China can field an Army of 200 Million Men

[xsited1]

China can field an Army of 200 Million Men

Since Chinese men are so much skinnier and shorter than American men, it takes about 4 of them to equal one American soldier so it's more like an army of 50 million men.

 

[grunt11b]

Last country that the Chinese invaded was Korea..and basically because there were US troops in that country.

The Chinese, believe it or not, have no interest in military domination of the world.

The economic domination, however, is suspect.

And the US is happily helping in that endeavor..thanks to conservatives.

I'm sure it had nothing to do with the left raising capital gains taxes to the point to where companies had no choice but to pull up roots and ship jobs to places like China,Taiwan,Vietnam for the cheaper labor. I am also sure it had nothing to do with the leftist inside the labor movements "Unions" who pushed at corporations from the bottom for wages way above what the employee should have been getting that chased the businesses away either right?
And let's not forget about Bill Clinton signing the free trade act that ushered in every walmart product on the shelf right now.
If anyone helped the Chinese, it was the Left, not conservatives, we would rather people buy American and keep American jobs in America.

 

[grunt11b]

I remember back in the discussions on Gulf War I when Iraq was billed as having a huge army, a large part of which were veterans of the 10 year war with Iran.

They were taken to pieces and nearly eliminated in the course of 6 weeks.

Gulf War II went even faster.

The Chinese don't have an effective air arm. The navy is even less of an issue.

The only reason China has that big of an army is because they are afraid of their population.

China's military interests at this point are defense of their territory..something they are more then capable of doing.

Especially since Obama sold them the Blue Prints to the hummer and a Stealth fighter under Clinton was shot down in Serbia in 1999. And all of a sudden China has Stealth technology:

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS8-RWw0QtwuS6tVinq2jLpUInHqpAj9NlDU5dQ0wrXguHK1sV9

And let's not forget about the Multi Billion dollar stealth helicopter that was shot down in Pakistan During the bIn laden raid, another top secret air craft shot down under a democrat president.
Top Secret Stealth Helicopter Program Revealed in Osama Bin Laden Raid: Experts - ABC News

SO under the last two Democratic Presidents we have sold our Humvee blue print and lost two very important strategic stealth technology aircraft. I understand the Hummer blueprint went to help pay off debt...maybe. But I can't help but to think with all of Americas resources why could we not have those stealth fighter/helicopters wreckage secured and kept away from our enemies? We know the Serbs sold the fighter wreckage to Russis which ended up in Chinas hands, wonder where the Helo Tech went?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Chinese have an unlimited surplus of young fighting age men with no wives to be able to send anywhere in the world it is fact that they have boasted that they can field an army of 200 million men. China has had a long history of being the economic trading superpower of the world, perhaps they are attempting to rule the world economically again. Can we stop it? We do have a large army but we are already sick of these resource wars.

Yes, and the USA can field 35,000 nuclear weapons.

But don't worrry about China's military might, its their economic might that is going to make all the difference.

It's hard to imagine the US engaging in a nuclear weapon first use again.

 

[rdean]

It's OK.

We can field an Army of 5,000 nuclear bombs.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Don't let the propaganda or podium talk fool you, our government and the Chinese gov't are the best of pals and have been for years.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Our American fascist corporatists, all righties, love China.

 

[rightwinger]

Chinese have an unlimited surplus of young fighting age men with no wives to be able to send anywhere in the world it is fact that they have boasted that they can field an army of 200 million men. China has had a long history of being the economic trading superpower of the world, perhaps they are attempting to rule the world economically again. Can we stop it? We do have a large army but we are already sick of these resource wars.

China might have a 200 million man Army, but their primary mission is to keep 1.5 billion Chinese in check

They are no threat to the US

 

[peace2011]

our government and the Chinese gov't are the best of pals and have been for years.

China: US Waging Global Internet War to Bring Down Governments

The Chinese military has accused the US of waging a global Internet war against multiple nations in an effort to bring down governments, citing the Arab Spring revolutions as an example.

The accusations made by scholars at the Chinese military academy follow accusations by Google that Chinese offices attempted to hack Google accounts related to US government offices, officials, journalists, activists and politicians.

Google traced the attacks to the city of Jinan known for hosting the military’s vocational school which focuses on computers and technology. The same location was also linked to an assault on Google's systems over a year ago. China has denied responsibility for both attacks.

China is now asserting however that the US is using computer tactics via the Internet to promote regime change in the Arab world and claimed to have evidence that cyber attacks originated within the United States.

"Of late, an Internet tornado has swept across the world … massively impacting and shocking the globe. Behind all this lies the shadow of America," said an article by Ye Zheng and Zhao Baoxian, scholars from the Academy of Military Sciences. “Faced with this warm up for an Internet war, every nation and military can't be passive but is making preparations to fight the Internet war.”

China: US waging global Internet war — RT

 

[peace2011]

They are no threat to the US

US military to Respond with Physical Force to Cyber Attack

The Pentagon’s newest policy grants the US military the ability to respond to a cyber attack on government networks with physical force – equating hacking to an act of war.

This new trend has many advocates and experts worried. Hacking a government system may soon be an offence that can be retaliated against with force, even though most US government hacks are conducted by individuals and activists – not foreign governments.

“Does the United States want to say we’re guna deter Russia with nuclear weapons because of some hackers in a Moscow internet café?” asked Research fellow Benjamin H. Friedman from the Cato Institute in Washington. “That sounds like an overly bellicose threat to me.”
Friedman described the assertion that a cyber attack is an act of war as preposterous. He explained that the vast majority of attacks are criminal, but have nothing to do with defense or the military – the government must recognize the difference.

He said the use of threat of military force as a deterrent is a bad idea. The risk of criminal activity of this nature is known and should be deterrent enough.

Pentagon declares war on cyber attacks — RT

Pentagon: Cyber attacks are an Act of War

The Pentagon has decided that computer-based attacks and hacking from a foreign country can now be considered acts of war.

According to a report by the Wall Street Journal the Pentagon is stiffening their approach to cyber attacks following the recent cyber attack of US military defense contractor Lockheed Martin.

According to the report, “If a cyber attack produces the death, damage, destruction or high-level disruption that a traditional military attack would cause, then it would be a candidate for a ‘use of force’ consideration, which could merit retaliation.”

The military is said to be adapting to a changing landscape, where new technology brings new threats. Currently cyber warfare is not addressed by the Rules of Armed Conflict, since those rules are based on laws which pre-date cyber issues. International treaties like the Geneva Conventions and others which made up the rules of war cannot, the military argues, apply to cyber attacks because they were not designed to.

The United States hopes its new approach to cyber attacks will be met by a consensus from its allies.

Pentagon: Cyber attacks are an act of war — RT

 

[Sallow]

Last country that the Chinese invaded was Korea..and basically because there were US troops in that country.

The Chinese, believe it or not, have no interest in military domination of the world.

The economic domination, however, is suspect.

And the US is happily helping in that endeavor..thanks to conservatives.

Actually..I am wrong about this..and I just remembered..that China tried to "Annex" Vietnam after America left.

And got their asses roundly kicked.

 

[Sallow]

Last country that the Chinese invaded was Korea..and basically because there were US troops in that country.

The Chinese, believe it or not, have no interest in military domination of the world.

The economic domination, however, is suspect.

And the US is happily helping in that endeavor..thanks to conservatives.

I'm sure it had nothing to do with the left raising capital gains taxes to the point to where companies had no choice but to pull up roots and ship jobs to places like China,Taiwan,Vietnam for the cheaper labor. I am also sure it had nothing to do with the leftist inside the labor movements "Unions" who pushed at corporations from the bottom for wages way above what the employee should have been getting that chased the businesses away either right?
And let's not forget about Bill Clinton signing the free trade act that ushered in every walmart product on the shelf right now.
If anyone helped the Chinese, it was the Left, not conservatives, we would rather people buy American and keep American jobs in America.

It was George W. Bush's tax holiday on foreign profits that led the way. Not any "free trade act".

 

[peace2011]

China warned " attack on Pakistan would construed as an attack on China"

China has "warned in unequivocal terms that any attack on Pakistan would be construed as an attack on China", The News daily quoted diplomatic sources as saying.

The warning was formally conveyed by the Chinese foreign minister at last week's China-US strategic dialogue and economic talks in Washington, it said.

For his part, Gilani reiterated Pakistan's support for its policy of 'One China' and said his country fully supports China on the issues of Taiwan and Tibet.

During her briefing today Jiang skirted questions about Pakistan-China signing new defence agreements. Asked about assertions by Pakistan's Ambassador to China Masood Khan before Gilani's arrival that new defence deals would be signed, she said the two sides signed agreements in economy, technology, finance and energy resources.

"As to specific cooperation, please refer to relevant companies," she said, adding that China is actively implementing pledges to help pro-disaster reconstruction and exerting utmost to help tide over difficulties."

China on Thursday said the international community "must respect" Pakistan's sovereignty, tacitly confirming reports that it has asked the US not to violate Islamabad's territorial integrity, following the killing of Osama bin Laden.

Asked about reports that China has asked US during its recently concluded strategic dialogue with Washington to respect Pakistan's sovereignty as Islamabad came under heavy pressure after bin Laden's killing, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Jiang Yu told media here that "sovereignty and territorial integrity of Pakistan must be respected."

"We believe that Pakistan has made great contribution to international counter-terrorism efforts, as well as huge sacrifices. The international community should understand and support Pakistan's efforts to restore national stability and develop its economy," she said.

China asks US to respect Pak's sovereignty, independence - Economic Times

Obama: would raid Pakistan again if militant found

President Barack Obama would approve a new incursion into Pakistan if the United States found another leading militant there, he said in a BBC interview broadcast on Sunday.

U.S. Navy SEALs killed al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, mastermind of the September 11 attacks on U.S. cities in 2001, in a raid on his fortified compound in Pakistan on May 2, ending a manhunt for the world's most-wanted militant.

Asked if Obama would do the same again if the United States discovered another "high-value target" in Pakistan or another country, such as a senior al Qaeda member or Afghan Taliban leader Mullah Omar, he said he would "take the shot."

"We are very respectful of the sovereignty of Pakistan. But we cannot allow someone who is actively planning to kill our people or our allies' people, we can't allow those kind of active plans to come to fruition without us taking some action," Obama told the BBC.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/22/us-obama-pakistan-idUSTRE74L0U320110522?feedType=RSS

 

[ginscpy]

Didn't seem to deter the Japs when they invaded/occupied China ....

 

[mike beev]

It isn't a Chinese army we should be concerned about; our concerns should be their building a competative submarine fleet. In real war games, submarines always sink aircraft carriers. If we ever go to military war with them, it will be a naval & air war in the Pacific and because we were stupid enough to get between them and the Spratleys or them and Taiwan. It is their backyard, and they will demand to rule it their own way. But since we are committing economic suicide, there will be no need for them to fight us; we will colapse from within. Any doubts? Look at the balance of trade.

 

[editec]

Last country that the Chinese invaded was Korea..and basically because there were US troops in that country.

The Chinese, believe it or not, have no interest in military domination of the world.

The economic domination, however, is suspect.

And the US is happily helping in that endeavor..thanks to conservatives.

Actually..I am wrong about this..and I just remembered..that China tried to "Annex" Vietnam after America left.

And got their asses roundly kicked.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECbhcqdIN5g"]YouTube - ‪China - Vietnam War 1979 ( Battle of Cao Bang)‬‏[/ame]

 

[RAYLIEN]

i believe that u.s. is our true ally,our defender and our mother. hail ye, oh america, the land of the brave and the land which was choosen by god to become a defender and crusher of any nation who is showing thier power to the smaller and poorer country such as philippines… MY BELOVED COUNTRY.. HELP US AMERICA!!!! I AM RAYLIEN GARGANERA, FILIPINO!!! WILLING TO DIE FOR AMERICA AND PHILIPPINES!!!! FUCK YOU CHINESE COWARD CHICKEN SHITT!!!!

 

[waltky]

Granny says purt soon dey gonna come over here an' we gonna be eatin' fish & riceheads...

US Says China’s Military Expanding Rapidly
Wednesday, August 24th, 2011 - The U.S. Defense Department says China is on pace to achieve its goal of building a modern military by 2020, a move it says could potentially destabilize the Asia-Pacific region.

In its annual assessment to Congress, the Pentagon Wednesday said China is rapidly modernizing its military equipment and achieved several advances in the past year. It noted that China made a test flight of a new stealth fighter, conducted sea trials of its first aircraft carrier and made improvements in satellite technology and cyber warfare.

U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Michael Schiffer said Wednesday the Chinese military buildup could have a destabilizing effect on the region. He said it increases the risk of misunderstandings and miscalculations and may contribute to regional tensions and anxieties.

The report said Chinese leaders continue to prepare for a potential conflict with Taiwan, but also now see a broader role for China's military. The Pentagon estimates that China spent more than $160 billion for its military in 2010. China says its military buildup is for self-defense and has accused U.S. officials of trying to portray its armed forces as a threat.

Source

 

[Baruch Menachem]

They need 199,975,000 of them to keep a lid on so the place doesn't blow up in their faces. That is the problem with all oppressive regimes. They have to spend most of their budget on political repression, they don't have any resources at all for actual national defense.

 

[Jerminator]

They might have 200 million men for an army, but if they want to attack someone, what do the soldiers do, walk there?