Posted on 07/24/2006 5:28:10 PM PDT by Paul Ross
I'm sure an impartial third party would agree that my most random comment is more intelligent than your most well thought out conspiracy theories.
Wars and munitions are not critical on a "per capita" basis. Absolute numbers that can be brought to bear in theater is what counts.
Your focus is still on your claim that China's overriding goal is military dominance (above all else). My point is that China's overriding goal is to develop their economy.
Lets look at some numbers then about steel consumption. The US Navy is unquestionably the largest in the world (300 or so ships). If we assume that every ship displaces as much as 100,000 tons (conservative assumption since only the Nimitz class carriers weigh that much), then total US Navy displacement is about 30 million tons. What is the ratio do you want to give me for figuring scrap metal; 2 to 1? So, to replicate the entire US Navy (at least in terms of displacement), China would need 60 million tons of steel. And of course, the US Navy (or any of the world's current navy) is built over decades. Lets assume 10 years then for a conservatively quick time span. Then the steel necessary to replicate an equivalent in displacement to the US Navy would take about 6 million tons a year.
China will consume roughly 400 million ton for 2006. What that tells me, back in the late 1980's, when China was producing 50 or so million tons a year, China had more than enough steel making capacity to build a large navy, one that would exceed the displacement of the US Navy by now. Yet, years later, the US navy is still the largest. What did they do with all that steel?
(BTW, I can make this arguement with just about any military hardware. Want to talk tanks? Armoured personnel carriers? Pieces of artillery?)
What they put it into is the 20,000 skyscrapers they built since then. The extensive freeway system that is currently under construction, the shipyards, the roads, factories, etc. Not to mention installing electrical capacity to provide their citizen electricity with much needed energy (since 1980, they have built a power generating capacity nearly equivalent to the US and have plans to add that much more by 2020).
Residential housing is built in large units (large apartment complexes, unlike here where it is individual homes made of timber), thereby using reinforced concrete (alot of steel rebar).
Per capita is important, especially when most of China's steel is used for civilian purposes (prove to me that most of China's steel is used for the military). You can't expect China to limit their steel consumption to what Beligum or Finland or Sweden consumes? Shanghai alone requires more steel those three countries COMBINED. So per capita is a very paramount arguement.
The reality is, you couldn't care less about the living conditions of the ordinary Chinese citizen. You want to choke off to ANY potential that could result in a more well off China.
Currently, the GOVERNMENT in China wants to put a cap on steel production (fear of diverting loans into unprofitable venture). But I'm convinced it'll be short lived effort. Looking at how much steel developed nations use, China will easily bring their annual consumption of steel up to the 800-900 million ton range in the next 10-15 years.
"Suddenly" is suddenly defined as 25 years in the making.
Sorry, but your "per capita" argument on steel-making just blows. No chance for you to redeem yourself...ever.
Your focus is still on your claim that China's overriding goal is military dominance (above all else).
Wrong. Industrial usurpation is, (which means they can wait us out) then predictably followed by the military dominance that we have previously enjoyed as a result of our industrial advantages. Soon to be decisively lost.
My point is that China's overriding goal is to develop their economy.
Oh, so now you mistake means and ends? You think their building up infrastructure for their people. I don't. The Party and Princeling honchos may get a pile of goodies in the interim, but the average schmoe? Ha!
Lets look at some numbers then about steel consumption.Let's.
The US Navy is unquestionably the largest in the world (300 or so ships).
Wrong. 281 ships and falling to a predicted 180 ships under W's lame build-rates. He wishes to close half the remaining ship yards. Permanently.
If we assume that every ship displaces as much as 100,000 tons (conservative assumption since only the Nimitz class carriers weigh that much), then total US Navy displacement is about 30 million tons. What is the ratio do you want to give me for figuring scrap metal; 2 to 1? So, to replicate the entire US Navy (at least in terms of displacement), China would need 60 million tons of steel. And of course, the US Navy (or any of the world's current navy) is built over decades. Lets assume 10 years then for a conservatively quick time span. Then the steel necessary to replicate an equivalent in displacement to the US Navy would take about 6 million tons a year.
It takes maritime steel plate. I.e., a specialty steel, heavy slabs. Can't be done in most U.S. mills at all. Just a few integrated mills can still do it here. The Chinese, on the other hand, have large numbers of "integrated" steel mills that can gear up for maritime plate steel production. They are busy still adding to the industrial base and associated infrastructure of the country, but once these fundamentals are addressed, they have dramatic luxury to turn to exporting steel to destroy the residual Western steel manufactures, and then deploy their navy. These are likely not events that will take decades. We may see them in the next 10 years.
China will consume roughly 400 million ton for 2006.
The Panda Huggers and apologists assured us that the "China Market" would buy our steel and make us rich. Hahahahahahaahahaahahaha.
What that tells me, back in the late 1980's, when China was producing 50 or so million tons a year, China had more than enough steel making capacity to build a large navy, one that would exceed the displacement of the US Navy by now.
They are patient. Steal, (steel) our industry first.
Yet, years later, the US navy is still the largest.
Not for long, and no longer in submarines.
What did they do with all that steel?
See above.
(BTW, I can make this arguement with just about any military hardware. Want to talk tanks? Armoured personnel carriers? Pieces of artillery?)
More poor arguments? Go right ahead.
Relax, man. I really don't think anyone here can choke off the well beings of the Chinese even if they want to. All they make all these arguments to demonize China and the Chinese people. But, the truth is, China and the world is moving on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.