![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Cub Driver" wrote in message ... Yes we had barely enough. And it taxed the manpower. Now we have that mission, Bosnia and Iraq. Plus a potential war with China in the near future for control of the far East. Well, we could shuck Bosnia any day. We don't have a dog in that fight. And we can't prepare for a war with China. We could not prevail in such a war. Really? While I agree the likelihood of such a conflict is not that great at present (provided the PRC does not go stupid over Taiwan), I don't really see how we "could not prevail" in a military conflict with the PRC. It is not as if prevailing requires us to to put boots-on-the-ground in Beijing. The PRC is quickly growing to rather like its foreign trade, and its people are becoming more and more enamored of materialistic possessions. Turning off their power grid, chunking up their communications systems, and denying them any viable foreign trade (i.e., naval blockade) would seem to offer a reasonable chance for us to "prevail" against them. I don't think the PRC cares to risk finding out the hard way. In this respect, it is the United States that is the second-rate nation. I don't think so. Remaining bound to the Lanchesterian attrition model is not a very good basis for assessing the capabilities of the modern US military. China's PLA indeed has oodles of men with rifles; unfortunately, it has yet to demonstrate a keen ability to operate as an effective joint combat force, their PLAAF (despite its gain of some Su-27 and Su-30 mounts) is nowhere near being able to confidently confront US airpower, they are newcomers to the field of using space operations as a source of leverage in military operations, and their PLAN would provide little more than target practice for the USN. We must get along with China, and China to prosper must get along with the U.S. Fortunately both countries seem to understand that. I like the view posited by some national security wonk a couple of years back: he described our strategy vis a vis the PRC as "congagement", with us both containing and engaging the PRC. Engagement generally seems to be working, but if the PRC *really* thought that the US could not confront them militarily all bets would be off and they'd be a lot more antagonistic to their neighbors. Brooks all the best -- Dan Ford |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:52:33 -0500, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote: "Cub Driver" wrote in message .. . Yes we had barely enough. And it taxed the manpower. Now we have that mission, Bosnia and Iraq. Plus a potential war with China in the near future for control of the far East. Well, we could shuck Bosnia any day. We don't have a dog in that fight. And we can't prepare for a war with China. We could not prevail in such a war. Really? While I agree the likelihood of such a conflict is not that great at present (provided the PRC does not go stupid over Taiwan), I don't really see how we "could not prevail" in a military conflict with the PRC. It is not as if prevailing requires us to to put boots-on-the-ground in Beijing. The PRC is quickly growing to rather like its foreign trade, and its people are becoming more and more enamored of materialistic possessions. Turning off their power grid, chunking up their communications systems, and denying them any viable foreign trade (i.e., naval blockade) would seem to offer a reasonable chance for us to "prevail" against them. I don't think the PRC cares to risk finding out the hard way. The Nov/Dec issue of Foreign Affairs focussed on the "New China" and offered some rather interesting economic insights. Thinks like more than 40,000 Nationalist Chinese companies having offices, plants, branches on the mainland and more than 400,000 Nationalists working on the mainland. The economic integration of the PRC and ROC is considerable and despite the political posturing of the leadership, probably dominant. The final straw in the PRC coffin of political control will come when the country is forced to open up for the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games which they fought so strenuously to gain. With literally millions of visitors from outside the Communist paradise, the leadership will be forced to be on their best behavior and the masses will be exposed to the magical world of democracy, free press, information and idea exchange. "How you gonna keep 'em down on the farm, after they've seen Paree???" As for military force, China certainly has manpower and they definitely have men under arms, but they don't have offensive force projection capability. They don't have a blue-water navy, they don't have a meaningful offensive air force and they don't have the necessary airlift capability to fight a mobile war even within their own borders. We must get along with China, and China to prosper must get along with the U.S. Fortunately both countries seem to understand that. I like the view posited by some national security wonk a couple of years back: he described our strategy vis a vis the PRC as "congagement", with us both containing and engaging the PRC. Engagement generally seems to be working, but if the PRC *really* thought that the US could not confront them militarily all bets would be off and they'd be a lot more antagonistic to their neighbors. Amazingly enough, it was the enlightened foreign policy of Kissinger/Nixon with regard to China (hold the flames regarding other errors of that administration), that opened the door to dialogue with China. Precisely the policy of containing militarily without threatening while engaging economically which inevitably undermines the shortages and failures of central planning as compared to a free market. The poor Chinese leadership never saw K-Mart coming! Ed Rasimus Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret) "When Thunder Rolled" Smithsonian Institution Press ISBN #1-58834-103-8 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Ed Rasimus" wrote in message ... On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:52:33 -0500, "Kevin Brooks" wrote: "Cub Driver" wrote in message .. . Yes we had barely enough. And it taxed the manpower. Now we have that mission, Bosnia and Iraq. Plus a potential war with China in the near future for control of the far East. Well, we could shuck Bosnia any day. We don't have a dog in that fight. And we can't prepare for a war with China. We could not prevail in such a war. Really? While I agree the likelihood of such a conflict is not that great at present (provided the PRC does not go stupid over Taiwan), I don't really see how we "could not prevail" in a military conflict with the PRC. It is not as if prevailing requires us to to put boots-on-the-ground in Beijing. The PRC is quickly growing to rather like its foreign trade, and its people are becoming more and more enamored of materialistic possessions. Turning off their power grid, chunking up their communications systems, and denying them any viable foreign trade (i.e., naval blockade) would seem to offer a reasonable chance for us to "prevail" against them. I don't think the PRC cares to risk finding out the hard way. The Nov/Dec issue of Foreign Affairs focussed on the "New China" and offered some rather interesting economic insights. Thinks like more than 40,000 Nationalist Chinese companies having offices, plants, branches on the mainland and more than 400,000 Nationalists working on the mainland. The economic integration of the PRC and ROC is considerable and despite the political posturing of the leadership, probably dominant. The final straw in the PRC coffin of political control will come when the country is forced to open up for the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games which they fought so strenuously to gain. With literally millions of visitors from outside the Communist paradise, the leadership will be forced to be on their best behavior and the masses will be exposed to the magical world of democracy, free press, information and idea exchange. "How you gonna keep 'em down on the farm, after they've seen Paree???" Exactly. They are finding that modern capitalism, which they have increasingly embraced out of economic necessity, has an inherent tendency to engender individual independence. I think you are also right in noting that the Party's biggest "threat" is currently from within as a result of this increased openess. As for military force, China certainly has manpower and they definitely have men under arms, but they don't have offensive force projection capability. They don't have a blue-water navy, they don't have a meaningful offensive air force and they don't have the necessary airlift capability to fight a mobile war even within their own borders. Dead on target. Even the PLA realizes this, and did as early as after the first Gulf War, after observing the devastating effects of US precision engagement against the Iraqis. They are trying to redesign their forces accordingly, but they have a lot of institutional inertia to overcome, and it will be some time before thay have both the tools and the expertise to be considered a first-rate military power. snip The poor Chinese leadership never saw K-Mart coming! Ugh! They can keep K-Mart. That is a prime example of a large company that forgot its fortunes depended upon customer satisfaction; gimme WallyWorld or Tar-shay anyday! Brooks Ed Rasimus |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() The PRC is quickly growing to rather like its foreign trade We rather like it as well ![]() all the best -- Dan Ford email: (requires authentication) see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Juan Jiminez is a liar and a fraud (was: Zoom fables on ANN | ChuckSlusarczyk | Home Built | 105 | October 8th 04 12:38 AM |
Bush's guard record | JDKAHN | Home Built | 13 | October 3rd 04 09:38 PM |
GWB and the Air Guard | JD | Military Aviation | 77 | March 17th 04 10:52 AM |
Colin Powell on National Guard | ArtKramr | Military Aviation | 12 | February 23rd 04 01:26 AM |
bush rules! | Be Kind | Military Aviation | 53 | February 14th 04 04:26 PM |