In the News II

Quote: Tanko

Nothing the US can do about it.

China has a larger navy and a larger army than the US.

That and the fact the US hasn't won a war in nearly eighty years.

Have you seen the shape of our soldiers?

70% of them are obese.

Larger navy based on what? If the Chinese navy fought our navy they would be very sorry very fast.

Quote: Tanko

Nothing the US can do about it.

China has a larger navy and a larger army than the US.

That and the fact the US hasn't won a war in nearly eighty years.

Have you seen the shape of our soldiers?

70% of them are obese.

Although the Chinese navy is large and has many ships, it is not believed to be a major concern for areas other than the South China Sea. The ships do not have much range and their technology is very suspect. Unfortunately for them, many of their defenses are copied from soviet systems that are also suspect.

Quote: DRich

Quote: Tanko

Nothing the US can do about it.

China has a larger navy and a larger army than the US.

That and the fact the US hasn't won a war in nearly eighty years.

Have you seen the shape of our soldiers?

70% of them are obese.

Although the Chinese navy is large and has many ships, it is not believed to be a major concern for areas other than the South China Sea. The ships do not have much range and their technology is very suspect. Unfortunately for them, many of their defenses are copied from soviet systems that are also suspect.

The USA Navy could fairly easy bottle up the Chinese Navy close to their home ports. At the least make it very difficult to operate in the open ocean.

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: DRich

Quote: Tanko

Nothing the US can do about it.

China has a larger navy and a larger army than the US.

That and the fact the US hasn't won a war in nearly eighty years.

Have you seen the shape of our soldiers?

70% of them are obese.

Although the Chinese navy is large and has many ships, it is not believed to be a major concern for areas other than the South China Sea. The ships do not have much range and their technology is very suspect. Unfortunately for them, many of their defenses are copied from soviet systems that are also suspect.

The USA Navy could fairly easy bottle up the Chinese Navy close to their home ports. At the least make it very difficult to operate in the open ocean.

"A submarine arms race is intensifying as China embarks on the production of a new generation of nuclear-armed submarines that for the first time are expected to pose a challenge to growing U.S. and allied efforts to track them.Oct 9, 2023"

Quote: AZDuffman

Although the Chinese navy is large and has many ships, it is not believed to be a major concern for areas other than the South China Sea. The ships do not have much range and their technology is very suspect. Unfortunately for them, many of their defenses are copied from soviet systems that are also suspect.

The USA Navy could fairly easy bottle up the Chinese Navy close to their home ports. At the least make it very difficult to operate in the open ocean.

Quote: DRich

Although the Chinese navy is large and has many ships, it is not believed to be a major concern for areas other than the South China Sea. The ships do not have much range and their technology is very suspect. Unfortunately for them, many of their defenses are copied from soviet systems that are also suspect.

If they don't have the technology, it's only a matter of time before a US company sells it to them, to they steal it.

China has the largest navy with 730 military vessels, followed by Russia with 598 and North Korea with 519. The United States comes in fourth with 484 naval vessels.

In August, the US sent four destroyers off the coast of Alaska, while China and Russia sent eleven warships.

The Chinese ships have the range. The US sent two carriers to the middle east in the past two weeks, and China sent six warships there to counter the US.

The Chinese also claim to have 1,000 DF-21 hypersonic missiles with a 1,300 hundred mile range, that can sink US aircraft carriers.

'Chinese hypersonic missiles 'can destroy newest US aircraft carrier'

They probably won't attack the US for the time being, since we are a cash cow for them. A source of incredible wealth. They've been strip mining the US of it's wealth by $400 billion every year.

Quote: Tanko

If they don't have the technology, it's only a matter of time before a US company sells it to them, to they steal it.

China has the largest navy with 730 military vessels, followed by Russia with 598 and North Korea with 519. The United States comes in fourth with 484 naval vessels.

In August, the US sent four destroyers off the coast of Alaska, while China and Russia sent eleven warships.

The Chinese ships have the range. The US sent two carriers to the middle east in the past two weeks, and China sent six warships there to counter the US.

The Chinese also claim to have 1,000 DF-21 hypersonic missiles with a 1,300 hundred mile range, that can sink US aircraft carriers.

'Chinese hypersonic missiles 'can destroy newest US aircraft carrier'

They probably won't attack the US for the time being, since we are a cash cow for them. A source of incredible wealth. They've been strip mining the US of it's wealth by $400 billion every year.

This is a silly platitude, of course they will reach U.S. tech eventually. They are several decades behind in Naval tech, and have been my whole life (and long before.) Eventually yes they will get where we are now, and we will be more advanced. Sure, they have many ways to catch up including independent research, buying tech, and spies. But, you can't catch up 20-30 years by propaganda.

Remember, they have only had a modern navy for like 2-6 years (until very recently they had a brown water navy -IE rivers and immediate coasts only.) So they have never been the cutting edge of naval tech (even going back to ancient China this has never been a standout for them, sure in past eras they have been the standout with gunpowder development and early matchlock firearms.)

Be careful believing what the war games the CCP runs. Be even more careful believing the wargames that they spend money publishing in international newspapers.

A trade surplus is not stripping us of our wealth. That is not how trade works. We are buying from them more than they are buying from us (which is not surprising considering the formula of both our country and their country.)

China is simply not in a position to challenge the U.S. militarily or economically. Are they more of a threat than Russia? Sure..... But this is not saying much...

I would say China is the most impressive enemy we have, but it is still nowhere near the same league. And, this is just looking Nation v. Nation (when you factor in our allies and their allies, it is not even a contest, we control most of the nuclear world effectively.)

It is good to be wary of China. And, no American should ever travel there. But, there is no reason to be paranoid of China. They are not going to be forming a modern dynasty anymore than ISIS is going to be forming a modern caliphate (as much as their propaganda says otherwise.)

Quote: Tanko

If they don't have the technology, it's only a matter of time before a US company sells it to them, to they steal it.

Having the tech is one thing. Having a navy tradition that knows how to use it is something else. The USA has had the naval tradition since John Paul Jones. This is more important than the average person knows. Not navy but ground forces, after the Gulf War the Pentagon wargamed the results and found that if Iraq had our tech and we their the result would still have been the same.

Imagine you get a nuclear powered supercarrier. Do you know how to run it? You open the owner's manual and see:

"Congratulations on your purchase of your supercarrier. With proper maintenance your carrier will give you decades of service........"

Then what?

.
if the radical Muslims attack Israel - and the Israelis respond in kind - the radical Muslims get lots of sympathy from around the world

and lots of people are talking down Jews

but if the radical Muslims attack the U.S. - such as in 9/11 - and the victimization is generalized

very little criticism of an aggressive U.S. response - comparatively

.

Quote: PotPie

.
if the radical Muslims attack Israel - and the Israelis respond in kind - the radical Muslims get lots of sympathy from around the world

and lots of people are talking down Jews

but if the radical Muslims attack the U.S. - such as in 9/11 - and the victimization is generalized

very little criticism of an aggressive U.S. response - comparatively

.

I do not agree with your last point at all. Literally my whole life we have heard nothing except for how terrible America is for defending itself and it's interests, and how misguided of a response to 9/11 and other terror acts America has. With the possible exception of Israel, I do not think any foreign policy suite gets criticized more endlessly than U.S. policy. Even in the early 90s there was talk about the Gulf War being immoral, and the Somalia operations being a waste, etc...

In fact going back to even the Spanish American, American responses are hugely criticized. America has always had large factions that think America should not be involved in foreign wars under any circumstance. Heck even the Civil War had a lot of resistance (when America itself was literally the battlefield.) Maybe the War of 1812 was the exception because that was one example of where we were literally being invaded by a foreign military and people had no choice but to cooperate or die. But, America has always had people internally who think any military action is terrible (sure some wars are more and less "popular" than others, but such factions always exist in some large form.) Though I actually think America has become more anti-war in the last 60 years (Vietnam and post-Vietnam era.) And, while being pro-peace is not a bad thing, being anti-war is (especially when needed for international progress.)