The US encircled China by establishing anti-missile system network

Well, the relationships between the US and South Korea/Taiwan that have grown in the Cold War era are still intact. Back then they were important as a possible base of operations in the Communist Bloc's backyard. Nowadays, with China's militarization in mind, the US are (through the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 which is still in effect) more or less obligated to ensure that Taiwan can defend itself against a possible Chinese aggression.

About the relationship between the US and PRC in the future, I'm quite sure that it doesn't get better from now on...
 
Yeah...
actually if you want to do something about this, you might want to establish missile bases in Cuba. lol.
 
@ longriver

Actually, you could as well describe China´s actions as "agressive", but this angle of view won´t help to understand what is going on:

Seriously, and as I see you are from China, with all due respect: India and China have now over more than a decade been dubbed the future super powers, with US ending up third, and Europe relegated to a 2nd world nation level entity, all until 2050 (my take: It will go faster, we are living an exponential curve here).

It is only natural, that both US and China are marking their territory over those issues now, think of it as a pissing contest to establish your claims, as ypu did in school, or as every "pack" animal does.

Nothing notoriously "bad" or especially "aggressive" from either side, just the natural flow of things, testing out possibilities, limits and procedures, to adjust.

Just as an example, an article from 2004 (but there are many estimations dating back to 1995 that I recall): http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/us-faces-challenges-three-fronts

In a speech in Seoul, Korea, renowned historian Paul Kennedy warned that America's status as an unchallenged global hegemon may be on the decline. The US faces three challenges that are currently threatening its sole-superpower status: Terrorism, economic rivalries and a diminishing cultural reputation:

At their current rates of growth, the economies of China and India will pose challenges to the US within the next fifty years. Contributing to US economic woes is the country’s extravagant military, even at a time when the US has the largest debts of any nation in recorded history (this is GWB time referred to... Rattler).

Kennedy also raises the question of whether the US military, even with this support, is becoming more or less effective at fighting terrorism. He applies his own term, “imperial overstretch” to describe the gap between military spending and national interest. He suggests that there is a disparity as well between US military goals and action. Furthermore, terrorists will likely avoid direct engagement with the powerful US military and attack civilian targets, embassies and other “soft” targets. In Kennedy's opinion, in order to improve its success with respect to terrorism, the US needs to concentrate on the key areas around the world that "are significant for U.S. strategic power."

On the cultural front, American cultural influence, based on its popular culture exports, is waning as approval for US policies declines in the international community. To deal with these problems is a major task, but Kennedy recommends that the US practice the politics of “reassurance” – promising not to misuse its power and acting as a “team player.”

If the US is able to address the issues Kennedy has outlined it may regain its reputation, and ironically, its global power may increase if a certain sense of restraint, subtlety and multilateralism is achieved.
Click to expand...
Actually, I think Kennedy got all this right 6 yrs ago, and Obama has at least been able to address the "strategic culture" issue (if not solved it), though the normal US "patriot" does not see nor understand this bit of "realpolitik" effect (as he has never bothered to read stuff like Kennedies in 2004 and right now - kind of surprised - has no background nor learning space except GWB rethorics to argue upon).

Then, in about 2007, the obvious made main media:

http://www.merinews.com/article/who...bal-super-power---india-or-china/128301.shtml

http://newsblaze.com/story/20070111114457tsop.nb/topstory.html

If you guys would get internet/press censorship out of the way and regulate the Tibetean issue, you might as well just by now have jumped the west (maybe you have anyway), is what I think (without really having the education background to estimate well, might well be you guys need this censorship with the vast millions you house in order to avoid the extremes, however rare this appears to us democratically bread and raised western citizens). OTOH I also believe your functionaries (like in every nation) have the "guard your ass" refrain so deeply imprinted on their soul that they won´t be able to do something real innovative until very late and with the society in uproar.

My 2 EuroCents,

Rattler
 
Last edited:
Personally having lived on both sides of the Pacific, unless some changes are made in the US or China screws up majorly in the coming decades, this is already over as a contest.
And unfortunately for me and many of us, the result is not favorable.
 
rattler said:
@ longriver

Actually, you could as well describe China´s actions as "agressive", but this angle of view won´t help to understand what is going on:

Seriously, and as I see you are from China, with all due respect: India and China have now over more than a decade been dubbed the future super powers, with US ending up third, and Europe relegated to a 2nd world nation level entity, all until 2050 (my take: It will go faster, we are living an exponential curve here).

It is only natural, that both US and China are marking their territory over those issues now, think of it as a pissing contest to establish your claims, as ypu did in school, or as every "pack" animal does.

Nothing notoriously "bad" or especially "aggressive" from either side, just the natural flow of things, testing out possibilities, limits and procedures, to adjust.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm from China and I do appreciate your comments here. However, from my perspective, the actions that the US have made at the beginning of 2010 are agreestive to China: the arm sales, meet with Dalai, although he is not seen as a seperatists in some countries, as well as the trade conflicts. At least, China hasn't sent any troops around the US. China's military is mainly a defensive one rather than aggressive one.
 
longriver said:
Yes, I'm from China and I do appreciate your comments here. However, from my perspective, the actions that the US have made at the beginning of 2010 are agreestive to China: the arm sales, meet with Dalai, although he is not seen as a seperatists in some countries, as well as the trade conflicts. At least, China hasn't sent any troops around the US. China's military is mainly a defensive one rather than aggressive one.
Click to expand...
If you really want me to list the Chinese actions that one could dub aggressive, well, I am prepared to prove to you there were more "agressive" actions from Chinas side (and with more impact) than from US in the last 2 years.

But, as I said, this discussion will just distract from the main motive behind all (both sided actions as described by me), any kind (and any sided) nationalistic/politic/patriotic propaganda will just cloud analysis.

Rattler
 
I think the Chinese learned a lot from their Spratley's misadventure.
They are far less likely to attempt things by force than before.
 
longriver said:
The US encircled China by establishing anti-missile system network

The tension between China and the US is increasing due to the US' aggressive actions toward China. How do you think about the future relation between the two powers?
Click to expand...

Think this is pretty much inaccurate.

Where is the encirclement?

The US is not in India, Russia, Southeast Asia, or west of China.

I don't think a US presences on two Pacific islands, Taiwan and Japan, begins to qualify as encircling China.

"Yes, I'm from China and I do appreciate your comments here. However, from my perspective, the actions that the US have made at the beginning of 2010 are aggressive to China." quote longriver

What actions? This is February 2010. What are the aggressive actions President Obama has taken in the last two months?
 
Actually that would be Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and also smaller presences of various kinds in Southeast Asia. So for the Chinese, that can be seen as encirclement.
The Southeast Asia presence has little or nothing to do with China but I'm pretty sure that the relations the US has with Southeast Asian countries, especially in their cooperation against terrorism does provide additional headaches for any Chinese ambition in Southeast Asia.
Also, the sale of weapons to Taiwan was also seen as an act of belligerance by the PRC.
So that's possibly how they see it.
 
I see, that cant be seen as encirclement. I doubt that South Korea and Japan being armed is mainly for encircling China. I believe the USA have the idea of putting Anti-missile systems in other countries near a country with nuclear capabilities with not only protecting that said country, but to make it slim of a chance for that nuclear-armed country to be able to launch a nuke to hit US soil.

Think about it, If Russia was to launch a nuke, it would either have to go north then south and cross Canada before it can get to US or go through another way. Most destinations however has something to do with crossing another country's territory.

Every country has its right to do whatever it can to protect it from such attacks. I wouldn't call it aggressive to be honest. I can see how it can be viewed as aggressive though. The arms sale to Taiwan; I wonder why they sold them weapons. Was it to help Taiwan against China more than to help the economy. I guess these moves can be viewed aggressive, but China I dont think should see it that way. US can't do anything without public backing when it comes to military standards (occupying or attacking a country). I may be overlooking something though.

I am new here by the way and hold no real military experience; only what I read in research and such :)
 
Question:
If China had either missiles or troops in Cuba, the Dominican Republic and Mexico, would you see that as encirclement?
If China assured the United States that it is for a number of purposes that does not include "containing" the United States, would you believe it?

RayManKiller3 said:
I see, that cant be seen as encirclement. I doubt that South Korea and Japan being armed is mainly for encircling China. I believe the USA have the idea of putting Anti-missile systems in other countries near a country with nuclear capabilities with not only protecting that said country, but to make it slim of a chance for that nuclear-armed country to be able to launch a nuke to hit US soil.

Think about it, If Russia was to launch a nuke, it would either have to go north then south and cross Canada before it can get to US or go through another way. Most destinations however has something to do with crossing another country's territory.

Every country has its right to do whatever it can to protect it from such attacks. I wouldn't call it aggressive to be honest. I can see how it can be viewed as aggressive though. The arms sale to Taiwan; I wonder why they sold them weapons. Was it to help Taiwan against China more than to help the economy. I guess these moves can be viewed aggressive, but China I dont think should see it that way. US can't do anything without public backing when it comes to military standards (occupying or attacking a country). I may be overlooking something though.

I am new here by the way and hold no real military experience; only what I read in research and such :)
Click to expand...
 
Well, if it is Missile defense, then I wouldnt complain about it. Of course not many people will agree with it.

When I said I dont see how it is encirclement, I meant I doubt the reasons of doing this is purely to encricle China like the OP seems to have said.

A good amount of these countries (like Poland) wanted these systems and asked for it. South Korea has it as everyone knows North Korea seems hostile. Japan has it because it is in reach of North Korea.

Any move militarily or economically can be viewed as aggressive to one's country. For example: China dumped some US bonds, not enough to do much, but some see that as aggressive.


All I am saying, I dont think and we all dont have proof if this is done specifically to encircle China. I believe this is done to persaude North Korea to stop its nuclear tests, therefore encircling North Korea.
 
This has really turned into a non topic:
The original poster has not supplied any information of a US encirclement. The best anyone has come up with is Japan and Korea. Both still allied with the US in defense from North Korea. On going since the end of WWII and the Korean War.
Or;
US selling weapons to Taiwan has been going on since the Nationalist Chinese set up government on the Island. 60 years?;-)

In short the topic was dead on arrival.:roll:

The US is well aware the communist Chinese government does not like the US support of the Nationalists. The policy has not changed in 60 years.:)

Maybe the ChiComs bought into President Obama's "change" campaign.

"Question:
If China had either missiles or troops in Cuba, the Dominican Republic and Mexico, would you see that as encirclement?" quote 13Th_redneck

No, but it might equal about a 100 degree arc. Definitely not encirclement.
Same as the US missiles in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan might equal a 60 degree arc. Well short of encirclement.:-D

Seems a few people may not have had Geometry?:thumb:
 
Chukpike said:
"Question:
If China had either missiles or troops in Cuba, the Dominican Republic and Mexico, would you see that as encirclement?" quote 13Th_redneck

No, but it might equal about a 100 degree arc. Definitely not encirclement.
Same as the US missiles in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan might equal a 60 degree arc. Well short of encirclement.:-D

Seems a few people may not have had Geometry?:thumb:
Click to expand...

Smartass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top