Should America Intervene in a Future War Between China and India?

Posted by: Daktoria

Vote
16 Total Votes
1

No, it's none of our business.

13 votes
0 comments
2

No, America is tired of fighting wars.

2 votes
0 comments
3

No, America trades a lot with China, and we don't need to disturb that.

1 vote
0 comments
4

Yes, a balance of power is needed against China.

0 votes
0 comments
5

Yes, China is an ally of Pakistan which is a rival of India, and Pakistan harbors Islamists who America opposes.

0 votes
0 comments
6

Yes, America needs to contain China in the Pacific.

0 votes
0 comments
7

Yes, Israel is America's ally, and India is Israel's ally.

0 votes
0 comments
8

No, Russia is an ally of India, and Russia isn't America's ally.

0 votes
0 comments
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
komododragon8 says2015-05-01T11:16:35.8972839-05:00
Can you add an option of taking over both countries once they've weakened each other.
ccless1 says2015-05-01T12:01:00.4065349-05:00
What about intervening on humanitarian grounds? Or in a humanitarian manner?
wrichcirw says2015-05-01T12:26:02.0711532-05:00
Assuming such a war would actually break out between nuclear powers, of course American should intervene...Hell the whole world would intervene.
wrichcirw says2015-05-01T12:27:07.2282221-05:00
If you add an option - "Yes, nuclear war is everyone's business" I would change my vote to that.
58539672 says2015-05-01T15:17:54.9969382-05:00
I was not aware tension between these nations were rising.
Welliss says2015-05-01T17:29:15.6139885-05:00
I wouldn't directly intervene. I think we should send funds or show sympathy for India but not get directly involved.
Daktoria says2015-05-01T20:17:53.0144971-05:00
Wrichcirw, do you honestly believe China and India would turn to nukes? The rest of the world would hate them if they did that.
wrichcirw says2015-05-01T22:03:36.2430195-05:00
@daktoria - you're proposing war between nuclear powers. It's never happened before, and if a war were to break out between any two nuclear powers, there's every reason to think that nukes would be the first weapon of war used by both parties. If nukes aren't a deterrent for war, then nukes are what they are - weapons of war that were manufactured to be used.
wrichcirw says2015-05-01T22:04:40.5667835-05:00
Anyway, that's why your question is rather outlandish. A "future war between china and india" will be a nuclear war...There's not much reason (at all) to think there will be one in the horizon.
Daktoria says2015-05-02T10:24:24.1642112-05:00
Wrichcirw, you're ignoring how India and China don't compose the entire world. Both sides have third party relations to maintain. If either side used nukes, the rest of the world would hate them. We live in a multipolar world today. This isn't like the Cold War between the U.S. and the Soviet Union where if one of us used nukes, we could tell the rest of the world to deal with it.
Daktoria says2015-05-02T10:26:06.1427186-05:00
Anyway, you're right that the poll is a little outlandish, but the real point of the poll is to focus on deeper foreign policy issues. That's why this is not strictly "yes" or "no". There are lots of justifications people can take for their reasoning.
wrichcirw says2015-05-02T10:38:07.7839396-05:00
@daktoria: "If either side used nukes, the rest of the world would hate them. We live in a multipolar world today. " This is precisely why neither side would risk a direct confrontation. It would very quickly escalate, like all wars, in order to determine the winner. This is why the USSR and the US never engaged in direct confrontation for nearly 50 years of Cold War. Therefore, a China/India conflict is simply an impossibility unless both parties were willing to risk an inevitable nuclear war.
wrichcirw says2015-05-02T10:39:16.9012564-05:00
@daktoria: "the real point of the poll is to focus on deeper foreign policy issues. " Well, you can deepen the discussion by at least acknowledging that both countries are nuclear powers, and add that into your calculus.
Daktoria says2015-05-03T10:31:39.6221101-05:00
Wrichcirw, if what you're saying is true, how do you account for the Sino-Indian conflicts in the past which never amounted to nukes?
Daktoria says2015-05-03T10:32:37.3981944-05:00
I mean I'm not saying escalation wouldn't happen. I'm just saying escalation wouldn't reach Defcon 1 because both sides understand there are third party interests at stake.
wrichcirw says2015-05-04T01:27:36.7419053-05:00
"Wrichcirw, if what you're saying is true, how do you account for the Sino-Indian conflicts in the past which never amounted to nukes?" They weren't nuclear powers when they had those border skirmishes. You're talking about the conflicts they had in 1962...China didn't develop nukes until 1964, and India until 1974.
Daktoria says2015-05-04T20:40:45.6179838-05:00
...But the ability to launch nukes has nothing to do with the attitude to use them. In fact, both countries today have "no first use" policies. They strictly maintain arsenals for the sake of deterrence.
wrichcirw says2015-05-07T19:20:07.4055938-05:00
"They strictly maintain arsenals for the sake of deterrence." What they seek to deter is war. But, you're asking what would happen if they went to war. Deterrence is no longer a consideration once they actually war. Nukes would then be used in the same manner as all weapons of war are used in war - to destroy the enemy's capacity to wage war.
wrichcirw says2015-05-07T19:21:11.8812204-05:00
I mean, one reason why we call our military department the "Department of Defense" is because a strong military is one of the best deterrents to war. It is a much better deterrent than the opposite...Having no military whatsoever.
SeanCoffey says2016-01-12T14:05:56.1225552Z
I think US should use more flexible methods of dealing with national enterprises. New technologies have to be put into operation (for instance <a href="http://www.Brownpapertickets.Com/blogcomments/105889">virtual data room providers</a> offer VDR services). Intervening in a war is the last thing they could do.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.