Taiwan: Would War be viable?

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Smiley
There is another way to look at this. Blowing lots of money on imported weaponry is going to hurt China's long term growth and economic power.

Which is why China has no desire to go to war, or to create a massive, expensive army that would be on par with the US, or to waste money invading Taiwan or any other country. Just look at how much money the US is spending on wars and its military, and the effect that has on the US economy.

US power comes from its economy which provides the money to finance a modern army. For China to come even somewhat close to the US in terms of power it must build its economy first. It can't afford to waste a lot of money on its military now. For China's economy to grow, it needs to establish a better legal system and to crack down more on corruption (something like 34,000 party members were arrested last year for corruption which gives you idea of the scale of the problem). China also has to prevent what happened to the USSR and that's why it huffs and puffs about Taiwan. If it didn't, and Taiwan declared itself independent, then China would risk seperatist movements in Guangdong, Hong Kong, Tibet, etc.

If you need a demon to worry about, forget about China - the military power, and start thinking about how your country is going to stay economically ahead of China.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Tingkai


Which is why China has no desire to go to war, or to create a massive, expensive army that would be on par with the US, or to waste money invading Taiwan or any other country. Just look at how much money the US is spending on wars and its military, and the effect that has on the US economy.

US power comes from its economy which provides the money to finance a modern army. For China to come even somewhat close to the US in terms of power it must build its economy first. It can't afford to waste a lot of money on its military now. For China's economy to grow, it needs to establish a better legal system and to crack down more on corruption (something like 34,000 party members were arrested last year for corruption which gives you idea of the scale of the problem). China also has to prevent what happened to the USSR and that's why it huffs and puffs about Taiwan. If it didn't, and Taiwan declared itself independent, then China would risk seperatist movements in Guangdong, Hong Kong, Tibet, etc.

If you need a demon to worry about, forget about China - the military power, and start thinking about how your country is going to stay economically ahead of China.

Then why does China have a standing Army of 3,000,000 (Million) plus Air Force, and Navy? If you count the Air Force and Navy they have more then 3 million. Their land mass is just a few sq.miles smaller then the US. Also no one and I mean no one is going to invade China anytime soon.
HeII our Army is now at 500,000, Air Force around 350,000, Navy around 350 to 400,000 and Marine 150,000.

[:) Smiley]

Probably a legacy of the low-tech days. Also, rmies are also used for more than just fighting wars- they also do things such as disaster relief, in the US the Corps of Engineers builds bridges, etc.

[DaShi]

There are lots of news reports here about China increasing its military spending even more.

[Dis]

I kind of lost track of this thread, I'm not sure if this has been posted.

china to have 800 missiles pointed at Taiwan by next year.

http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_10-3-2005_pg4_8

[Dr Strangelove]

But China has only 200 nukes AFAIK.

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
But China has only 200 nukes AFAIK.

Actually this have nothing to do with nukes, China definately won't use nukes against Taiwan, against a people it claims are Chinese and a part of China. They are coventionally armed missiles which are designed to do damage to Taiwan.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Joseph
Then why does China have a standing Army of 3,000,000 (Million) plus Air Force, and Navy? If you count the Air Force and Navy they have more then 3 million. Their land mass is just a few sq.miles smaller then the US. Also no one and I mean no one is going to invade China anytime soon.
HeII our Army is now at 500,000, Air Force around 350,000, Navy around 350 to 400,000 and Marine 150,000.

The PLA has about 2.3 million people in uniform, down 1.5 million from aobut 20 years ago.

Why 2.3 million in uniform? A lot of reasons:
a) All countries, except Costa Rica, maintain armies even though they are not required. The existence of an army does not mean a country is planning a war.
b) The PLA is a low-tech, labour-intensive army as Smiley said. Just because there are 2.3 million in uniform doesn't mean the PLA has a fraction of the power of the US military.
c) China has a big population so 2.3 million is a drop in the bucket
d) Kicking them out of the military would increase unemployment which is already a big problem;
e) A lot of these people are not soldiers. The PLA owns a many businesses (including farms to feed the troops) and the people in these businesses are often counted in military ranks.
f) The large army acts as a deterent. The PLA lacks effective offensive abilties. It has traditionally been designed as a defensive force.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by DaShi
There are lots of news reports here about China increasing its military spending even more.

Official numbers are $30 billion, an 11 per cent increase, but that's well below GDP growth (nominal GDP growth about 17%, real growth about 8%) and remember that inflation is running at about 9 per cent so the real increase in military spending is around 2 per cent.

China's military spending is under control relative to GDP and will not adversely effect economic growth, unlike US military spending, which is running at more than $400 billion. The amount China spends is a small fraction of US military expenditure.

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Tingkai


Official numbers are $30 billion, an 11 per cent increase, but that's well below GDP growth (nominal GDP growth about 17%, real growth about 8%) and remember that inflation is running at about 9 per cent so the real increase in military spending is around 2 per cent.

China's military spending is under control relative to GDP and will not adversely effect economic growth, unlike US military spending, which is running at more than $400 billion. The amount China spends is a small fraction of US military expenditure.

The reality is China's official military spending numbers are BS. Lots of military realated spending doesn't show up as part of their military budget. Its closer to around 2.5% of their GDP, so they are not far behind the US in percentage.

[GePap]

Isn't the US at 3.5-4%? 1% of GDP is a big difference.

Actually, it surprises me that Chinese military spending is less as a % of GDP than the US- one would expect a state with militaristic intentions to spend more like 5% of GDP on the military, not 2.5%.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by GePap


No, the Chinese are no innocent angels, but at least you, unlike PLATO it seems, acknowledges we also play the game.

And I claimed that we were innocent angels where? Sure we play the game...and better than most. So what? I'm supposed to apologize for wanting to win?

China is the threat of the next hundred years. Sooner or later our spheres of influence will conflict and there will be trouble. Better sooner IMO. And better yet if it is defending a democratic people from there would be oppressors

[GePap]

Originally posted by PLATO


And I claimed that we were innocent angels where? Sure we play the game...and better than most. So what? I'm supposed to apologize for wanting to win?

China is the threat of the next hundred years. Sooner or later our spheres of influence will conflict and there will be trouble. Better sooner IMO. And better yet if it is defending a democratic people from there would be oppressors

First, who knows what kind of government China will have in 100 years. Second, there is nothing that can be done about the fact that the US's time in the sun is limited- the question is, why should the transition be violent? This is what is utterly unnecessary- China and India are bound, by simple economics and dmeographics to eclipse the US in the future. Why the US should see this as a threat is the question- its sort of moronic to be paranoid about the inevitable. The intelliegent thing is to figure how to manage the transition peacefully.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by GePap


First, who knows what kind of government China will have in 100 years. Second, there is nothing that can be done about the fact that the US's time in the sun is limited- the question is, why should the transition be violent? This is what is utterly unnecessary- China and India are bound, by simple economics and dmeographics to eclipse the US in the future. Why the US should see this as a threat is the question- its sort of moronic to be paranoid about the inevitable. The intelliegent thing is to figure how to manage the transition peacefully.

I suppose that we disagree that it is inevitable. The US has more natural resources than both combined and without having to deal with overwhelming domestic populations.

It is my belief that the desire of China to control more of the natural resources it needs to feed its ever growing internal demand is what will lead to violence.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by GePap


First, who knows what kind of government China will have in 100 years. Second, there is nothing that can be done about the fact that the US's time in the sun is limited- the question is, why should the transition be violent? This is what is utterly unnecessary- China and India are bound, by simple economics and dmeographics to eclipse the US in the future. Why the US should see this as a threat is the question- its sort of moronic to be paranoid about the inevitable. The intelliegent thing is to figure how to manage the transition peacefully.

I read a lot of your post, are you an American?