Will the USA allow to China to become more powerful

[xxThe_Lebowskixx]

For the sake of debate, assume that in 50 years China is going to be more powerful and wealthier then the United States. Will the United States allow this to happen? Policing the world seems to be a top priority of the United States government and its hard to imagine the future George Bushs of the world being okay with the fact that China will be able to kick our ass, have a stronger military, etc. So what happens? Does the president get on television and say that we must go to war with China or we will fall to number 2 and not be able to defend ourselves in the future? As China gets more and more powerful does the United States government begin to instigate confrontations to create a window for a propaganda campaign to convince the American population that a war is a good idea?

[Phil153]

I think we've past the point of no return. Barring an internal collapse (or the US getting off its ass and publicly funding science again), China will become the world superpower in 20-30 years, and dominate Asia. And unless there are drastic changes in the Chinese leadership structure, this will begin a chain of events in Asia that will likely start World War III.

As for your scenario...the US can never attack China. It is rapidly militarizing and will be an unstoppable military force soon. They're estimated to have several hundred nuclear weapons as well. The only hope against China is the development of overwhelming technology and a huge change in Western ownership laws to cripple their economy and shut off their resources, which isn't going to happen.

[lehighguy]

I think China is more likely to be the aggressor. The communist party has no legitimate hold to power, so a few decades out if there was an economic downturn or something, I could see them starting a war to rally the people and hold onto power.

In any event, I think your much more likely to see a slow decline then violence. Why would the George Bush's of the world care, they can always shift thier money form US stocks to Chinese stocks.

[tomdemaine]

[ QUOTE ]
I think China is more likely to be the aggressor. The communist party has no legitimate hold to power, so a few decades out if there was an economic downturn or something, I could see them starting a war to rally the people and hold onto power.



[/ QUOTE ]

Made me chuckle.

[bobman0330]

The thing is, there's not really anything that can be "done" about China. The preeminence of China is a demographic fact, and has been for centuries. Short of genocide, the only thing that can prevent it is the Chinese government, and they've stopped doing so. Given that, any kind of military action would only set China back a decade or so and make them justifiably hate us.

Far more likely than war is an effort to build an anti-China coalition (US, Japan, Taiwan, S.Korea(?), India, maybe Australia) to try to compel the Chinese to respect international norms.

[AzDesertRat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think China is more likely to be the aggressor. The communist party has no legitimate hold to power, so a few decades out if there was an economic downturn or something, I could see them starting a war to rally the people and hold onto power.



[/ QUOTE ]

Made me chuckle.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wag the Dog? [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[lehighguy]

Why is that?

[Bill Haywood]

[ QUOTE ]
this will begin a chain of events in Asia that will likely start World War III.

[/ QUOTE ]

From what I've seen, China's foreign policy is Real Politick. They are businessmen, conquering world trade through productivity. What makes you believe they are into world wars of aggression? They strike me as far, far, less reckless than the US, militarily.

The way many commentators are talking about China, they seem desperate for an enemy. China's military spending is a sliver of the U.S. 2005, U.S. military budget was seven times China's.

I'm surprised to find myself defending China, but marking it as a special threat to world peace does not appear supported.

[ QUOTE ]
try to compel the Chinese to respect international norms.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is China especially egregious in anything? I mean, it commits more crimes against its people than most countries because it is so big. But what are they doing that isn't common?

[lehighguy]

I don't see them doing anything in the next 30 years, but they've done a very good job of keeping the Taiwan option open. If thier economy advances and the middle class starts wanting representation, if thier economic promises ever faltered, they could try to reclaim Taiwan in a war to solidify thier power.

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
this will begin a chain of events in Asia that will likely start World War III.

[/ QUOTE ]

From what I've seen, China's foreign policy is Real Politick. They are businessmen, conquering world trade through productivity. What makes you believe they are into world wars of aggression? They strike me as far, far, less reckless than the US, militarily.

The way many commentators are talking about China, they seem desperate for an enemy. China's military spending is a sliver of the U.S. 2005, U.S. military budget was seven times China's.

I'm surprised to find myself defending China, but marking it as a special threat to world peace does not appear supported.

[ QUOTE ]
try to compel the Chinese to respect international norms.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is China especially egregious in anything? I mean, it commits more crimes against its people than most countries because it is so big. But what are they doing that isn't common?

[/ QUOTE ]

Someone did post China's past military aggressions, and to me it was a surprisingly long or robust list, including in the 20th century. Sorry I can't remember more details.