English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

15 answers

The US can't afford a war with a dinky little country like Iraq. Why would anyone think we could afford a war with a true global power?

2006-09-26 15:57:49 · answer #1 · answered by Ignoramus 3 · 2 3

Also consider the resources, what does china have to back them for this?
Oil, steel, ore, minerals, etc..etc..
China would have to take over a few countries or have a few that have as numerous of resources as the United States as allies.
Remember it wouldn't just be USA against China it would bring in more than meets the eye, North Korea, Japan, Britian, USSR, Germany, Iran, and allies have alot to do with what you can offer them as an allie.
Example N.Korea is so limited on food they import almost all of its sources for this.
What if Japan and USA was to block or sink food carrying ships? Thus cutting off food for soldiers, it's a messy thing called war and lets hope it never happens in this century.
Iraq isn't a war its more of a skirmish.
I understand our troops are dying over there, but in real sense compare it to the millions in any other war.
Another thing lets not get into vietnam war, cuz if alot of our soldiers had there way, and if it was fought the way it was supposed to, it would of been our victory and sooner than how long it lasted

2006-09-26 16:10:37 · answer #2 · answered by retisin2002 4 · 0 0

Bomb the hell out of a nuclear power? Iraq is a skirmish? What kind of garbage are some of you trying to feed your readership?

China has just shy of a TRILLION dollars in foreign exchange, a third of it in American T-Bills. They bought $200 BILLION worth in 2004, and nearly $300 BILLION in 2005. Hear all that whining about how big the national debt is and how amazingly the Federal Government remains solvent year after year? You can thank the Chinese. And the Taiwanese. And the Japanese. And every other G7 nation out there that subsidizes the national debt. A war with China would be nothing short of disastrous for the world's financial markets.

As for the Chinese military, it isn't a question of population, since combat power isn't measured by manpower alone; it's a question of being able to afford the cost of reconstruction afterwards. For you idiots who believe that the American military can't handle Iraq and Afghanistan, you are reminded that the standing military forces in both theaters - the Iraqi Army and the Taliban - were neutralized in a matter of months, and never attained any sort of tactical parity with American forces, EVER. It is the peacekeeping that grinds us down.

Should we fight China and somehow, somehow win, and somehow push it to all the way where we overthrow the Chinese Communist Party, we are now stuck with having to feed over a BILLION PEOPLE. Who have long memories. And who have the capability to produce weapons of mass destruction in abundance thanks to their industrial base and scientific expertise, even if their arsenal is depleted. American at this stage simply cannot bankroll that sort of committment, let alone fund a war properly.

And that's after we apologize to every single allied nation in the region about how their economies were shattered after our bases in the region hosted by them become targets and their shipping routes were disrupted. Never mind the radioactive fallout if it goes nuclear drifting all over the Pacific Rim if both sides go beyond conventional.

By the way, SGLI is now $400,000, so you count the number of dead American servicemembers that you see coming out of this debacle and multiply it by that number. That's how much the taxpayer has to shell out to bereaved relatives.

And this is all assuming that we actually do win this thing. The last time the American military faced the PLA was in the Korean War, and that ended up being a draw. Unlike the armed rabble so common to the Middle East, the Chinese will fight, and they'll fight hard.

War with Communist China is unaffordable for all concerned. But so was the Second World War. Peace is hard to come by when those who don't understand the cost of war issue challenges and the gloves thrown down.

By the way ... pidpit YOU ARE A MORON.

The blunt application of firepower does NOTHING in an insurgency when the primary mission is reconstruction and peacekeeping. Defeating the uniformed Iraqi military was easy enough. Try fighting multiple enemies that blend into the populace, and win their compliance through fear.

As for the Chinese, they are NOT STARVING. You obviously don't know a damn thing about Chinese dietary habits either, but should some imbecile decide that war with China is winnable and abandon all attempts at negotiation, I should have 5, maybe 6 tours of Iraq under my belt. When we fight the PLA (or rather, me and my own fight, since I know your *** won't be there) you may finally understand how we fought Asian land armies to a costly victory in the Second World War, a draw in the Korean War, and a loss in Vietnam, and how to reverse that trend. It took atomic weapons to subdue the Japanese, we walked away from Korea after we paid for real estate and an inconclusive armistice in blood, and after all the ordnance we threw at the NVA, we STILL LOST that one. So when the PLA, which will have a LOT more technology to its name in any future conflict and nuclear weapons doesn't roll over and die just because you think it will, go ahead and write that book.

Assmuing there's much of a world left after two major nuclear powers go at it, of course.

pidpit - YOU ARE AN IDIOT.

2006-09-26 16:23:56 · answer #3 · answered by Nat 5 · 0 0

Well considering that China is our number one FDI (foreign direct investment) contributor and we are basically borrowing money, my guess is no. Secondly, the U.S. market relies heavily on cheap goods imported for China; any war would mean that those imports would immediately cease, forcing Americans to find more expensive alternatives. This would probably lead to a simultaneous increase in demand and shortage of supply making domestic prices for a variety of goods sky rocket. Add it all up and you don't need to do any math to figure out this one.

2006-09-26 18:36:01 · answer #4 · answered by zed 1 · 0 0

Yes, the Chinese wouldn't be able to afford to go to war with us. We are the Chinese number one economic supporters. We go to war with them, they loose most of their money.

I lived in China for a year. It is true that the Chinese have 1.3 billion people in that country and one he!! of a large military but their military sucks. Look at history, they have been taken over time and time again in every war. The Japanese did it in WW2. The smallest Island in the world took over the Chinese. We would have no problem sending them back to the stoneage.

Look at the battle of the Chosin Reservoir during Korea. 25,000 Americans took on 120,000 Chinese. 6,000 Americans were killed wounded or captured. There was a total of 72,500 Chinese who parished, were wounded or captured.

There would be no head on war with China if something ever did break out. It would come to a nuclear showdown with them like we did with the Russians during the Cold War.

2006-09-27 01:31:27 · answer #5 · answered by SGT 3 · 0 1

If by afford you mean money-wise, no, we'd be in a lot of trouble.

Militarily, we have a much better air force and navy than China, however they are quickly catching up technology wise. They also have a much larger standing army. You also have to consider that we're also both nuclear powers.

2006-09-26 15:59:15 · answer #6 · answered by Brian F 2 · 1 0

i think of of the main suitable president to uphold the type grew to alter into Grover Cleveland (possibly this us of a's optimal underrated president). Bush is just one member of a significant Pantheon of politicians who've trampled Constitutional innovations. Congress isn't exempt from blame the two. The voted to fund the conflict in Iraq, abdicating their Constitutional duty to declare conflict; possibly they have been too poultry to stand the warmth temperature indoors the subsequent election.

2016-12-12 15:50:14 · answer #7 · answered by bornhoft 4 · 0 0

No, Bush has already sold the USA to China to pay for his other wars.

2006-09-26 18:43:47 · answer #8 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0 0

We would beat the living crap out of them if the rest of the world would just shut the f*ck up and stop putting us under a damn microscope. The war in Iraq would have been over by now if our GIs were allowed to hit them fast and hard and just think of it, fewer lives would have been lost.

They may have more people, but take a look at how many of those people are starving.

Fer cryin' out loud, they eat cats and dogs.

2006-09-26 16:47:45 · answer #9 · answered by pidpit 3 · 0 2

No way we can't afford the war in Iraq and Afganastan.
China would slaughter us and so would Korea. Our guys are good, but remember Vietnam. I wouldn't mess with them unless we did something like we did to Japan, bomb the hell out of them.

2006-09-26 16:03:05 · answer #10 · answered by powerofconviction 2 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers