China's military power
- Thread starter long live usa
- Start date
- Status
Well, now that hes gone, we might be able to have a logical and sensible discussion, not an imperialist idealRich said:
, and for the record, swerves here, so i'll just insult him some more, bloody POME Now then, perhaps biggest advantage that China has over the US is to do with politics, the US has a senate to review, tear apart and demand whatever it wants in its miltary budget, where as china, has a much more centralised power system, with the Premier holding a stronger vote then their parliament. If Chinese military leaders went to him with a request for more ships, and a way of payment from their ever increasing economy, then approval would most likely be given on the spot, no delays through a senate overview, just a sit down with the minister for labour on where and when it can be done, and next thing, china has a few more ships. I'm not saying it can build as much as it wants, its just they have a much faster and simpler way of getting military equipment because of their centralised system, with the Party having the final say. There is a military affairs commision, but it to reports to the party, and is somewhat, a review board more then a senatorial probe.
Also, china is building itself up on the world stage, the US is already there, so china can afford to increase its military if it wants to become a world superpower, while the US reduces its forces.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/in_depth/china_politics/government/html/7.stm
You know what's funny, the US is heading that way. With spates of corruption charges in politics in recent years, (The corruption charges against congressmen, and senators) I think a lot of americans (backup by CNN survey) have already lost faith to the beuraucracy in the congress and senate. They just might vote to have it closed down in the future...icelord said:Well, now that hes gone, we might be able to have a logical and sensible discussion, not an imperialist ideal
Now then, perhaps biggest advantage that China has over the US is to do with politics, the US has a senate to review, tear apart and demand whatever it wants in its miltary budget, where as china, has a much more centralised power system, with the Premier holding a stronger vote then their parliament. If Chinese military leaders went to him with a request for more ships, and a way of payment from their ever increasing economy, then approval would most likely be given on the spot, no delays through a senate overview, just a sit down with the minister for labour on where and when it can be done, and next thing, china has a few more ships. I'm not saying it can build as much as it wants, its just they have a much faster and simpler way of getting military equipment because of their centralised system, with the Party having the final say. There is a military affairs commision, but it to reports to the party, and is somewhat, a review board more then a senatorial probe.
Also, china is building itself up on the world stage, the US is already there, so china can afford to increase its military if it wants to become a world superpower, while the US reduces its forces.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/in_depth/china_politics/government/html/7.stm
Not to mention Bush adminstration have not so subtlely ever increasing, and centralising the powerbase to the executive branch, and as the old saying go, the power they acquired, the freedom you lost - are not going to be given back. and if this trend continues, it won't be long before US politics becomes a mirror of Chinese communist.
Last edited:
Not like I would argue with an expert non-native of America on internal politics but you have no idea of US political history. Even if Bush claims as much executive power as he wants it will all be over the second he leaves office. Every new congressional session enters a whole new contingency and what one president gets is taken away depending on the power balance and the times. For example, Abraham Lincoln had the most executive power of any president, if you wanted to call any of our presidents a dictator it would have been him. But as soon as the next legitamate election came around U.S. Grant lost all the executive power. He was a weak and powerless president, due one to the times and secondly to his character. Your inference is a bit over the top. We still hold elections ya know.dioditto said:
I am sorry, I may sounded extreme, but it is just how we see it here. (well atleast how I see it.. from the few essays on Harvard Review, Quadrant, and American Prospects I read, and the other media and papers... ).Big-E said:
That's still debatable...Har har har
Last edited:
If this is all you read no wonder you think about us the way you do. You are only getting a rather socialistic view of my nation. If you want the whole story pick up some US history books, get the facts of where my nation has been and you can intelligently decide where it's going. Don't rely on socialist pundits. History will set you free... :dbananadioditto said:
You misunderstood what I wrote. I'll put it another way:dioditto said:Much larger than US?? last I check (which is 5 mins ago) US's economy is 10 times larger than Chineses'.
The difference in size between the Chinese economy today & the US economy is less than the difference in size between the Japanese economy & the US has ever been.
That is at purchasing power parity. At official exchange rates, the picture is different, but official exchange rates do not reflect the true size of the Chinese economy. At PPP, the Chinese economy is likely to become larger than the USAs by about 2020.
All true, but an administration can change certain roles in goverment in order to centralise power, witness Henry Kissinger and the Role of National Security Adviser, it was never the same again, the National security adviser now controls much of the defence information that the President hears, and it takes a very well informed President to act contary to his advice.
In my opinion thats an unelected buracrate being given way to much power.
But this is something thats happened in most western countries over the last 30 years, esp in France and England, decisions are taken in Downing Street, even the incubent party is powerless if they disagree with the PM.
In this humble posters opinion power has become more centralised in western countries, this is a serious developement, esp in times of crises when a small group of decision makers can isolate them selfs from the realitys on the ground.
Iraq and Afganistan are good examples of this, where the US and British administrations have tried to obscure the facts on the ground in order to push there agendas. The merits of thoses agendas are beside the point, the fact that they have advanced under a cloak of secrecy is worrying.
The checks and balances of a democrasy need to be vigelanty watched! otherwise we could end up drifting away from democratic roots.
Yeah china could be a great Power in the Future, but it could also break apart
under the strain of it unrepresentitive goverment, both outcomes seem lightly at this stage.
I find that the two party system along with three branches of government ensure that we will never become communist. Even though the Republicans control both houses of Congress and the presidency they still can't pass any real legislation. If the president was so powerful then why is he so impotent to accomplish any of his agenda?
Is Ice Lord and DioDitto the same person here? Or does Dio just enjoy talking to himself? I went thru all my posts, and while I do like to defend my position energetically, I saw no post insulting enough to be called a "blabber'er" by an apparent insulting nit-wit .
Actually I like a bit of :duel with big E. He knows what hes talking about and I often get a lot out of it. He has made valid points even I cant strike down. Can we now get back to the subject at hand boys and girls whilst I look for the ignore feature for a couple of these kiddies.
China right? How many SSNs, say comparable to improved LA class, do they have ready to launch off the quays?: And please, whoever it is thats comparing the building and equipping of ocean cargo ships to Carriers, please stop right now. How many nations out there can build cargo transports and how many can build super carriers???
Cargo ships????
OK, found the ignore feature. Lets continue to flesh out this China thing as they are the apparent "Boogeyman" for the rest of our lives. At least in terms of superpower confrontation.
Actually I like a bit of :duel with big E. He knows what hes talking about and I often get a lot out of it. He has made valid points even I cant strike down. Can we now get back to the subject at hand boys and girls whilst I look for the ignore feature for a couple of these kiddies.
China right? How many SSNs, say comparable to improved LA class, do they have ready to launch off the quays?
: And please, whoever it is thats comparing the building and equipping of ocean cargo ships to Carriers, please stop right now. How many nations out there can build cargo transports and how many can build super carriers???Cargo ships????
OK, found the ignore feature. Lets continue to flesh out this China thing as they are the apparent "Boogeyman" for the rest of our lives. At least in terms of superpower confrontation.
America has the advantage of the 3 branches of govt. yeah sure, democracy and so on, but its the beauracracy thats the problem, china doesn't have that, sure they have a bit more corruption in an illegal sense, but its the corruption thats legal that the US has, being a senator saying "i'll agree to these ships being built, but somethings gotta be in it for me" being the rudder is built in their state, or the whole damn thing, while china has the $$$ greed, rather then power struggles of the US. Yes its political, but thats what chinas power is going to be based on, politics and power, in a mirror image of the US, thats why its called superpower, you have more power and sway then the other nations.
30+ and around 10, not including as i've said, South Korea, which manages to build cargo(yes cargo) ships as well as worlds largest oil tankers, as well as frigates, submarines and destroyers in the one place, and could quite easily build a super carrier, as its currently building the Dokdo, and a range of Sth Koreas LHDs,with some technical assistance could quite easily do it, and on time! Argue all you want about the mass difference, but they could do it, ask and you shall recieve.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
No, or at least he doesn't use the same IP address if he is the same person with different handles...Rich said:
True, but if congress gets feed a line of bullshit by the NSA advisor the Sec of state or the Sec of Defence, then congress can be led into all sorts of open ended wars....
If there was a conflict over taiwan, an invasion around 2015, 2020, do you think America would intervene, if Chinas defence moderenisation continues at this pace would it be wise?
Aussie Digger said:No, or at least he doesn't use the same IP address if he is the same person with different handles...
Mod edit: If that's your real opinion I'd suggest leaving him alone. Insults aren't likely to help. This goes for everyone else too. Get back on topic or the thread's closed. Vapid insults achieve nothing. AD.
"the LUZHOU-class (Type
051C) DDG. Designed for anti-air warfare, it
is equipped with the Russian SA-N-20 SAM
system, controlled by the TOMBSTONE phasedarray
radar. The SA-N-20 more than doubles the
range of current PLAN systems"
Has anyone any info on this ship? does china really need to buy Russian/Ukrainian ships if they can buy their Radar and Sam suites?
051C) DDG. Designed for anti-air warfare, it
is equipped with the Russian SA-N-20 SAM
system, controlled by the TOMBSTONE phasedarray
radar. The SA-N-20 more than doubles the
range of current PLAN systems"
Has anyone any info on this ship? does china really need to buy Russian/Ukrainian ships if they can buy their Radar and Sam suites?
Thats always the problem, everyone is human, and their own personal view may distort the information their giving, they don't ever give the raw data, just an overview, with an analyst feeding them his input.merocaine said:
As for Taiwan, the US has invested a lot into their defence force, as well as the posting of Pacific fleet ships such as carriers and AWDs.
and then again, any conflict with china is a big ask, it may end up being a struggle for taiwan to hold out while the US tries diplomacy.
Is their any formal Pact or treaty between the two, other then military joint excercises?
- Status