[Jubal]

Rationalizations.
When the war comes it will be conducted for energy:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/FF18Ad04.html

Fact, China controls both ends of the Panama Canal through a company associated with the PLA.
http://www.softwar.net/panama.html

Fact, China holds a tremendous amount of US Treasury bills.

In the meantime, some say China is pursuing a strategy called, Unrestricted Warfare. Which would presumably involve all of the above, and more.
http://www.ntu.edu.sg/idss/Perspective/research_050222.htm

In addition, there have been rumors of Chinese troops training in Mexico, but I haven't been able to confirm that.

http://www.cfr.org/pdf/China_TF.pdf

I think war with China is inevitable, if only because competition for oil will lead to calculated but essentially desperate decisions. Probably in the middle east.

[Kuehn12]

Assumption one: Wars are fought over natural resources. Example, Gulf War
However, this is the only example I can think in modern times. Most modern conflicts are based on ideology, religious intolerance on the part of the Muslim world, and civil conflict based on ethnic hate.

Assumption two: A chance that during a conflict with the PRC that a Chinese agent would sabotage the Panama Canal.
This is a given, and you could throw in the Strait of
Macca.

Assumption three: The Chinese are involved in the Latin America. Yes, they are and they may very well be training Mexican troops. That isn't the real problem, it is the diplomatic failure of the US in South America that should be troubling. We have tacitly given up on the Monroe Doctrine. Nearly the entire region has gone red with Fidel Castro behind it all with his new Benedicto, The Peoples Republic of China.

Qiao and Wang believe that unlike the “weapons of new concepts,” which motivate technological innovation in the narrower military field, what drives UW is the “new concepts of weapons,” i.e., ways and means that are non-military but can be employed as weapons for warfare to achieve political objectives. In this sense, UW really refers to non-military warfare (as opposed to military operations other than war (MOOTW) such as peacekeeping, disaster relief, etc.). It encompasses diplomatic warfare (through alliance building and diplomatic bargaining and deception, for instance), economic warfare (through trade, aid, and sanctions), financial warfare (through stock speculation and currency devaluation or forgery), cyber warfare (through hacking and virus attacks), media and information warfare (through media management and control of information), network warfare (through disrupting critical infrastructure such as electricity grids, traffic dispatching, financial transactions, telephone communications, and mass media networks), and environmental warfare (through man-made natural disasters such as earthquakes).

Assumption Three: that there definition of unrestricted is the same a Osama bin laden. Much of what is said sounds like the exercise of soft power, but last few lines makes the guy sound like a weirdo. I mean what is he talking about EMP weapons or something.

Last Assumption: War with China is inevitable.
War with China isn't inevitable, but is proable over the next 10 to 20 years. However, that could have been said about the Soviet Union at any point over the coarse of the Cold War. This situation is some what different. The Soviet weren't apart of the internal economic system to the extent that China is, and China is no where near as powerful as the USSR militarily. There are also forces within China that might change its nature; the huge Christian movement, the unbridled capitalism, and uncertain nature of the next generation of Chinese leaders.
All of which could stave off any conflict.