Chinas military budget jumps 14%

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by DrStealth, Mar 4, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. this is very funny considering the amout of "black projects" the US has running and the billions hidden around in undisclosed development.


    PRC Vs USA...................... hhhmmmm now theres a topic for discussion, who would the (long term) victor be,
    (and with a bit of luck the commonwealth nations wont be involved :twisted: )
     
  2. hmmmmmm

    [​IMG]

    V

    [​IMG]


    ....................



    I think I'll go for the chogie!!
     
  3. Today my money would be on the US. Currently a lot of the hype about China is just that. It would not be too hard to bankrupt them as a nation (at cost of course) and stir up trouble within its own borders.

    At the moment though I can only see China going to war over Taiwain and not fighting any expeditionary wars against the west over resourses but needs might change that, personally I think China will do all it can to encourage an economically strong EU block that will politically/militarily split from the US. The Chinese can then choose who they trade with when it comes to international disputes. They definately see a world with 3-4 super blocks to their advantage rather than the current state of affairs with several 'great' nations dominated by a single superpower. They do not want to go down the arms race to ruin road that the USSR took so don't expect any great build up of ICBM's in China - they will probably stick to a similar number of them as the UK and France. Prehaps they will continue to develop large numbers of tactical nukes that will allow them to dominate their play ground - this could lead to a regional arms race with Japan, Russia, or India?

    You never know - they might become a democracy yet, although I fear the leadership intends to allow the population (or the middle classes at least) to become decadent enough that they don't care for political freedoms.
     
  4. Imagery of PRC nuclear facilities.

    http://www.imagingnotes.com/go/page4a.php?menu_id=23

    The US Navy is moving 6 more LA Class Attack subs from the Atlantic to the Pacific which will bring the number of subs in the Pacific to 31. This is in recognition of the growing concern the US has with Chinese military growth and their intentions.
     
  5. In a military sense China is not a superpower but a regional power. It currently only has 3 old Soviet Aircraft carriers and its one SSBN is in port most of the time and the technology gap is still huge. At the moment China would lose a war with the US in my opinion, but it would be a very costly war all the same.
     
  6. Of course China has a less powerful military than the US.

    Not only does China spend less on its military but it is also a smaller percentage of the economy than it is in the US.

    But all this talk of China vs US is IMHO to misunderstand the Chinese mentality. They are among the last of the true imperialists. They have drawn a big red circle around south East Asia and decided that it is its sphere of influence. It doesn't really care what goes on in the world apart from what it sees as the area for China to run. The Chinese have had an empire that has survived since before 200BC, it is very much part of the national ethos and mentality that it is the natural order of things that they should control the region.

    It comes down to pride, that is why chinese jets flew next to US ones a few years back on the limits of their airspace, it is why they are willing to go to war is a country becomes 'officially' independent even though currently in all practicalities it is already.

    Will it ever go to war with the US? I doubt it, there simply isn't a conflict of interest, apart from Taiwan (which of course is a big but) and each is entangled with the other in terms of trade. The current 'friction' IMHO is that of US hawks who are looking for a scape goat for their deficit worries.

    As for Taiwan, well yea that is a big question but I doubt the US would back Taiwan if it unilaterally declared independence and they know it so I doubt it will ever happen.
     
  7. I'll take the crispy duck and plum sauce over the burger. Culinary decision of course. :wink:
     
  8. And, your point is.... ?

    And, your point is.... ?

    I'm sure you have a point to make T6, but from these two items, it could be any number of things. Please do enlighten me, or were they just throw-away lines with no specific purpose?

    PS.
    Here's a link to a US nuclear facility. http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=Oak+ridge,+TN&ll=35.987174,-84.248657&spn=0.032364,0.086517&t=k
    And my point? So what if PRC has one, so does the US... If I give you more links, does that make it any more sinister?
     
  9. I got a nuclear facility in my basement. Anyone feel scared yet?
     
  10. My point is that the US takes the potential threat from China seriously. Reinforcing the submarine force enables the US to station a submarine picket around Taiwan should the need arise.

    The pictures of never seen before [in public anyway] of PRC facilities was more a matter of interest.
     
  11. i saw somewhere, dont remember where, but, China can afford to loose 1000 men a day for three yrs. I dont know how true that is, but it is a scary thought.
     
  12. I'm sorry, I don't see what threat China is to the US militarily. Any military conflict between the two is a zero-sum equation for both sides. Neither will initiate for that very reason.

    And if the PRC is foolish enough to launch a pre-emptive strike against Taiwan - an endeavor that can only be chanced while the US is tied into Iraq and Afghanistan - what is the US going to do? Pinprick strikes or go atomic? Are you willing to lose a US city or three for the sake of Taipei? I doubt it!!!!

    Oh! Well here's another: http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/serbia/facility/vinca-history.jpg and here too: http://www.defense.gov/photos/May1999/990529-O-9999M-005.html

    And here's another facility that actually built 6 weopans without the US knowing anything about it.... http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=Belgrade&ll=-25.799698,27.932954&spn=0.018005,0.043259&t=k Guess where?
     
  13. Don't you mean a negative sum game?

    I don't know whether China wants Taiwan, as much as they want the issue of Taiwan. It's a good way of bucking up support for the CCP by appeals to naitionalism, thus allowing the CCP to forget about the peasantry and the proletariat and concentrate on getting itself rich.

    The only problem that can arise is if the CCP overplays its hand. With the nationalist issue they could be riding on the back of a tiger. At least, if T6's report is gen, the US is at being discreet about its force posture. SSNs are a lot less visible than a CVBG or two and not as likely to raise as many hackles. (Of course, one could postulate that carrier-based aircraft are more useful in occupying and controlling a desert battlespace than submarines- and thus might be in high demand. :D)
     
  14. Hold on. I'll just check with my current advisor on such affairs...

    ...

    Well, Mr Guinness says, you may be right. But this is his 4th attempt - or my 4th attempt - or my 4th Guinness - or

    ... Oh you get the point!!!!


    I agree completely. Recently spent 12 months on a UK campus full of Chinese students. To man and boy, they were fully indoctinated into the theory that Taiwan was shortly to return to the fold. They hoped for a peaceful return but expected a military intervention from their behalf. They tried to impress upon me that it was the duty of every 'true' chinese to ensure this happens. However, when questionned, not a single one of them was prepared to be in the first wave of landing assault craft - they all had prior engagements elsewhere!!! Which I think tells the very same story that you have come to believe. :)


    Not very discrete if T6 is telling us, is it? But, your point is well noted. Since the end of the Cold War, it seems to be the norm rather than the exception for negotiating sides to gradually force each other into corners from which the only escape is military action. NATO backed Milosevic into such a corner, but in doing so, marched themselves into an opposing corner with the same view. Roll on 4 years to Spring 2003, guess what? However, I doubt it will get that far with China, for the very same reason it didn't with the Soviet Union.

    BTW. Who have you upset to get the Oxygen Thief label?