US military plan against China outlined in think-tank report

[Plantagenet]

It's not that simple. Lhasa was fiercely independent, the dominant city in Tibet and the home of the Dalai Lama's sect. There were from memory another 11 main monasteries, some of whom were treated very poorly by the Lhasa authorities for centuries. Some of these sects, particularly in the north, welcomed China's displacement of their Lhasa based overlords.

Yes, and there were "quislings" in Norway who welcomed the Nazi invasion of Norway in WWII.

Nonetheless, Germany had no right to invade the nation of Norway, and China had no right to invade the nation of Tibet.

(Wow...a Nazi analogy. I'm starting to sound like Preston).

[bochen280]

It's not that simple. Lhasa was fiercely independent, the dominant city in Tibet and the home of the Dalai Lama's sect. There were from memory another 11 main monasteries, some of whom were treated very poorly by the Lhasa authorities for centuries. Some of these sects, particularly in the north, welcomed China's displacement of their Lhasa based overlords.

Yes, and there were "quislings" in Norway who welcomed the Nazi invasion of Norway in WWII.

Nonetheless, Germany had no right to invade the nation of Norway, and China had no right to invade the nation of Tibet.

(Wow...a Nazi analogy. I'm starting to sound like Preston).

Just like the US had no right to invade the nation of North American Native Indians?

[evilgenius]

The whole China containment plan is not to prevent China from becoming a superpower that challenges America... it is a plan to ruin China's economy and create enough demand destruction so the people at home can maintain "nonnegotiable way of life" for as long as possible. Cause face it, Fusion ain't going to save us. The policy is simple: grab what is left, and prevent anyone else from using it.

Ah, true wisdom, at least from the point of view of a rationalist today. I don't think in the long run that the US really hopes to stop China. The better view is to realize they will eventually land on top, but to cause them to be more like us than like what we fear. When energy doesn't matter so much, yet technology is still extant, population will matter more. If in such a case China is on the US side then there is far less for the US to worry about than if they aren't. Just as harmony with Europe was paramount to the dominance of the US in the 20th Century so too will harmony with China be paramount to US dominance in the 21st. This time they might even be the ones to step in during the next war to try and stop the obvious from happening.

[JohnRM]

War on the scale of that which would occur between the US and China is all but impossible, right now. The lesson learned from WWII is that what you stand to gain is always vastly outweighed by what you can to, and probably will, lose. Even so, a US v. China war would quickly turn into a stalemate. The US would lose Korea and probably Taiwan, but the Chinese economy would be anihilated. Neither country would gain anything valuable enough, not even access to resources, to justify the expense of massive quantities of resources that such a war would require. Unless the US could manage to enlist the support of numerous allies in the region, including India, Korea, Japan, the Philippes, Vietnam, and NATO, the stalemate could last indefinitely. China's manpower is far too great to overcome and the US Navy rules the waves, without question. China could not hope to challenge the US for many decades. It simply does not have the ships, the technology, nor the experience to do so.

[dinopello]

Foreign Policy Magazine had an article about another kind of weapon being used against China.

Send them our post-WWII planners.

China's urban population is projected to grow by 350 million people by 2020, effectively adding today's entire U.S. population to its cities in less than a decade. China has already passed the United States as the world's largest car market, and by 2025, the country will need to pave up to an estimated 5 billion square meters of road just to keep moving.

Like the U.S. cities of the 1950s and '60s, Chinese cities are working to accommodate the explosive growth of automobile travel by building highways, ring roads, and parking lots. But more than any other factor, the rise of the car and the growth of the national highway system hollowed out American cities after World War II. Urban professionals fled to their newly accessible palaces in the suburbs, leaving behind ghettos of poverty and dysfunction. As Jane Jacobs, the great American urbanist, lamented, "Not TV or illegal drugs but the automobile has been the chief destroyer of American communities."

If anything, due to China's high population density, the Chinese urban reckoning will be even more severe than America's. Already, traffic in Beijing is frequently at a standstill despite the incredible pace of road construction (a "solution" akin to trying to lose weight by loosening your belt). The situation is so dire that Beijing, Guangzhou, and Shanghai are using a lottery to allocate a limited number of vehicle registrations. In August 2010, a 60-mile traffic jam stopped a highway outside Beijing for 11 days. There's a reason no high-density city has ever been designed around the car: It simply doesn't work.

[sparky]

.
there has been a lot of reserve currencies before
one of the most intriguing was the Maria theresa thaler
the most widespread was the byzantine bezan

all those had a value , the worth of their metal content plus a trust value called seignieurage

What there never was before was a Fiat reserve currency
worth nothing but the good faith and trust of a government

[Pops]

There is no shortage of steel.

That's true:

They can print draft orders.

We don't do that any more, makes it inconvenient for the plutocracy who must make up excuses for why their kids aren't going.

There is big time decommissioning going on in the US Militaary, we hired every gang banger we could find the last decade and now we're kicking them out. We have the greatest air force but we're going to drones.

Really it's just like the steel situation, we've given up the reason we have always won, the ability to keep on building tanks and ships no matter how many get whacked. We're doing the same with the drones, they are great when the enemy is riding a moped but not so much when he is closer to our level of technology, drones are soft, fly slow and are dependent on comms and GPS.

[SeaGypsy]

There isn't going to be a war with China/ USA anyhow; in the foreseeable. Sabre rattling & restraint measures only.

[bochen280]

There is no shortage of steel.

That's true:

They can print draft orders.

We don't do that any more, makes it inconvenient for the plutocracy who must make up excuses for why their kids aren't going.

There is big time decommissioning going on in the US Militaary, we hired every gang banger we could find the last decade and now we're kicking them out. We have the greatest air force but we're going to drones.

Really it's just like the steel situation, we've given up the reason we have always won, the ability to keep on building tanks and ships no matter how many get whacked. We're doing the same with the drones, they are great when the enemy is riding a moped but not so much when he is closer to our level of technology, drones are soft, fly slow and are dependent on comms and GPS.

I have a question. Are ICBM not dependent on GPS? Only the TEAM USA have worldwide GPS right? China only has a very limited one and won't be complete until 2020. I don't know if Russia has anything.... so if GPS can be shutdown or set to military use only, then this gives the nation that owns this system (the US in this case) a huge home field advantage....

So logically ICBM cannot be GPS guided... since back in the early 60's there wasn't even a GPS.... but what do they use? IRU? How do they improve upon the accuracy of the nukes without a TomTom? If nukes don't need GPS, why can't drones have a backup system that is independent on GPS? Like a camera and corresponding terrain maps? Google has a self driving car that operates on the same concept...

Also:
I don't think draft will be necessary. People who want to stay in the military because they can't find a job in the civilian world are being kicked out...

[bochen280]

There isn't going to be a war with China/ USA anyhow; in the foreseeable. Sabre rattling & restraint measures only.

That is the conventional wisdom... but what about a "black swan event"? Everyone (including CCP) believes America is not that reckless and wouldn't instigate a massive nation vs nation war or nuke war with China anytime soon... But Peak Oil changes the whole picture.... If magically the population of India and China could be deleted like the inverse of how the Feds make money on a computer via a digital bookkeeping entry, then "Peak Oil" would be pushed back 10 - 20 years! Gas would go down to $1.50 and the US can party like it is 1999 again....

If America truly believes it can successfully do a nuclear first-strike depreciation of the CCP in China, then why wouldn't' they? It is now or never, use it or lose it... because later on US will be poorer and Chinese military will be stronger than they are right now (relatively speaking...) so if there ever was a chance to pull something like this off with acceptable loses (say Chinese retaliation strike hits only two large cities, face it, nuclear war is a PERCENTAGES game) then it would be now... China would never strike US first because that would be political, economic and militaristic suicide... but US stands to benefit a lot from a surprise first strike... and right now, it seems IF they are successful (relatively speaking) then the pros would outweigh the cons. Maybe there is some truth to Dec 21 2012? Also, realistically, if US nuke strikes China and knocks out entire CCP, do you think a lone Chinese submarine commander would even give the order to launch in retaliation? I think not.... I think he would probably defect to the US for chance to live American dream like what the Russians did in Hunt for Red October. I don't think China has a credible deterrence against US.

[SeaGypsy]

Way too speculative, I am willing to bet any amount it doesn't before at least 2020.

[bochen280]

Way too speculative, I am willing to bet any amount it doesn't before at least 2020.

There has never been a nation that had to face the prospects of nuclear retaliation. Japan couldn't fight back in 1945 because it didn't have nukes. That doesn't count. I'm saying if today US surprise first strike attacks China via nukes and wipe out CCP and all major Chinese cities, what is to guarantee China will actually retaliate? And if they don't retaliate (for whatever reason(s)) or if such retaliation was only minimally effective, then why would the US not attack? Think about it. Population is the problem. Peak oil is a population problem. It IS a zero sum game. The nukes are already there, those are sunken costs whether or not they will ever be used, and this is the most quickly and effective "bang for buck" and the ONLY way US could totally defeat China militaristically and hence economically in short order... Why do you think US is building missile defense in earnest now and trying to persuade Russia to disarm? If China doesn't built a defensive 'deadhand' tied to some sort of 'doomsday machine' or increase its SLBM by orders of magnitude then it is practically inviting US to attack... I mean after Syria and Iran ... China will be next if it doesn't watch out.

[SeaGypsy]

Because this is not a conspiracy nut site. We usually try to base our arguments on logic. It would be much easier for the USA to blockade shipping of oil to Chindia on some political pretence than to justify nuking a few of their cities. Remeber the USA which cares about it's public image? Japan was in the midst of taking over SE Asia/ Oceania by brute force where necessary. China is not doing anything like that. There is not and will not be, any time soon any justification for nuking China or anyone else.

[bochen280]

Because this is not a conspiracy nut site. We usually try to base our arguments on logic. It would be much easier for the USA to blockade shipping of oil to Chindia on some political pretence than to justify nuking a few of their cities. Remeber the USA which cares about it's public image? Japan was in the midst of taking over SE Asia/ Oceania by brute force where necessary. China is not doing anything like that. There is not and will not be, any time soon any justification for nuking China or anyone else.

Public image was on the upslide of Olduvai Gorge... Push comes to shove, I don't conventional wisdom and sheeple herd mentality is going to be an accurate predictor of the things to come. "Rights", "justification" only exists in the context of a normal society, there is nothing normal about realities of what mankind is facing.

[Pops]

China, Russia, India and maybe EU have GPS.

Old school ICBMs used ground based nav, like LORAN I suppose, I'm sure they use GPS now, they aren't just built and set on a shelf, LOL. In fact I read that it is illegal to export GPS receivers that operate above a certain altitude and speed specifically so they can't be used in missiles.

As to the draft, they were giving gang bangers sign-up and re-up bonuses until recently. 2 million served in Iraq/Afgan - over 10 years – but China wouldn't be Iraq. In WWII there were 16 million in the service.

China and the US are joined at the hip for the moment, heck they are buying up the tar sands.

[Pops]

Tell me again why the US would attack China?

[evilgenius]

I don't think for a second that the US is planning on attacking China. I don't think they want to attack Russia either. The US is definitely pushing against Russian influence in the Middle East, though. The problem with what is going on in the Middle East is that the US could very easily be pulled into a war with Russia. If so, the missile defense they would like doesn't exist yet. The Russians might allow themselves to lose a limited land/sea engagement, but that is wishful thinking.

After Syria, and maybe Lebanon, fall to this 'Arab Spring' then the situation will become very stark. It will either resolve itself by losing energy in various smaller conflicts, or it will become an engagement with Iran, or perhaps a proxy engagement with Iran via a renewed US occupation of Iraq intended to quell a general Shia uprising. China fits into this situation really in the sense that they need resources. Their best scenario for growing and most peacefully acquiring what they need is under the US umbrella. They can't just end their general experiment with capitalism. Seen in this light a strong relationship with China is of great benefit to the US right now. It could be what keeps the Russians from going too far in reaction to the losses they can very well see occurring. Now is not a good time to send mixed signals about how close the US/China relationship is. Some limited sabre rattling is ok, but not that which is on the level that makes the Chinese sit at a table with the Russians and mutually complain about what a raw deal the US is giving them.

[bochen280]

I don't think for a second that the US is planning on attacking China. I don't think they want to attack Russia either. The US is definitely pushing against Russian influence in the Middle East, though. The problem with what is going on in the Middle East is that the US could very easily be pulled into a war with Russia. If so, the missile defense they would like doesn't exist yet. The Russians might allow themselves to lose a limited land/sea engagement, but that is wishful thinking.

After Syria, and maybe Lebanon, fall to this 'Arab Spring' then the situation will become very stark. It will either resolve itself by losing energy in various smaller conflicts, or it will become an engagement with Iran, or perhaps a proxy engagement with Iran via a renewed US occupation of Iraq intended to quell a general Shia uprising. China fits into this situation really in the sense that they need resources. Their best scenario for growing and most peacefully acquiring what they need is under the US umbrella. They can't just end their general experiment with capitalism. Seen in this light a strong relationship with China is of great benefit to the US right now. It could be what keeps the Russians from going too far in reaction to the losses they can very well see occurring. Now is not a good time to send mixed signals about how close the US/China relationship is. Some limited sabre rattling is ok, but not that which is on the level that makes the Chinese sit at a table with the Russians and mutually complain about what a raw deal the US is giving them.

What makes you think it is not US and Russia secretly teaming up against China?

[sparky]

.
It is in the nature of the military to make plans or "contingencies"
First it's a good mental training for staff ,
it allow for a slow considerate approach to a given hypothetical situation
get the maps , get the facts ,get the political set up , distillate the lot ,
gnaw on the possible objectives and tasks ,determine the ways and means .
All pretty academic really .
there probably is a plan for going to war against Paraguay

on any U.S. versus China nastiness
no need to bomb anyone , with nukes or otherwise
the U.S. navy as of August 2012 is in supreme control of the world sea-lanes
China imports and exports can be choked at the second islands chain
As the Republic of China People Navy is well aware
it leave only four accesses

there is the Russian backdoor , of limited bandwidth
the Burmese side exit , dito
the Pakistanese high road ,any trucks using it would consume their own load worth of fuel
and of course some smuggling via Korea and Vietnam

It is interesting to note the big effort of the U.S. to become friendly with Burma and Vietnam
while non breaking relations with those double faced , lying mongrels in power in Pakistan

[bochen280]

.
It is in the nature of the military to make plans or "contingencies"
First it's a good mental training for staff ,
it allow for a slow considerate approach to a given hypothetical situation
get the maps , get the facts ,get the political set up , distillate the lot ,
gnaw on the possible objectives and tasks ,determine the ways and means .
All pretty academic really .
there probably is a plan for going to war against Paraguay

on any U.S. versus China nastiness
no need to bomb anyone , with nukes or otherwise
the U.S. navy as of August 2012 is in supreme control of the world sea-lanes
China imports and exports can be choked at the second islands chain
As the Republic of China People Navy is well aware
it leave only four accesses

there is the Russian backdoor , of limited bandwidth
the Burmese side exit , dito
the Pakistanese high road ,any trucks using it would consume their own load worth of fuel
and of course some smuggling via Korea and Vietnam

It is interesting to note the big effort of the U.S. to become friendly with Burma and Vietnam
while non breaking relations with those double faced , lying mongrels in power in Pakistan

But that is why China is building stealth bomber/fighter J-20, a fleet of aircraft carriers, own global GPS, stealth busting radar, a blue water navy, and anti-ship missiles. In the future, US won't be able to easily or realistic deny China's import/export transportation ability... but there is always the "first strike nuke" option... and that is my point... American cannot afford to fight conventional war with China... but US doesn't NEED to if nukes will do the tricks.