Re: Chinese sucesfully test anti-satellite.
But when does military spending become an 'arms-race'. If I see Canada spending billions of dollars purchasing and refitting their equipment, then I'd be kinda worried.
With satellites down across the globe, GPS and alot of tracking gear would be null and void. It would make our military 1950's-ish navigational and plotting level.
I guess grey-hound satellites would be cool. Locally launched satellites that relay information directly back to HQ. Especially for squad or company levels. They send up a spy bot or UAV, and scope out the situation.
I think that space warfare has given America a definite edge. To make Space Shuttles into orbital, adjustable weapondry platforms would be some modifications, and that would give the US a definite edge, allowing orbital, high power strikes. The Chinese only have something like the Russian rockets. 1 use sorta things.
Re: Chinese sucesfully test anti-satellite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
China faces some interesting options.
They're western flank is secured and halted by the Gobi desert and the logistical problems associated with that. To the north is Russian Siberia, which is just as bad as the Gobi desert. There aren't any strategic options, aside from a thrust across the Bering Straits, even if they could. To the south is the Himalayan Mountains and the Indochina jungles. To the west is the Pacific Ocean. As such, the Chinese (if they do declare war) are going to be looking for more resources to keep their population supplied and avoid internal civil war.
If all options save for military expansion were exhausted, then the Chinese are going for the food sources that are required for life. Thats going to be the rice paddies of Indochina, and the land of India.
The Vietnamese are going to put up a stiff fight, and with American/Indian backing across the board, the Vietnamese will be able to pull some serious damage on the advancing Chinese columns. The Himalayan mountains will slow any and every operation (Yeti's, duh!), which may have been the reasoning behind the train line from Beijing to wherever in Tibet.
If its economic, then they will strike the nearest capitalist neighbor, Japan. South Korea will be hit by the NK troops with Chinese support. Taiwan will have to be a shield, absorbing enough damage so that American support can arrive. The U.S. will have to be able to work without satellit support, something that I hope the U.S. Navy is very aware of.
Australia will no doubt lend some aid, along with most of Western Europe.
You're thinking old school colonialism, but not old school enough. If China negotiates an alliance with Russia, which they certainly will if they ever feel threatened by the US, geographical flanks won't matter. As per the old Soviet doctrine, there will not be a period of conventional skirmishing, but the war will go nuclear from the start, and the targets will not just be the frontline, but will strike at the enemy's heartland also.
The key to defeatig China would be to strangle their sources of energy and other essentials. Unlike the Japanese co-prosperity sphere, the Chinese have not been securing these resources by occupying the countries that obtain them, but have insinuated into these countries via culture and economy. In any Sino-American war, the populations of these countries will back China. And unlike the neocon emphasis on force of arms, the Chinese way is considerably cheaper, arouses less opposition from the subject peoples, is mutually beneficial, and increases influence and control over time without needing to put in any additional effort. The kind of thing the US used to be so good at, but thanks to the neocons no-one will believe America again for the forseeable future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
The key problem is Chinese aid to Latin America, Africa, and other under-developed areas. Chinese investments have boosted local economies, and made it into something like Reaganonomics, where countries are tied to China by their financial interests.
That's more like it. Some of us have recognised this for some years now, and shaken our heads disbelievingly at Bush's efforts to sabotage your own reservoirs of influence and goodwill. A lot of people wanted to believe in America, but the sheer front of declared US unilateralism (even before 9/11), capped by the debacle of Iraq, made them despair. I wonder how many of these Sinophiles grew up dreaming of making their country into another US?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
I think that the U.S. could use space shuttles to pummel China with HE or damaging warheads. The Cao Cao analogy is very nice, because if worse came to worse, the U.S. could nuke the rice paddies and food sources in China, destroying the agriculture of the nation and forcing the peasantry either to revolt against the war or starve.
And what makes you think the US can survive the retaliatory nukes? MAD. Also, any forseeable space-oriented weapons platform is going to be exorbitantly uneconomic. The cost of putting a weapon on a shuttle far, far (*10^umpteen) exceeds the comparative benefits of putting it up in space.
China is enough of a power not to fear the US militarily, and they are far shrewder than the current bunch in the White House. Bush and the neocons have not just blundered in Iraq. A disastrous war can easily be made up for. Their doctrine of unilateralism has hugely damaged people's trust in the US, and that cannot easily be repaired. China isn't going to attack the US, and if the US attacks China, you can guarantee the rest of the world will turn against you, if only by cutting off all relations.
Re: Chinese sucesfully test anti-satellite.
Wow, this thread has gotten pretty wild. Can anyone explain to me how it is in any way in U.S. interests to get involved in a war with China, and how it is in any way in Chinese interests to get involved in a war with the U.S. China is becoming a player on the world stage to rival the U.S., and they're flexing their muscles and showing they deserve our respect, which seems perfectly healthy to me. I think we're getting a little too used to being the only world superpower, and developed a little hubris to go with that. America and China are intimately related economically, and that I think is what's most important to both nations. Neither of us are going to risk the disaster that would ensue from a direct military tangle with the other. There'll be plenty of posturing, plenty of competition, plenty of seeking for respect or even fear, but hopefully no lunacy.
Ajax
Re: Chinese sucesfully test anti-satellite.
Quote:
To make Space Shuttles into orbital, adjustable weapondry platforms would be some modifications, and that would give the US a definite edge, allowing orbital, high power strikes. The Chinese only have something like the Russian rockets. 1 use sorta things.
The Space Shuttle was built in part to be an orbital bomber, although the USAF figured out how unworkable it was and dumped it after the launch facilites were built at Vandenburg.
And you don't need the shuttle as a weapons platform. It would actually suck as one, since it only can stay up for about two weeks. Well, I guess you could run supply missions. An automated station would be better.
An excellent example would be Polyus:
http://www.k26.com/buran/Info/Polyus...s-energia.html
https://img227.imageshack.us/img227/9066/polyus29vq.jpg
But anyway, don't you all worry about space things. I'll handle it :yes:
Re: Chinese sucesfully test anti-satellite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
But when does military spending become an 'arms-race'. If I see Canada spending billions of dollars purchasing and refitting their equipment, then I'd be kinda worried.
Be worried then, cause we are. It was one of Harpers election promises. Which he delivered on in his first budget.
Re: Chinese sucesfully test anti-satellite.
Unless China starts a genocide of their population to keep it down, they will have the largest population by like 2010.
They have alot of people thanking them for the investments on infranstructure, and that sort of money doesn't come without string.
China, while it doesn't have the ability to destroy America yet, they are rapidly progressing to such a position. The ability to destroy satellites is essential to defeating any modern power. Now, unless they want to destroy Russia, they have the aformentioned geopolitical options to ensure resources to feed their population, or they are facing food riots, and political reform isn't very far behind. Reform often means a reshuffling of politico's, or something along the lines of the French Revolution (anyone? anyone?)
It doesn't mean China is going to be doing it now, in 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040, or 2050. They could clone 4000 cows and 5000 chickens. Land can support only so many people per square mile.
What I want to know is about the global warming and climate shifts. If that occurs, then some nations will be forced into a migration that the recieving countries aren't able to stand, nor want. If the Sahara desert suddenly sprang to life with lush plains of grass and trees, rippling brooks, and hundreds of deer, it would be cool. It would be bad because Algeria would have to stave off the poor and criminal, who seek to settle in the new rich lands.
Climate change would force Nicaragua to declare war on neighbors, for if Nicaragua becomes a barren desert, then the people there are screwed. So they seek to preserve their nation, and strike out.
Now, coming from a non-emotional perspective (see peace thread) I would say that now would be the time for world peace (with climate change). The nations would bind together and share the wealth.
Okay.
Re: Chinese sucesfully test anti-satellite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
Unless China starts a genocide of their population to keep it down, they will have the largest population by like 2010.
They have alot of people thanking them for the investments on infranstructure, and that sort of money doesn't come without string.
China, while it doesn't have the ability to destroy America yet, they are rapidly progressing to such a position. The ability to destroy satellites is essential to defeating any modern power. Now, unless they want to destroy Russia, they have the aformentioned geopolitical options to ensure resources to feed their population, or they are facing food riots, and political reform isn't very far behind. Reform often means a reshuffling of politico's, or something along the lines of the French Revolution (anyone? anyone?)
It doesn't mean China is going to be doing it now, in 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040, or 2050. They could clone 4000 cows and 5000 chickens. Land can support only so many people per square mile.
The one family one child policy has been showing its effects, as the Confucian society has led to an imbalance of sexes. Too many young men and not enough young women. That means population slowdown. Combined with instability caused by the migration of youngsters to the cities and the depopulation of the countryside which traditionally favours large families, this means overpopulation isn't going to be a problem for the Chinese. There are problems with their population, but sheer size isn't going to be one of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
What I want to know is about the global warming and climate shifts. If that occurs, then some nations will be forced into a migration that the recieving countries aren't able to stand, nor want. If the Sahara desert suddenly sprang to life with lush plains of grass and trees, rippling brooks, and hundreds of deer, it would be cool. It would be bad because Algeria would have to stave off the poor and criminal, who seek to settle in the new rich lands.
Climate change would force Nicaragua to declare war on neighbors, for if Nicaragua becomes a barren desert, then the people there are screwed. So they seek to preserve their nation, and strike out.
Now, coming from a non-emotional perspective (see peace thread) I would say that now would be the time for world peace (with climate change). The nations would bind together and share the wealth.
Okay.
This would require dropping the neocon doctrine (see Wolfowitz's 1992 defense document, resurrected in 2001) that the US will not tolerate any rival to its power, in any sphere, using force to keep them down if necessary. As I've said before, this doctrine means using force to keep down the Europeans if ever we united as a single state. That isn't likely, but now we are seeing the Chinese asserting themselves as a significant power in their own right, and the White House doesn't like it one bit. Personally, I find ajaxfetish's comment much more sane than macho warmongering.
Re: Chinese sucesfully test anti-satellite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
Unless China starts a genocide of their population to keep it down, they will have the largest population by like 2010.
They have had the largest population in the world for quite some time now.
Re: Chinese sucesfully test anti-satellite.
Darn Wall Street Journal!
It doesn't mean that they won't need any fewer resources.
Re: Chinese sucesfully test anti-satellite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
Unless China starts a genocide of their population to keep it down, they will have the largest population by like 2010.
They have alot of people thanking them for the investments on infranstructure, and that sort of money doesn't come without string.
China, while it doesn't have the ability to destroy America yet, they are rapidly progressing to such a position. The ability to destroy satellites is essential to defeating any modern power. Now, unless they want to destroy Russia, they have the aformentioned geopolitical options to ensure resources to feed their population, or they are facing food riots, and political reform isn't very far behind. Reform often means a reshuffling of politico's, or something along the lines of the French Revolution (anyone? anyone?)
It doesn't mean China is going to be doing it now, in 2010, 2020, 2030, 2040, or 2050. They could clone 4000 cows and 5000 chickens. Land can support only so many people per square mile.
As mentioned they have the largest population and have had for some time. And that China has had the one child policy for some time.
In the future India will have the largest population, as they are the second largest nation and are doing nothing to slow down its population growth.
As for cloning animals...
a) It takes more resources then if they breed (you have to get a scientist involved to do what any rutting animal can).
b) meat takes up more land then rice
c) They are by no means capped out on population density. Look at Indonesia... 250 million plus and growing.
Also Taiwan would not be in an interesting situation, they may in fact join a sufficiently capitalist China.
Australia has stated in the not so distant past that if a conflict over Taiwan occured that they wouldn't automatically side with China.
A clearer way to view what is happening is to look as APEC... a lot of the locals are more then happy to buddy up with China above and beyond Japan...
