How China Might Take Over

At 4/7/2012 12:40:17 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:38:18 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:35:44 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:33:37 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:32:21 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Can you imagine all the hunters throughout the country just swapping out Chinese soldiers as their targets?

Dang, we pwn!

Dont underestimate them, just ask any WWII veteran who fought against the Japanese.

As a matter of fact, if I had to fight in WWII I would want to fight against the Germans or the Western Allies. The Soviets and Japanese were downright terriyfing and vicious.

The USSR lost millions of men in the first days of battle....they almost lost.

And yet they fought on. That's what is so terrifying about them. They don't surrender. They wouldnt even take "one step backward" at one point, you had to kill them all to move forward.

Yup, then came Stalingrad....and the German's ran out of bullets and froze.

Some of my favorite battles of WW II are the Russia ones, Stalingrad being among the "best" for me.

That's why I liked the WW I-II Call of Duties. They actually portrayed real people, and you get a lot more meaning out of the story.

At 4/7/2012 12:41:53 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:40:17 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:38:18 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:35:44 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:33:37 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:32:21 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Can you imagine all the hunters throughout the country just swapping out Chinese soldiers as their targets?

Dang, we pwn!

Dont underestimate them, just ask any WWII veteran who fought against the Japanese.

As a matter of fact, if I had to fight in WWII I would want to fight against the Germans or the Western Allies. The Soviets and Japanese were downright terriyfing and vicious.

The USSR lost millions of men in the first days of battle....they almost lost.

And yet they fought on. That's what is so terrifying about them. They don't surrender. They wouldnt even take "one step backward" at one point, you had to kill them all to move forward.

Yup, then came Stalingrad....and the German's ran out of bullets and froze.

Yeah and they wouldn't let the enemy cross the Volga. Had the Germans won at Stalingrad, the war would've been drastically different. But the soviets fought to the death there, all of them. The 13th Guards Rifle Division had 10,000 men originally, and only 320 of them survived the battle.

If the British lost the Battle of Britain, Russia would have lost at Stalingrad....British really changed the outcome of the entire war with that battle.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

At 4/7/2012 12:43:39 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Some of my favorite battles of WW II are the Russia ones, Stalingrad being among the "best" for me.

That's why I liked the WW I-II Call of Duties. They actually portrayed real people, and you get a lot more meaning out of the story.

The battle of Midway is one of my favorite battles.

and if your getting your history from COD I just lost all respect for you :P

The sale of Portal 3.

At 4/7/2012 12:43:39 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Some of my favorite battles of WW II are the Russia ones, Stalingrad being among the "best" for me.

That's why I liked the WW I-II Call of Duties. They actually portrayed real people, and you get a lot more meaning out of the story.

Yeah back when videogames portrayed real events and honored real people (or at least real generations).

Sorry, but the fictional captain price and "soap" just dont do it for me. Victor Reznov however.....

At 4/7/2012 12:44:59 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
If the British lost the Battle of Britain, Russia would have lost at Stalingrad....British really changed the outcome of the entire war with that battle.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Kinds interesting how WW II had several "If they had lost, it would have been over" battles.

At 4/7/2012 12:43:39 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Some of my favorite battles of WW II are the Russia ones, Stalingrad being among the "best" for me.

That's why I liked the WW I-II Call of Duties. They actually portrayed real people, and you get a lot more meaning out of the story.

what the hell is WWI call of duty? sitting in a muddy trench then getting decimated by an artillery shell and have rats devour your rotting corpse? On EASY MODE?

At 4/7/2012 12:44:22 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:41:53 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:40:17 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:38:18 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:35:44 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:33:37 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:32:21 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Can you imagine all the hunters throughout the country just swapping out Chinese soldiers as their targets?

Dang, we pwn!

Dont underestimate them, just ask any WWII veteran who fought against the Japanese.

As a matter of fact, if I had to fight in WWII I would want to fight against the Germans or the Western Allies. The Soviets and Japanese were downright terriyfing and vicious.

The USSR lost millions of men in the first days of battle....they almost lost.

And yet they fought on. That's what is so terrifying about them. They don't surrender. They wouldnt even take "one step backward" at one point, you had to kill them all to move forward.

Yup, then came Stalingrad....and the German's ran out of bullets and froze.

Yeah and they wouldn't let the enemy cross the Volga. Had the Germans won at Stalingrad, the war would've been drastically different. But the soviets fought to the death there, all of them. The 13th Guards Rifle Division had 10,000 men originally, and only 320 of them survived the battle.

The battle of Stalingrad was brutal.

At 4/7/2012 12:45:16 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:43:39 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Some of my favorite battles of WW II are the Russia ones, Stalingrad being among the "best" for me.

That's why I liked the WW I-II Call of Duties. They actually portrayed real people, and you get a lot more meaning out of the story.

The battle of Midway is one of my favorite battles.

and if your getting your history from COD I just lost all respect for you :P

No, I don't get my history from CoD, though I did learn about some incredible people through it.

History buff is what I am basically.

I always read my history book all the way through the day I get it.

At 4/7/2012 12:46:58 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:44:22 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:41:53 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:40:17 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:38:18 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:35:44 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:33:37 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:32:21 AM, OberHerr wrote:
Can you imagine all the hunters throughout the country just swapping out Chinese soldiers as their targets?

Dang, we pwn!

Dont underestimate them, just ask any WWII veteran who fought against the Japanese.

As a matter of fact, if I had to fight in WWII I would want to fight against the Germans or the Western Allies. The Soviets and Japanese were downright terriyfing and vicious.

The USSR lost millions of men in the first days of battle....they almost lost.

And yet they fought on. That's what is so terrifying about them. They don't surrender. They wouldnt even take "one step backward" at one point, you had to kill them all to move forward.

Yup, then came Stalingrad....and the German's ran out of bullets and froze.

Yeah and they wouldn't let the enemy cross the Volga. Had the Germans won at Stalingrad, the war would've been drastically different. But the soviets fought to the death there, all of them. The 13th Guards Rifle Division had 10,000 men originally, and only 320 of them survived the battle.

The battle of Stalingrad was brutal.

Yeah. One of the few great historical events I'm glad to not have witnessed.

At 4/7/2012 12:46:08 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:44:59 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
If the British lost the Battle of Britain, Russia would have lost at Stalingrad....British really changed the outcome of the entire war with that battle.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Kinds interesting how WW II had several "If they had lost, it would have been over" battles.

Not really, this was the first victory for the Allies. The first one is always the hardest when you are getting your as$ kicked.

At 4/7/2012 12:46:08 AM, OberHerr wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:44:59 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
If the British lost the Battle of Britain, Russia would have lost at Stalingrad....British really changed the outcome of the entire war with that battle.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

Kinds interesting how WW II had several "If they had lost, it would have been over" battles.

Part of that is because there were too many times where Hitler and Stalin basically went "all in" when most military experts believe that it was stupid to do so (i.e. cost more lives than needed).

I feel like WWII is the war where military technology skyrocketed but, medical technology did not keep pace with military tech.

At 4/7/2012 12:50:24 AM, THEBOMB wrote:
I feel like WWII is the war where military technology skyrocketed but, medical technology did not keep pace with military tech.

That would be WWI I think. The tactics at least didnt keep pace with the tech

At 4/7/2012 12:51:19 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:50:24 AM, THEBOMB wrote:
I feel like WWII is the war where military technology skyrocketed but, medical technology did not keep pace with military tech.

That would be WWI I think. The tactics at least didnt keep pace with the tech

That's probably right...artillery + trench *winch*

At 4/7/2012 12:50:24 AM, THEBOMB wrote:
I feel like WWII is the war where military technology skyrocketed but, medical technology did not keep pace with military tech.

Yeah, though medical technology did advance quite a bit during that war.

I think it was because it was kinda a "who could get the most deadly weapon up first" war, tech wise, and medical lagged behind.

God danger, why don't we have a history thread?

At 4/7/2012 12:54:01 AM, OberHerr wrote:
God dang it, why don't we have a history thread?

Fix'd.

At 4/7/2012 12:54:24 AM, OberHerr wrote:
God dang it, why don't we have a history thread?

We should petition for one :P

At 4/7/2012 12:55:13 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:54:24 AM, OberHerr wrote:
God dang it, why don't we have a history thread?

We should petition for one :P

It's been done before, but nothing came of it.

At 4/7/2012 12:55:48 AM, thett3 wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:55:13 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

At 4/7/2012 12:54:24 AM, OberHerr wrote:
God dang it, why don't we have a history thread?

We should petition for one :P

It's been done before, but nothing came of it.

oh...that's to bad :(

At 4/6/2012 11:23:57 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Once their male population becomes 90% of their population they will crumble. We has this scare when japan was on the rise, until they fell.

That actually seems to me like it would help them. China will become the oldest nation in the future, which will be very bad for their economy as the elderly are taxing the state and younger population and the population not working will be very high compared to the working population. That will be the first affect of China's one child policy. The next affect would stem from what you say. As families continually abort until they get a male, the male population will be much higher than the female. Thus the next generation would be a small one. This would bring the old generation more into ballance with the young generation methinks. I'm probably wrong though. It only just came to my head and I haven't really considered it much with my already sleep deprived mind. :/

At 4/6/2012 8:31:14 PM, Wnope wrote:
I have a thought experiment I've been wanting some input in. What sort of events could lead to China becoming the economic and military superpower while crippling America and the industrial world?

For instance, China has the ability to control its own currency to an extent unnattainable by western nations.

Can you think of some sort of world-wide financial disaster which would economically cripple everyone but China due to this currency ability (over and undervaluing)?

What other kind of scenarios could lead to MAJOR supremacy of China over America.

Eventually, I'd like to figure out how China might end up occupying America, but first I have to figure this step out.

Really, Wnope, is this your quite thinly-veiled way of expressing your Sinophobia via inciting imaginative, intellectually-masturbatory speculation about how China might one day attain global economic hegemony, leading all the way to an outright military occupation of the U.S.?! Isn't early 21st-century fear of being subjected to Chinese economic dominance just another, updated variation on the old "yellow peril" theme?

At any rate, there is a massive portion of suffering Third-World humanity that would have you know that much of the planet is already under someone's harmful and heartless hegemony, i.e., the global economic supremacy of the American and Western capitalist elite, and that idle conjecturing about how an actually-existing Caucasoid plutocratic world order might one day be replaced by an Asian economic imperialism is of little interest to them. In fact they have no time whatsoever for such idle conjecturing, as they're too occupied trying to survive our not so benevolent politico-economic tyranny over their lives and lot.

At 5/3/2012 9:07:04 AM, phantom wrote:

At 4/6/2012 11:23:57 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Once their male population becomes 90% of their population they will crumble. We has this scare when japan was on the rise, until they fell.

That actually seems to me like it would help them. China will become the oldest nation in the future, which will be very bad for their economy as the elderly are taxing the state and younger population and the population not working will be very high compared to the working population. That will be the first affect of China's one child policy. The next affect would stem from what you say. As families continually abort until they get a male, the male population will be much higher than the female. Thus the next generation would be a small one. This would bring the old generation more into ballance with the young generation methinks. I'm probably wrong though. It only just came to my head and I haven't really considered it much with my already sleep deprived mind. :/

So having large plummets in population is bad? (japan is suffering from it, used to be the historical "china" to use economically). It would shrink populations, generations, and make it mainly men, not good. They need to end the one child policy before they are a threat.

At 5/3/2012 9:52:17 PM, 16kadams wrote:

At 5/3/2012 9:07:04 AM, phantom wrote:

At 4/6/2012 11:23:57 PM, 16kadams wrote:
Once their male population becomes 90% of their population they will crumble. We has this scare when japan was on the rise, until they fell.

That actually seems to me like it would help them. China will become the oldest nation in the future, which will be very bad for their economy as the elderly are taxing the state and younger population and the population not working will be very high compared to the working population. That will be the first affect of China's one child policy. The next affect would stem from what you say. As families continually abort until they get a male, the male population will be much higher than the female. Thus the next generation would be a small one. This would bring the old generation more into ballance with the young generation methinks. I'm probably wrong though. It only just came to my head and I haven't really considered it much with my already sleep deprived mind. :/

So having large plummets in population is bad? (japan is suffering from it, used to be the historical "china" to use economically). It would shrink populations, generations, and make it mainly men, not good. They need to end the one child policy before they are a threat.

First time here, so slaughter me easy (:

I'm almost sure that Female Infanticide is illegal in China, and yes I believe having large plummets of population is bad. Japan is not a major case, so I do not see your reasoning.

China is heavily depend on mass production, some places contain up to 50,000 people who work 16 hour shifts (Apple for one.) They are paid flimsily and are given terrible work conditions. Another example is India. According to a 2005 World Bank estimate, 41.6% of the total Indian population falls below the international poverty line of US$ 1.25 a day. Their population and it continues to rise as people know the more kids they have the more of a chance some of them will survive.

At 4/6/2012 8:31:14 PM, Wnope wrote:
I have a thought experiment I've been wanting some input in. What sort of events could lead to China becoming the economic and military superpower while crippling America and the industrial world?

For instance, China has the ability to control its own currency to an extent unnattainable by western nations.

Can you think of some sort of world-wide financial disaster which would economically cripple everyone but China due to this currency ability (over and undervaluing)?

What other kind of scenarios could lead to MAJOR supremacy of China over America.

Eventually, I'd like to figure out how China might end up occupying America, but first I have to figure this step out.

I don't think anything dramatic is needed. Any crisis (military of economic) hurts everyone involved. The most likely scenario is that trade between Asian countries would increase to such an extent, that America would become increasingly irrelevant in major parts of the world. This is already happening up to some extent. I doubt USA can prevent it. The most USA can do is focus on economy and become more competitive.

China is already a superpower. I don't think becoming 'the superpower' would benefit China.

At 5/10/2012 1:59:24 AM, baggins wrote:

At 4/6/2012 8:31:14 PM, Wnope wrote:
I have a thought experiment I've been wanting some input in. What sort of events could lead to China becoming the economic and military superpower while crippling America and the industrial world?

For instance, China has the ability to control its own currency to an extent unnattainable by western nations.

Can you think of some sort of world-wide financial disaster which would economically cripple everyone but China due to this currency ability (over and undervaluing)?

What other kind of scenarios could lead to MAJOR supremacy of China over America.

Eventually, I'd like to figure out how China might end up occupying America, but first I have to figure this step out.

I don't think anything dramatic is needed. Any crisis (military of economic) hurts everyone involved. The most likely scenario is that trade between Asian countries would increase to such an extent, that America would become increasingly irrelevant in major parts of the world. This is already happening up to some extent. I doubt USA can prevent it. The most USA can do is focus on economy and become more competitive.

China is already a superpower. I don't think becoming 'the superpower' would benefit China.

I find it hard for China to Cripple the USA, but lets say that US fell and all the economies around the world were not affected by it, because China stepped in the place of the US ( which is not likely, actually it is not even close to a .000000001 of an idea.) But I progress, If it all, the US fell and China is now a leading superpower. At first I would expect the spread of the rebuffed of Socialistic and Communistic ideas, which are repressed in Latin American countries such as in Nicaragua, or Peru, where elected officials, or dictators have been overthrown by the USA because of their strong belief in Communistic or Socialistic ideas,( which were replaced by a Dictator that heavily depend on the US to keep a balanced economy, which only made the Latin America weak in being self reliant and I can go on for days. America was a strong hand on preventing the spread of Communism, thanks to the Cold War and more importantly the Marshall Plan. Of course, we would lose the wars in the Middle East, since our economy is crippled, and the power vacuum would allow China to expand to Latin American countries (Sandistas so to say), creating a huge friction between Europe, the free market economy block, and China, the "communist" but free trade block. so in other worlds, its another Cold War, ( we can best hope its cold). Europe would help us at the same time at having tension with China, which would suck, because Europe is not doing so hot. But then again, who knows.

At 4/6/2012 8:31:14 PM, Wnope wrote:
I have a thought experiment I've been wanting some input in. What sort of events could lead to China becoming the economic and military superpower while crippling America and the industrial world?

For instance, China has the ability to control its own currency to an extent unnattainable by western nations.

Can you think of some sort of world-wide financial disaster which would economically cripple everyone but China due to this currency ability (over and undervaluing)?

What other kind of scenarios could lead to MAJOR supremacy of China over America.

Eventually, I'd like to figure out how China might end up occupying America, but first I have to figure this step out.

Didn't read most of the other posts on this forum, but in regards to your original question - China is actually going to be facing a lot of crippling issues of its own. While China has had unprecedented and remarkable growth, I think the main issues that the government will have to face are 1) political dissent due to huge gaps in wealth, and 2) they, like the United States, will soon face a population that is aging rapidly - meaning a shift from high growth sectors like manufacturing to slow-growth service sectors such as health care. So, I don't really think we have anything to worry about in that regard...

On other matters, we have been seen by the Chinese to be escalating militarily in the region by building a U.S. Marine Base in Australia. This was potentially in response to China aggressively expanding their territory in regards to water (i.e, how much of the ocean they claim past their coast line) and "lack of transparency" with regard to their military. Just some food for thought on immediate conflicts.