"China is ready to engage in war and even nuclear conflict with the United States should fighting break out over Taiwan"

Link To Full Article

-- Zdude (zdude777@hotmail.com), February 21, 2000

Answers

And a particularly lovely breakfast time to YOU too.

C

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), February 21, 2000.

Chuck: ROFLMAO!!

However, it is appropriate for the meal most have toast with. (What's a smirk look like?)

-- JCC (wolverine_in_nc@hotmail.com), February 21, 2000.

Uh-oh! Be scared, be VERY scared!

They may be ready to fight, but are they ready to lose? We've been ready to fight them for over 50 years, and always will be.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 21, 2000.

America's military readiness to fight a significant war is near an all-time low. We couldn't even mount an operation as big as Desert Storm today. With pilots and other highly-trained professionals leaving the service in droves over the Anthrax Vaccine debacle, who will fly those few planes still able to take to the air after cannabalizing many others for "spare parts"? With our troops thinly spread out all over the world on so-called "peace keeping" missions that erode their readiness to fight, what sort of army can we field against a major enemy today? And, thanks to Klinton and his friends such as Bernard Schwarz of Loral, the ChiComs have pleanty of our latest technology go use against us, whenever it suits them. What real options will the next president have?

-- Flash (flash@flash.flash), February 21, 2000.

Hawk,

We WERE ready until the chi-coms got a man in the white house. For the last 8 years, "China-Bill" Clinton has been disbanding unit after unit of the military. How many Super-Carriers have been de- commissioned, how many brigades of Army, how many pilots forced into retirement, not to be replaced? It's despicable. Sometimes, I wish the cold war was still called just that. The maybe the polly politicians and sheeple would see the need for continuing readiness and defense spending. In a hundred years, I wonder if they'll compare the US with a prizefighter who celebrated too early, only to be pummeled to non-existence when his opponent got up (ironically, with the help and funding of the US) before the ten- count was done.

-- Powder (Powder47keg@aol.com), February 21, 2000.

The race is on. The Chinese will need about 2 years to convert the information that was handed to then into new weapons systems that are in the field. We have 1 year and maybe a new administration with an open view of history politics and enemies. Add to that the possibility of the US going to into a recession and the new demands for government money that are fighting for defense dollars and a public that has bought into the concept that we have no enemies. We shall see, but I wouldn't place a bet with the reigning champion he's looking like he ate a few too many doughnuts.

-- Squid (ItsDark@down.here), February 21, 2000.

We are reaping the "rewards" of electing then again re-electing a socialist in favor of a one world government. Clinton, like many powerful individuals who preceded him, was a "Rhodes" scholar indoctrinated into the "Oxfordian" NWO philosophy. These individuals have learned and thus possess an ability to effectively communicate in double talk rhetoric. This is a required part of their training. Most of these individuals move into political or corporate life. Clintons ability to sell out his country through treason while maintaing high approval ratings simultaneously is truly uncanny. Granted, his high approval ratings are directly related to brain- washing the sheeple. Unfortunately, the irreversable damage this dangerous man has created will eventually result in a truly scary predictable scenario. Militarily, he has placed our country in an extremely vulnerable state and thus harms way. Congress is not without blame as well. God help us.

-- NoJo (RSKeiper@aol.com), February 21, 2000.

Hawk,

Personally, I can't believe the Chinese would NOT be willing to send over a few million guys. From their perspective, what do they have to lose?

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), February 21, 2000.

Yep, they could send a 200 million man army couldn't they?

-- Powder (Powder47keg@aol.com), February 21, 2000.

Uhhh..... how?

-- Casper (c@no.yr), February 21, 2000.

the chinese have a 200 million man army.... if you count illiterate farmboy reservists with a rifle and 100 rounds... The chinese would have a seriously difficult time invading taiwan... let's see from shanghai to LA is what, 5000 miles? let's say a transport can make 25 miles an hour so that's 200 hours, about 8 days.. 200 million guys times three handfuls of rice per day... that's about 1.6billion pounds of rice for the trip... assuming nothing goes wrong... and, hey yagotta store food for LA too, not enough food there for 200 million chinese.. so, say, what 6 weeks toget settled in.. so all they need is like 20,000 transports and 11 billion pounds of rice... not to mention 10 billion servings of chicken chow mein.... (all that rice is gonna drive those guys nuts) wow, i'd hate to be in the PLA logistics division!

-- jeremiah (braponspdetroit@hotmail.com), February 21, 2000.

jeremiah,

so all they need is like 20,000 transports

That's if they can load 10.000 men and all their supplies on each ship :-)

-- Casper (c@no.yr), February 21, 2000.

This thread is another example of the unique blend of fact and delusional paranoia that is so entertaining here.

Clinton as a patsy for the Chinese government?

Is this the same Clinton that managed to bomb four (five if you count errant missles) countries in a several month period not too long ago?

The same Clinton that still seeks to develop nuclear warfighting capabilities in space (no different than Ronnie Raygun here)?

I think the reality is that Clinton is a patsy for the transnational conglomerates that are becoming more important than mere governments. Who gets to elect the CEOs of Exxon, Dupont, Boeing, etc.?

If our civilization had any sense, we'd spend the trillion dollars per year on military implements of death on eliminating hunger unnecessary disease, and shifting over to a sustainable, non-oil dependent world while there's still a bit of time.

For the ultra-paranoid on this list who think that Clinton is the fabled manchurian candidate, they seem to have forgetten it was the Republicans who initiated (1) the opening with the "chicoms" and (2) the transfer of factories from the US to China. There's also NO difference between Clinton, Gore, Bradly, McCain and George W. Shrub regarding the WTO and its many implications.

I'm neither Demican nor Republicrat, I'm glad that Ralph Nader is running (this time more seriously) for prez.

-- mark (wind@solar.com), February 21, 2000.

Casper and Jeremiah,

NO! I didn't mean China would send a couple million guys to the U.S., but rather could do so to Taiwan if needed. Especially after "softening up" a beachhead or two. As for feeding them, that's my point. China doesn't seem to have much regard for the lives of its individual citizens, they could send over people with NO rifles, hardly any food, and just tell them to fan out and survive on their own (maybe with the promise they could keep a plot of land they take over for their own families). This plan would both reduce the Chinese population some and deplete the stores in Taiwan at the same time.

Also, one of the beautiful things about an AK-47 is how cheaply they can be put together, even after china loads up its first waves of "farmboys" with existing weapons, I doubt they would be in short supply for long.

Remember, we got 500000 people half way around the world to the gulf, how hard would it be for China to swamp Tiawan with people if they didn't care about losses sustained to do so?

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), February 21, 2000.

There are so many Chinese men they could walk the ocean on each others backs...just kidding. But, they do have every incentive to invade our wimpy country just for the women....they kill baby girls over there and have millions of men with no local prospects.

-- canthappen (n@ysayer.com), February 21, 2000.

Hi Frank,

Sorry it took so long to get back to this..

I WAS talking about an invasion of the US by China, but this could be more fun :-)

Taiwan has a pretty good military just by itself.... uhhh... thanx to US :-) http://www.emeraldesigns.com/limit.html

We have a pretty good navy that could stop any incursion into Taiwan by sea or air.

Just for now, let's keep it between the 3 main players. dragging Russia and NATO into it would get a bit complicated :-)

-- canthappen,

I'll ignore most of your post but this....

There was an old saying about marching them a mile wide into machine gun fire, and never running out as they can breed faster than you can kill them.... true then, true now.... but we are more efficient now..... aren't we? :-(

-- Casper (c@no.yr), February 22, 2000.

Ah, Casper.

US interests trying to defend Taiwan would have the same nickname that Saudi troops and US troops in Korea carry.

Speed bumps.

The US forces CURENTLY on Taiwan that is. If the US "reinforces" them with couple carriers and a fully reinforced MEU or 2 things MIGHT be a bit better, in that they would be able to buy a bit of time for the US to figure out Pac Sealift ability to get a realistic defense/re-taking force into the theatre. Except that there aren't a couple MEU's floating around and the Carriers are all tied up "Peace- keeping".

You have the same problem here you have with Korea in that the supply lines are EXCEDINGLY imbalanced. When there is a discrepancy in supply line balance USUALLY you can bet on the shorter of the two, particularly when the shorter is 85 miles or so long and the longer is a couple thousand.

And you guys don't have to worry about jump-point choke-points and privateers in YOUR supply concerns.

Joss

-- Joss Metadi (warhammer@Pride.of Mnadeyne), February 23, 2000.