[dwd1]

Being that most leaders in China tend to fight as a last and not a first resort, I doubt if anything would occur anytime soon... However, with a two billion person population, capitalism and a need for natural resources and economic security might be a motivation for aggression... And they could lose 600 million people and still have enough to take over the world... We can not do that here....

From what I know of the "Art of War" tenets, the Chinese would most like use a perceived threat of force rather than actually resort to it... They do cherish life to a certain degree though the people on boats would probably disagree with me...

[Ancesthntr]

However, with a two billion person population, capitalism and a need for natural resources and economic security might be a motivation for aggression...

China currently has about 1.25 billion people, and its growth rate is very slow - per government orders. India is likely to pass China in population sometime in the next 25 or so years. You don't see the Indians being very aggressive, and they are more capitalist and richer than the Chinese, and they have far less in the way of natural resources. Perhaps the Indians have seen the light, namely that cooperation with advanced countries like the US and western Europe is more advantageous than conflict. Had the Germans and Japanese realized this, they'd have some very strange governments, but we'd have been spared WW2. One would hope that the Chinese leadership is also wise enough to "see the light" and to similarly cooperate for the mutual benefit of all concerned.

[templar]

From what I know of the "Art of War" tenets, the Chinese would most like use a perceived threat of force rather than actually resort to it...

Or appear to be harmless while developing and deploying overwhelming force.

The art of war is the art of deception. When weak appear strong, when strong appear weak. When near appear far away, when far away appear near.