<p>Remember the Opium War? Well, there's a chance that a war between China and USA might just happen. Whether we like to admit it or not, China's military power can almost threaten that of the US(well not really), but its economy is growing. So I was wondering, do will this hypothetical(for now) war be a clashing of political idealogies like the cold war, or will it be simply a war to determine the next super power. I think the US would win if this war was to happen. however, you never know...Iraq wasn't as easy to defeat as originally thought right? God how that war is pre-emptive. Bush wouldn't be president now had Saddam Hussein not been caught. Meh, he's better than kerry at least.</p>
<p>China's economy is like an economy on steroids -- sooner or later, it will pay the price for its hyperdriven growth.</p>
<p>Environmentally, China is wreaking havoc. Why waste 1000L of water on grain to feed people that'll profit you 100 bucks, when you can use the same 1000L of water to make T-shirts that'll profit you 1,000 bucks.</p>
<p>China is overpopulated. That's its worst problem. it can thank imperialism for that.</p>
<p>Your post was a bit rambling, but I've read that if the US and Britain decided to go Hitler on the world and take it over they could do so easily (makes you wonder how much of the "world" would be left, but whatever).</p>
<p>...but in answer to your question - the US would destroy China. The Chinese are afraid of a few antiquated US weapons in Taiwan. They're no match for the greatest Navy and Air Force the world has ever seen.</p>
<p>there won't be a war with China anytime in the near future...the Bush administration has already enstated an extensive trade agreement with China with very few limitations....hence...we have formed a dependence on the Chinese and they have formed a dependence on us....their economy is thriving, and we're only helping it along...but war isn't in the picture for the recent future</p>
<p>and just because we're talking about China i'd like to share one of my favorite quotes:</p>
<p>"A billion Chinese can't be wrong...eat rice"</p>
<p>and Maize&Blue22 is correct.</p>
<p>The U.S. has power of the "football" :)...a lil device that the President has with him at all times that holds the codes to every nuclear weapon registered under the United States of America....we could blow up the world a few times over...China's no problem....Britain is nowhere near as sophisticated in their weaponry....the only country that has military technology that surpasses ours is Russia, and that's limited to their attack helicopter...faster, lighter, quieter, and more destructive than your average Apache...everything else...we have the upper hand</p>
<p>I wonder what would qualify as a legitimate reason for the U.S. to launch a nuclear weapon...a reason other than someone else launching one at us first. It wouldn't surprise me if our own govt will blow up an American city and blame it on someone else in order to start a nuclear war. But that won't happen unless some key people can get rich in the process. This situation sounds familiar.</p>
<p>Ahem. Your facts must be really skewed.</p>
<p>The nuclear football is a formality. In cases where the football is compromised, the nuclear codes would be immediately deactivated by the Pentagon or the leading military authority, in cases of catastrophe.</p>
<p>At the moment, since we're not technically at war with any nation, any launching of a nuclear weapon would be tantamount to the declaration of war, and thus, I believe would require Congressional approval (in times of peace, at least, since I doubt a non-war scenario would require us launching nuclear missiles.. the President would be in some deep caca if he launched missiles during times of peace out of nowhere..) In cases of extreme emergency or states where we are already in war, the President may launch the nuclear missiles without the nuclear codes. </p>
<p>The NSA changes the Gold Codes -- aka the nuclear football codes -- on a daily basis.</p>
<p>China and USA are both not too happy about N. Korea. </p>
<p>And not to disappoint all the Communists out there, but I think China has had a taste of western capitalism, and is interested in learning a bit more about it before trying to take us down.</p>
<p>Which, if we continue with the wringing of hands and self-induced guilt, shouldn't be too hard.</p>
<p>Personally, I think a war between modern superpowers - like the US and China - would be impossible without nuclear destruction on both sides. Nobody would "win" this war; few would survive it.</p>
<p>Look at the Cold War - America and the USSR would've loved to beat the crap out of each other, and had nuclear arms not been part of the equation, there's a decent chance that it may have happened. If either side had been a little bit more reckless in one of many conflicts - Cuban Missile Crisis, USSR's spread over eastern Europe, the Vietnam or Korean wars - a global conflict could've resulted. But with nuclear arms, diplomacy was given precedence and a large-scale conflict was ultimately avoided.</p>
<p>The same will (must) happen between the US and China, should any conflict arise.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Iraq wasn't as easy to defeat as originally thought right?
[/quote]
No, Iraq was easy as hell for America to defeat. We just have problems now because we continue to occupy it with troops (we're still busy "liberating" them), and the locals don't like it very much. </p>
<p>
[quote]
So I was wondering, do will this hypothetical(for now) war be a clashing of political idealogies like the cold war, or will it be simply a war to determine the next super power.
[/quote]
I don't know if this is what you're trying to imply, but I really can't see America engaging in nuclear war against another superpower just because its economical or political clout is surpassing ours.</p>
<p>ummmmmm....well...since the cold war...the U.S. has been in deterence mode...i.e. we won't launch a nuclear attack unless we've had one launched against us already :)...several executive agreements have been made to guarantee this...and ummmm...sorry to burst your bubble...the government won't launch a nuclear attack on one of our cities...it's not really all that simple lol....and how would we get money outta blowin up a city?...there is an accountability factor...anyone that launches a nuclear weapon without an immediate threat would be held accountable and would face...i'll say...serious....punishment.</p>
<p>And would everyone stop building up this Chinese paranoia lol...China's not going to declare war, nor were they ever thinking about it....we're not doing anything to them, they're not doing anything to us...we're both bound by a trade agreement, so if anything, we're profiting off eachother.</p>
<p>Jimmy...the United States is the only superpower in the world...:)</p>
<p>Furthermore, Iraq was a difficult victory...we didn't know our enemies...we couldn't tell the difference between friend and enemy....such unorthodox tactics had us on our feet....i mean...ofcourse it was a surefire victory, but it yielded a much higher proportion of casualties than ever expected, and the situation naturally did get worse as time progressed...we never found what we were looking for, i.e. WMDs, and seth was right....if Bush had let Sadaam slip through his fingers we'd be calling mr. liberal nutjob President right now</p>
<p>The reason that this China war thing has been building up is because, at heart, America loves having someone to challenge. America has always been its most motivated when it had someone to beat (ie Space Race against USSR, Foreign expansion at the turn of the century against Europe, etc). Now that Russia has turned its armed forces into a combination thrift store/scrap heap, it seems as though militarily we're no longer dealing with foes of equal strength.</p>
<p>Deep down, many people are sick of dealing with terrorists. People want a rival that they can look straight in the eye. They want to be able to throw punches rather than swat flies. China is the only country that militarily has any chance of becoming a challenge. That's why people are talking about hypothetical wars.</p>
<p>i think you're correct in a sense...that does kinda apply in the modern sense, and then during the Industrial Revolution...but from 1900 and WWI and the time between WWI and WWII the U.S. stayed away from foreign affairs...and the most it got involved prior to the Industrial Revolution was with the Spanish American War and also with the Monroe Doctrine.</p>
<p>But I don't see any Red Fever spreading across the U.S. anytime soon :p</p>
<p>
[quote]
Jimmy...the United States is the only superpower in the world...
[/quote]
I don't believe so. I guess it all rests on how you define "superpower". Yeah, America is the strongest country, both militarily and economically, in the world. But this superiority doesn't make us invincible by any means.</p>
<p>nahrafsfa, what I meant by blowing up a city was not the U.S. actually launching a nuclear weapon but rather planting one and making it seem like another country was responsible for it. I know I'm only adding my conspiracy theory thoughts to this discussion. Look at 9/11. It is highly possible that it was an inside job. If it was, Bush got exactly what he wanted. If it wasn't, and our govt played absolutely no role in it (which is very hard to believe), it was still the perfect thing for Bush because it gave him the final go-ahead for going into Afghanistan and Iraq.</p>
<p>But this is a whole other discussion for another time.</p>
<p>no really.....the only 2 superpowers of the 20th century were the USSR and the US...when USSR collapsed in 1991 the United States was the only one left. Basically...the determining factor that makes a state a superpower is the size of their nuclear(or nucular...depends on if you're a Bushy or not :p) arsenal and the strength of their military. A superpower is one which can single handedly defeat any allies/other states.<br>
This is what made the USSR and the US superpowers after WWII. The USSR began developing nuclear weapons. They had just about as large an arsenal as we did, and their military was just as well equipped. Now...the Cold War began, because the two countries that were able to take over the world single handedly had totally opposite ideologies....democracy vs. communism....U.S. thought the Soviets were going to try to expand communism while Soviets thought the U.S. was goin to try and impose democracy.
Each state had the ability to blow up the other several times over...if one attacked...the other would launch their arsenal...so basically....they'd just blow up eachother...
But like i said earlier...nuclear arsenal is really what makes a superpower...now the U.S. is the only one left, since much of Russia's nuclear arsenal has already been dealt out on the black market...they still retain a substantial amount, but lots lots lots of it is gone.</p>
<p>china shouldn't be too hard. just give them a few more doses of opium. Haha. what a classic: "drug wains war for the British." :D</p>
<p>hmm..</p>
<p>European Union will be super power before China.</p>
<p>I don't think a non european country will ever be a super power, sorry. never happened, never will.</p>
<p>Never take the capabilities of other countries for granted. The US learned that from the Iraq war and they have a likely chance to suffer if they had a war with China. (btw, China has more allies than the US lol)</p>
<p>"China ........ steroids"</p>
<p>Well if thats the case, then the US is probably on weed. The economy in the US is terrible, while the case is quite opposite in China.</p>
<p>someone's been watching too much 24</p>