China Thinks It Can Defeat America in Battle

Real Clear Defense ^ | September 24, 2014 | David Axe

[C19fan]

The bad news first. The People’s Republic of China now believes it can successfully prevent the United States from intervening in the event of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan or some other military assault by Beijing.

Now the good news. China is wrong—and for one major reason. It apparently disregards the decisive power of America’s nuclear-powered submarines.

Moreover, for economic and demographic reasons Beijing has a narrow historical window in which to use its military to alter the world’s power structure. If China doesn’t make a major military move in the next couple decades, it probably never will.

The U.S. Navy’s submarines—the unsung main defenders of the current world order—must hold the line against China for another 20 years. After that, America can declare a sort of quiet victory in the increasingly chilly Cold War with China.

[C19fan]

The fact the China thinks it can handle the USA makes war more likely.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

America we really, really need to wake up.

We are buying everything from China.

This makes China rapidly stronger. China has four or five times America’s population.

Bring back US jobs.

[skeeter]

Moreover, for economic and demographic reasons Beijing has a narrow historical window in which to use its military to alter the world’s power structure. If China doesn’t make a major military move in the next couple decades years, it probably never will.

More 'fundamental change' from the Kenyan dwarf.

[PghBaldy]

That is true. I expect it to happen in the not so distant future. The tragic thing is half this country will be rooting for the other side.

[G Larry]

With Obama in office Luxembourg can defeat us.

[brownsfan]

“The fact the China thinks it can handle the USA makes war more likely.”

Our forces are hollowed out. I was in the Navy 77-81, still recovering from Jimmy Carter. We used to prove ships battle ready by scavenging parts from sister ships. So, in reality for every 2 or 3 “battle ready” ships, there was only 1 that was capable.

Add to that, our politically correct, Obama controlled command structure, and I don’t doubt for one second that China could defeat us.

[NY.SS-Bar9]

if China doesn’t make a major military move in the next couple decades, before the end of Obama's term, it probably never will.

[wally_bert]

Hope we can hold off Gran Fenwick.

[no-to-illegals]

the chi-coms decide to go for a swim ...

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

Good question. Our military is probably 1/3 what it was 10 years ago. We are only ordering 70 tomahawk missiles In the next 2 years and used 40 this week.

[RushIsMyTeddyBear]

I read that yesterday and it made me sick to my stomach.

[Obadiah]

Well, I suppose it depends on whether the openly serving trans-gender soldiers will “man up” and fight. Whether the homosexual soldiers will be attracted to the Chinese, or fight, and whether the women who passed the lowered skills tests will prove combat worthy.

Moreover, if China nuked California, invaded Seattle, and detonated an EMP over Kansas, I do believe it would take 6 weeks for Obama to develop a strategy and another 6 weeks to make a decision on what to do.

At this point, my money is on Luxembourg beating the United States.

[Resolute Conservative]

With our current leadership and how nearly half the population votes and the fact we have more Chinese infiltrating here everyday, I have my concerns.

[x1stcav]

You just hit on a rather dark side of the population. I know a lot of people welcoming a major hit on this country as our punishment from drifting away fro what we used to be.

[chajin]

With Obama in office Luxembourg Lichtenstein can defeat us.

[tanknetter]

We also have something like 4000 Tomahawks in our inventory. Meaning that we shot off a hair over 1% of what we have on hand.

Plus the Tomahawks are increasingly old tech. We have newer standoff options (JSOW, JASSM). They don’t have the range of a Tomahawk, but do allow the Tomahawks to be used sparingly, only at targets where their longer range is required.

[SMARTY]

What does it matter if we have the best and biggest arsenal in the universe, if our ‘leader’ is an irresolute and unprincipled half-wit?

[jaydee770]

I’m trying to imagine a plausible scenario where the U.S. would launch a nuke - even a limited tactical nuke.

Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t mind turning Mecca and/or Medina into glass parking lots, but I seriously doubt the U.S. political leadership — conservative or liberal — would ever have the political will to pull *that* trigger, regardless of the preciptating terrorist atrocity. Even if ISIS gets its hands on a dirty bomb, or even a real man-portable nuke (or worse) and the ability to initiate it.

I really, Really, *REALLY* want to believe our political leaders would respond so decisively that it would forever give our enemies a good reason to never attack us at that level ever again. But, I just don’t have that sort of faith in our politicians.

As for China, we would have to be willing to trade nuclear “blows”, and I don’t see we have the spine to do it. And I think China knows it. I think the only thing holding China back is the right moment of opportunity has not arrived. That and the massive amount of our debt they hold might be giving them pause...

[Ghost of SVR4]

There is also a secondary measure at play, economic. China owns a decent chunk of our debt (I believe 6-7%). They get uppity, we erase that debt and China is hurting; immediately? No, but trickle down their economy would be wrecked over a handful of months. I wouldn’t expect many politicians to go for that option however, they like borrowing too much to fund entitlements to get serious about eliminating an external threat.

[Amagi]

Yo ChiComs, the USofA will soon be rid of the pansy ass POTUS and you’ll still be trying to steal US Military technology secrets.