China on our doorstep

[qldfrog]

One thing I am 100% sure is that this is NOT the answer

Biden's message to China as AUKUS submarines details unveiled

www.9news.com.au

When I think how much real lethal capability we could get with less than a tenth of that in own built drones and unmanned tech, it makes me vomit.
All that to buy support from the US, actually Biden arrrtrttg

 

[rederob]

Only a complete fool would think that putting the word Democratic into a bodies name then makes it a democracy.

At no time have you offered any definition of democracy.
Nor did you show that China does not use democratic processes.
You have confused a democratic process with the political concept of a democracy.

 

[Sean K]

At no time have you offered any definition of democracy.
Nor did you show that China does not use democratic processes.
You have confused a democratic process with the political concept of a democracy.

You only have to go to wiki for a quick overview.

Democracy (From Ancient Greek: δημοκρατία, romanized: dēmokratía, dēmos 'people' and kratos 'rule'[1]) is a form of government in which the people have the authority to deliberate and decide legislation ("direct democracy"), or to choose governing officials to do so ("representative democracy"). Who is considered part of "the people" and how authority is shared among or delegated by the people has changed over time and at different rates in different countries. Features of democracy often include freedom of assembly, association, property rights, freedom of religion and speech, inclusiveness and equality, citizenship, consent of the governed, voting rights, freedom from unwarranted governmental deprivation of the right to life and liberty, and minority rights.

 

[qldfrog]

You only have to go to wiki for a quick overview.

Democracy (From Ancient Greek: δημοκρατία, romanized: dēmokratía, dēmos 'people' and kratos 'rule'[1]) is a form of government in which the people have the authority to deliberate and decide legislation ("direct democracy"), or to choose governing officials to do so ("representative democracy"). Who is considered part of "the people" and how authority is shared among or delegated by the people has changed over time and at different rates in different countries. Features of democracy often include freedom of assembly, association, property rights, freedom of religion and speech, inclusiveness and equality, citizenship, consent of the governed, voting rights, freedom from unwarranted governmental deprivation of the right to life and liberty, and minority rights.

There is only one side i would agree with the Red, we are now outside of full democracy status as in 2023:
property rights, freedom of xxxxx speech, inclusiveness and equality are definitively out, but better than China and still roughly a democracy.

 

[mullokintyre]

At no time have you offered any definition of democracy.
Nor did you show that China does not use democratic processes.
You have confused a democratic process with the political concept of a democracy.

Confused?
Pot . kettle. Non White.
Mick

 

[Dona Ferentes]

DDR Deutche Democratik Republik or more recently RDC: Republique Democratique du Congo..
Must be heaven on Earth ?

Democratic Kampuchea. aka Pol Pot

 

[rederob]

China has been playing the long game very well. Been very patient. But under Xi it's more than obvious they are now rushing to develop enough military capability to attack Taiwan and beat the US in a war in East Asia.

China has a "planned" economy, as I have outlined. Part of that process is matching its peers as it turns itself into a "developed" nation. China is not rushing anything as its outlined in the 5-Year Plans. No other country has borders with more nation states than China, and no other nation comes close to the amount of seaborne trade it needs to be able to protect. So with almost 4 times America's population its inevitable that China would progress towards the leading military nation in numerical terms, although not necessarily in technical terms.
Unlike your assertion, there is no emotion in this common sense natural order of events.

The extent of the military build up in such a short time has led to other countries to believe China is preparing to use hard power to influence the region.

How is more than 40 years a short time?
You may not be aware that China launched its first satellite in 1970 as part of its "Two Bombs, One Satellite" program.

It's driven Japan to change from having a purely defensive mindset with just 1% of GDP on defence to raise it to 2% and will be the third largest defence spender in a very short time.

Neither Koreas nor China have forgotten Japan's brutal occupations of their countries in the 20th century.

They said they would NOT militarise the Spratly Islands, but lied.

You have confused Taiwan's role in the Spratlys with mainland China's.

They now have military installations in contested waters that the UN determined was NOT China's under UNCLOS. They are there against international law.

True. You are willing to overlook other legal decisions over island possession and believe it's just China who does this? Remember that Itu Aba (aka Taiping Island) which Taiwan refuses to relinquish is also wilfully overlooked by everyone who wants to turn China into a bully.

The BRI incorporates debt trap diplomacy, it's clearly part of the plan.

Where is your proof that this is the case. I suggest you do some decent research and you might learn something that you now simply spout in ignorance.

Diego Garcia is part of the British Indian Ocean Territory. Prior to the British the Portuguese and French owned it.

Terra nullius never applied and the lawful owners are the original inhabitants who were forcibly removed.

China will attack once they have sufficient amphibious capability to land enough troops on the ground to hold territory and hold off any counter attacks by an international coalition that will include the QUAD and NATO. They will have started WW3.

Your military prowess are sorely lacking. If you understand a long game you will know that only a blockade is necessary. Anyone attempting to counter the blockade by military force will invoke the status of an attack on a sovereign state and be subject to UN sanction. As America, Japan, Australia and most of the rest of the world regard Taiwan as a region of China, it will be unwise for any military action to be taken in what is for all intents and purposes an internal conflict.

 

[Sean K]

China has a "planned" economy, as I have outlined. Part of that process is matching its peers as it turns itself into a "developed" nation. China is not rushing anything as its outlined in the 5-Year Plans. No other country has borders with more nation states than China, and no other nation comes close to the amount of seaborne trade it needs to be able to protect. So with almost 4 times America's population its inevitable that China would progress towards the leading military nation in numerical terms, although not necessarily in technical terms.
Unlike your assertion, there is no emotion in this common sense natural order of events.

How is more than 40 years a short time?
You may not be aware that China launched its first satellite in 1970 as part of its "Two Bombs, One Satellite" program.

Neither Koreas nor China have forgotten Japan's brutal occupations of their countries in the 20th century.

You have confused Taiwan's role in the Spratlys with mainland China's.

True. You are willing to overlook other legal decisions over island possession and believe it's just China who does this? Remember that Itu Aba (aka Taiping Island) which Taiwan refuses to relinquish is also wilfully overlooked by everyone who wants to turn China into a bully.

Where is your proof that this is the case. I suggest you do some decent research and you might learn something that you now simply spout in ignorance.

Terra nullius never applied and the lawful owners are the original inhabitants who were forcibly removed.

Your military prowess are sorely lacking. If you understand a long game you will know that only a blockade is necessary. Anyone attempting to counter the blockade by military force will invoke the status of an attack on a sovereign state and be subject to UN sanction. As America, Japan, Australia and most of the rest of the world regard Taiwan as a region of China, it will be unwise for any military action to be taken in what is for all intents and purposes an internal conflict.

China's military build up in the past decade is unprecedented outside war time.

Comparing the PRCs militarisation of the Spratlys to Taiping is a bit of a stretch. Agree, Taiwan shouldn't claim to own it, but it doesn't house weapons stations and fighter jets.

Whenever you are losing an argument you always resort to ad homs and are not worth replying to.

 

[sptrawler]

IMO China will eventually be the dominant superpower, that is a given, on its current trajectory it will happen sooner rather than later.
Also IMO, the West is in no position to go to war with China, on a manufacturing capability level and a social level, they have the West pretty well stumped.
So a negotiated outcome IMO is the only way a war can be delayed, history shows it probably will never be averted, just delayed.
What China has achieved in 50 years, couldn't have been done in a Western society, people just wouldn't be prepared to sacrifice enough in the hope of better future.
As has always been said, the best form of Government is a dictatorship, if you have the right dictator that's usually the problem. Take Singapore as an example, also in a very short period of time he transformed a small third world island into a world financial hub.

Lee Kuan Yew - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Xi jinping, is doing very much that same as Lee, just on a much larger scale, we have to learn to live with China, there is no way anyone can put them back in their box, so to speak. The West caused the situation with globalisation and greed, now it is time to realise that you reap what you sow, there is no point in blaming China for using the money we gave them well, to increase their living standards and affluence.
We just have to accept that the slaves are now as affluent as us and want some respect, that's life, histories littered with similar stories.
just my thoughts.

Xi Jinping - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[JohnDe]

IMO China will eventually be the dominant superpower, that is a given, on its current trajectory it will happen sooner rather than later.
Also IMO, the West is in no position to go to war with China, on a manufacturing capability level and a social level, they have the West pretty well stumped.
So a negotiated outcome IMO is the only way a war can be delayed, history shows it probably will never be averted, just delayed.
What China has achieved in 50 years, couldn't have been done in a Western society, people just wouldn't be prepared to sacrifice enough in the hope of better future.

Xi Jinping - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I thought the same thing, 10 years ago.

The past 3 years has shown that China is a convoluted system and its dependency on Western technology and food.

War is more than just a battle plan; it is foreseeing the future.

In WWII Japan looked at the USA as an unprepared nation, with little cohesion and no manufacturing capability for a major war effort. After the Pearl Harbor attack, the USA switched to war footing, and not long was producing more tanks and ships than all other countries combined.

What China has achieved in 50 years has come from the good nature of Western countries, believing that China wanted and was part of a new world order that came after the Cold War. We shared technology and traded ideas, while turning a blind eye to massive theft and copyright of technology from the West. that is now slowing down and may stop altogether, if the Chinese government keeps up with their aggressive stance towards multiple nations.

Influential Chinese leaders can see the change happening, I believe that they have two choices:

1. Follow international rules and be part of fair and equitable trading system and live in peace with the rest of the world, or
2. become an aggressive bully that takes what they want, while trying to dominate regions, and causing a weapons race.

The world has moved on from the Cold War period, when single nations could be classed as the dominant superpower. We are now at a stage where nations with likeminded views support each other and combine their talents.

China and Russia have forced the West to re-sign old deals and pacts, friendships have been strengthened. Take our submarine deal as an example, the speed and depth of that deal shows you how fast western democracies can act when needed. And China leadership do not like it.

EDIT: The west was not the first at Globalisation, nor can greed be blamed solely on the west.

When did globalization begin? Many scholars say it started with Columbus’s voyage to the New World in 1492. People traveled to nearby and faraway places well before Columbus’s voyage, however, exchanging their ideas, products, and customs along the way. The Silk Road, an ancient network of trade routes across China, Central Asia, and the Mediterranean used between 50 B.C.E. and 250 C.E. is perhaps the most well-known early example.

Globalization

Globalization is a term used to describe the increasing connectedness and interdependence of world cultures and economies.

education.nationalgeographic.org

 

[Gringotts Bank]

I can't even imagine a US-China war in Taiwan. And yet they're all saying it's going to happen as if it's definite. Will Taiwan end up looking like Ukraine? A complete flattening of all infrastructure that must be built from the ground up? How does the world go without semiconductors for a few years? Or, will it be a lightning strike that is over and done with in a few days?

 

[Sean K]

I can't even imagine a US-China war in Taiwan. And yet they're all saying it's going to happen as if it's definite. Will Taiwan end up looking like Ukraine? A complete flattening of all infrastructure that must be built from the ground up? How does the world go without semiconductors for a few years? Or, will it be a lightning strike that is over and done with in a few days?

Under the current Taiwan leadership they will defend themselves and it will accelerate quickly. Rederob's blockade operational plan will work for a short time until Taiwan needs supplies and then it will turn to custard. A blockade though, will allow the mobilisation of support behind Taiwan which will be bad for China. So, a surprise rapid strike might be a better plan. Either way, it turns to custard. There is no way China will get control of Taiwan without conflict under the current political dynamic, imo.

 

[rederob]

China's military build up in the past decade is unprecedented outside war time.

That should not be surprising to anyone as China's respective armed forces came off a very low base. Add to that the continued cold war mentality that America is applying to the region and China appears to be taking a leaf out of Americas book to be able to defend itself against all comers.

Comparing the PRCs militarisation of the Spratlys to Taiping is a bit of a stretch. Agree, Taiwan shouldn't claim to own it, but it doesn't house weapons stations and fighter jets.

I don't condone China's stance, but I do point out the duplicity of Australia when it talks about abiding by the rule of law relating to the South China Sea's islands.

Whenever you are losing an argument you always resort to ad homs and are not worth replying to.

How about stumping up with evidence to support your comments. For example, you rattle on about the BRI debt trap yet there is no evidence anywhere that supports this notion: I linked a video that explained this.
As at 2021 for example China had written off about 10% of BRI debt and restructured around 40%. Roughly 30% was being paid back on original terms and the remaining portion was either not yet due or offered a moratorium.
FYI an ad hom is an attack on you, rather than your commentary. I have yet to see you display in your commentary a basic understanding of anything about China that is not otherwise obvious to Blind Freddy.

 

[IFocus]

Rederob's blockade operational plan will work for a short time until Taiwan needs supplies and then it will turn to custard.

A blockade would have to be the most effective method, it then sets the scene calling the US's bluff which will have to generate enough momentum politically to launch an attack, not sure if that's possible given the divisive politics at play in the US currently.

The mess in communications called social media allows foreign actors to run plenty of false narrative's.

Cannot see that unfolding given the resources required to breakup a blockade and hold the island long term.

Still political will would be bigger issue I would think rather than military capability.

 

[rederob]

Influential Chinese leaders can see the change happening, I believe that they have two choices:

1. Follow international rules and be part of fair and equitable trading system and live in peace with the rest of the world,

Why should China have to do this if America does not?
America has unlawful restrictive trade practices in place and continues to ban more and more Chinese companies from doing business in America. America is also banning some non-American companies from doing business with China.

1. become an aggressive bully that takes what they want, while trying to dominate regions, and causing a weapons race.

That makes no sense. China has never made claims beyond what it regards as "China."
Furthermore, China's military situation is rather well understood globally so it does not need to exert itself in any way.

The world has moved on from the Cold War period, when single nations could be classed as the dominant superpower. We are now at a stage where nations with likeminded views support each other and combine their talents.

Very few international commentators agree with that position. The international sentiment is of a new cold war, with China replacing Russia in the fray. The west is in an active phase of "containment" and putting together various strategies such as AUKUS under the aegis of like minded groups of nations.

China and Russia have forced the West to re-sign old deals and pacts, friendships have been strengthened. Take our submarine deal as an example, the speed and depth of that deal shows you how fast western democracies can act when needed. And China leadership do not like it.

True (although the "deals" are involving different nations than previously and Japan's alignment with America is novel), but your point overrides your previous comment about the Cold War period.

 

[mullokintyre]

Your military prowess are sorely lacking. If you understand a long game you will know that only a blockade is necessary. Anyone attempting to counter the blockade by military force will invoke the status of an attack on a sovereign state and be subject to UN sanction. As America, Japan, Australia and most of the rest of the world regard Taiwan as a region of China, it will be unwise for any military action to be taken in what is for all intents and purposes an internal conflict.

Ha Ha, telling a bloke who graduated from Duntroon and served in OZ forces that his military prowess is lacking.
I still reckon you are just a CCP stooge.
Mick

 

[JohnDe]

Why should China have to do this if America does not?

I don't know, please tell us.

 

[JohnDe]

That makes no sense. China has never made claims beyond what it regards as "China."
Furthermore, China's military situation is rather well understood globally so it does not need to exert itself in any way.

I've made a quick reading list for you (by the way I like how you and one other forum member likes to throw the 'straw man' word around) -

How China Is Attempting to Control the ‘Information Pipes’

China's steady plan to take control of the Asia-Pacific region

China Wants to Rule the World by Controlling the Rules

China’s Influence in Southeastern, Central, and Eastern Europe: Vulnerabilities and Resilience in Four Countries

China’s Global Threat to Human Rights

The human rights situation across China

China Events of 2021

Who are the Uyghurs and why is China being accused of genocide?

 

[JohnDe]

Very few international commentators agree with that position. The international sentiment is of a new cold war, with China replacing Russia in the fray. The west is in an active phase of "containment" and putting together various strategies such as AUKUS under the aegis of like minded groups of nations.

Why aren’t China and America more afraid of a war?​

Next to China’s irresponsible stand-off with America, the cold war looks almost like a model​

​

In chinese diplomacy it is an argument-ending insult to accuse a foreign power of a “cold-war mentality”. Such scorn is unfair to the original cold war. That confrontation saw America and allies seek to thwart and subvert the Soviet Union and its satellites in every domain short of direct superpower conflict. The resulting contest was terrifying, often irrational and marked by shameful acts on each side. But on a few specific occasions—for instance, the Cuban missile crisis of 1962—the prospect of nuclear annihilation inspired leaders on each side to a rare seriousness of purpose.​

​

Increasingly, Sino-American relations are blighted by some of the worst aspects of that first cold war. By default, the other side’s motives are assumed to be malign. Disputes are made intractable by flag-waving bombast, and by clashing accounts of reality. Just this week a foreign-ministry spokesperson in Beijing insinuated that covid-19 was brewed up by American military researchers, to counter American government assessments that the pandemic may have begun with a laboratory leak in China. Once more, arms build-ups threaten the balance of deterrence between the two sides. In recent years, Chinese pilots have flown recklessly close to American spy planes in international skies near China, risking mid-air collisions. But this time, the (occasionally) redeeming seriousness of the American-Soviet stand-off is missing.​

 

[sptrawler]

I thought the same thing, 10 years ago.

The past 3 years has shown that China is a convoluted system and its dependency on Western technology and food.

They are only dependent on our high level chip making technology and as I said in the early stages of this debate, the chip manufacturing on Taiwan will be the underlying driver for China to reclaim Taiwan. It is much easier to take over existing than design and develop your own technology.

War is more than just a battle plan; it is foreseeing the future.

In WWII Japan looked at the USA as an unprepared nation, with little cohesion and no manufacturing capability for a major war effort. After the Pearl Harbor attack, the USA switched to war footing, and not long was producing more tanks and ships than all other countries combined.

When the U.S entered the Second world war, the industrial hubs of America were huge, massive steel making from the railroad development, the steel manufacturing for all the car manufacturing and sky scraper building. Those days, as with the U.K and Australia are long gone, 90% of the pig iron blast furnaces and steel furnaces and rolling mills are gone, to rebuild them can't be done in 12 months, it takes years, the supporting infrastructure has been removed, rail supply lines, gas lines, raw material unloading plant etc. I know I worked in a blast furnace in the 1970's, it has been gone for 40 years and something completely different is in its place.
the U.S currently has about 40 remaining blast furnaces, China has 260 fully operational, from memory I think Australia has two still operational.
We would struggle to arm our military with enough small arms and ammunition to last any length of time, let alone arm civilians, we don't even have gun and ammo shops anymore so where would we get it from?

What China has achieved in 50 years has come from the good nature of Western countries, believing that China wanted and was part of a new world order that came after the Cold War. We shared technology and traded ideas, while turning a blind eye to massive theft and copyright of technology from the West. that is now slowing down and may stop altogether, if the Chinese government keeps up with their aggressive stance towards multiple nations.

Let's not pretend.
The West has made a lot of money out of offshoring their manufacturing to third world countries for cheap labour, they increased their lifestyle from poverty, ours went up a huge amount on importing cheap goods rather than producing them in our own country and paying high wages. It wasn't driven by good nature, it was driven by making stuff we wanted cheaper it's just good business.
That doesn't mean it is good practice, it has left the West with a massive exposure to critical supplies, covid highlighted it and now China is exploiting it. That's life, you know for every action, there is a reaction how that manifests is the only difference.

Influential Chinese leaders can see the change happening, I believe that they have two choices:

1. Follow international rules and be part of fair and equitable trading system and live in peace with the rest of the world, or
2. become an aggressive bully that takes what they want, while trying to dominate regions, and causing a weapons race.

The world has moved on from the Cold War period, when single nations could be classed as the dominant superpower. We are now at a stage where nations with likeminded views support each other and combine their talents.

China and Russia have forced the West to re-sign old deals and pacts, friendships have been strengthened. Take our submarine deal as an example, the speed and depth of that deal shows you how fast western democracies can act when needed. And China leadership do not like it.

EDIT: The west was not the first at Globalisation, nor can greed be blamed solely on the west.

The West has to form strong alliances, because we have gutted out our manufacturing capability, so we are going to have to work together to piece together enough capacity to hopefully make some sort of deterrent.
The saving grace at the moment is, China doesn't know what high tech weapons the U.S has, so it is still not confident and that is why Xi is demanding China focus on improving its home grown high tech capability.
If China was confident, Taiwan would already be done and dusted, meanwhile as I said a couple of years ago Taiwan chip manufacturing will be getting dismantled. Just my opinion.