U.S base in Guam a major threat to China

[Kunal Biswas]

SSBM..

Gaum is US`s Andaman..

 

[Geoffrey R. Stone]

You have your facts wrong or you don't have any understanding. OHIO SUBS
and B-2 bombers in Guam have enough firepower to reduce Chinese Eastern Seaboard
to dust within a few hours. USA has more ICBM's on one OHIO sub than China has in
it's whole arsenal China reportedly 30 -ICBM's one OHIO sub 24 MIRV'd ICBM's and 154 cruise
missiles (all nuclear capable). DF-21d would be useless.

Should I take that to mean that you believe that some future conflict between China and the U.S. will lead to nuclear holocaust? It's certainly not anyone's preferable outcome.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Should I take that to mean that you believe that some future conflict between China and the U.S. will lead to nuclear holocaust?

There is nothing good about a nuclear war.Just a reply to the relevancy of a Guam base
and the effectiveness of DF-21d.

 

[Geoffrey R. Stone]

There is nothing good about a nuclear war.Just a reply to the relevancy of a Guam base
and the effectiveness of DF-21d.

I see. I was just shocked about how nonchalantly you mention the annihilation of China's entire Eastern seaboard, as if the deaths of hundreds of millions of civilians is a minor detail. Just a bit of collateral damage.

 

[Kunal Biswas]

From what I have read about the strategy of Pentagon war planners, Guam and the rest of the bases in the West Pacific are expected to be rendered useless in the opening stages of any serious conflict. The general consensus has been that there is not enough money around to harden all of them, and even the hardened ones are not going to avoid being taken out (it will just take a harder strike to do so). As expected, Carriers would be the primary tools of force projection. That is the reason why everyone took such an interest in the purported capabilities of the DF-21D.

In these series of serious conflicts, these is no chance of nuclear.. at least with China,

Regarding money factor can you give me some solid proof from reliable links..



Its not easy to take out such a base, you need to take out Airfields, You need to take out bunkers, You need to cut of supply chain..

Its not going to happen with present Chinese capability..



About Carrier, It is just part of a big force consist of SSBN, SSN, BMD Ships, Destroyers and other..

Force Projection term is used in Political view not Pure Military..

I see. I was just shocked about how nonchalantly you mention the annihilation of China's entire Eastern seaboard, as if the deaths of hundreds of millions of civilians is a minor detail. Just a bit of collateral damage.

War is brutal

 

[LETHALFORCE]

I see. I was just shocked about how nonchalantly you mention the annihilation of China's entire Eastern seaboard, as if the deaths of hundreds of millions of civilians is a minor detail. Just a bit of collateral damage.

It is a question China will have to answer continue Hegemonic ambitions and face the results.
If there is a war between USA and China, USA will go after the major economic centers without
a doubt.

 

[Geoffrey R. Stone]

It is a question China will have to answer continue Hegemonic ambitions and face the results.
If there is a war between USA and China, USA will go after the major economic centers without
a doubt.

So what sort of actions would China have to take in order to warrant that specific response? The situation would have to escalate really far in order for things to get that bad. Is it enough of a threat just that China is developing capabilities to push the U.S. farther out in the West Pacific?

I guess what I'm trying to say is, do you think it's reasonable for China to relinquish her security concerns to NATO/American good will? Is a competitive and modernized PLA inherently a threat? Is this about China not having a political system that you approve of? It seems that there are a variety of reasons for you to disapprove of China gaining strength, but would you not be just as suspicious of and hostile towards a hypothetical, future non-communist China that still overtakes the U.S. in economic and military strength? For argument's sake, let's say that the hypothetical political system is neither the current one, nor anything resembling a democratic system.

Is this really about you feeling that the rest of the world is not safe from China's developments? Or is this about a desire to uphold U.S. military and economic dominance? Or maybe this is about a belief that all good and acceptable governments should be democracies?

 

[LETHALFORCE]

So what sort of actions would China have to take in order to warrant that specific response? The situation would have to escalate really far in order for things to get that bad. Is it enough of a threat just that China is developing capabilities to push the U.S. farther out in the West Pacific?

I guess what I'm trying to say is, do you think it's reasonable for China to relinquish her security concerns to NATO/American good will? Is a competitive and modernized PLA inherently a threat? Is this about China not having a political system that you approve of? It seems that there are a variety of reasons for you to disapprove of China gaining strength, but would you not be just as suspicious of and hostile towards a hypothetical, future non-communist China that still overtakes the U.S. in economic and military strength? For argument's sake, let's say that the hypothetical political system is neither the current one, nor anything resembling a democratic system.

Is this really about you feeling that the rest of the world is not safe from China's developments? Or is this about a desire to uphold U.S. military and economic dominance? Or maybe this is about a belief that all good and acceptable governments should be democracies?

China is an economic and a military threat. You answered your own question at the end.
USA is a debtor nation to China what easier and faster way to make the debt disappear
then thru a military conflict.#1 always has to keep #2 in check or risk losing the top spot.

 

[Geoffrey R. Stone]

China is an economic and a military threat. You answered your own question at the end.
USA is a debtor nation to China what easier and faster way to make the debt disappear
then thru a military conflict.#1 always has to keep #2 in check or risk losing the top spot.

Embracing a war between China and the U.S. in order to address the national debt? Some might argue that's a sociopathic view to take.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Embracing a war between China and the U.S. in order to address the national debt? Some might argue that's a sociopathic view to take.

This is a view many in USA have taken. Authors are writing books about it. Resources are finite and China is a bigger
competitor than USA ever anticipated. USA has no means or intentions to ever payback the debt owed or a solution to
keep the American way of life on the current course.

US War with China Inevitable, Author Glain Says | CollapseNet

US War with China Inevitable

 

[Geoffrey R. Stone]

It doesn't change that it's absolutely insane. It's sociopathic to even entertain such an idea as a viable solution.

It's the moral and philosophical equivalent of a man murdering his banker because he can't/doesn't want to pay back the borrowed sum.

 

[Geoffrey R. Stone]

After giving it some further thought, I have to conclude that supporting a war that involves the targeting of civilian populations with nuclear weapons, in order to abolish the national debt, is about on the same moral level as engaging in genocide in order to create a scapegoat for uniting the national will. I'm thinking of the third reich here.

"In particular, over one million Jewish children were killed in the Holocaust, as were approximately two million Jewish women and three million Jewish men." So drop a nuke on Shanghai or Beijing and you've essentially exceeded all of Hitler's committed atrocities on the Jewish civilian population. Wipe out the entire Eastern seaboard with nukes and you've committed the greatest genocide in history.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

It doesn't change that it's absolutely insane. It's sociopathic to even entertain such an idea as a viable solution.

It's the moral and philosophical equivalent of a man murdering his banker because he can't/doesn't want to pay back the borrowed sum.

There is a saying owe the bank a million dollars the bank owes you owe the bank a
billion dollars and you owe the bank.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

After giving it some further thought, I have to conclude that supporting a war that involves the targeting of civilian populations with nuclear weapons, in order to abolish the national debt, is about on the same moral level as engaging in genocide in order to create a scapegoat for uniting the national will. I'm thinking of the third reich here.

"In particular, over one million Jewish children were killed in the Holocaust, as were approximately two million Jewish women and three million Jewish men." So drop a nuke on Shanghai or Beijing and you've essentially exceeded all of Hitler's committed atrocities on the Jewish civilian population. Wipe out the entire Eastern seaboard with nukes and you've committed the greatest genocide in history.

It has already happened once in Asia in ww2 -japan.

 

[Geoffrey R. Stone]

I'm not saying that it's absolutely impossible. I'm just saying that it's morally reprehensible to me, personally. And should be as such to anyone (aside from sociopaths).

 

[Geoffrey R. Stone]

There is a saying owe the bank a million dollars the bank owes you owe the bank a
billion dollars and you owe the bank.

Yes I've heard of a very similar saying. But I have never heard of anyone concluding from that saying that the solution is to murder your bankers.

The only kind of people who would conclude that, are the same kind of people that are viable candidates for becoming serial killers, mass murderers, etc.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Yes I've heard of a very similar saying. But I have never heard of anyone concluding from that saying that the solution is to murder your bankers.

The only kind of people who would conclude that, are the same kind of people that are viable candidates for becoming serial killers, mass murderers, etc.

Economy is everything to USA how far do you think USA would go to preserve it?
For USA anything impacting the economy can become an existential crisis. Do you
think after all the pride and glory USA had when Soviet Union collapsed does not
mean anything and USA would like to accept a communist defeat and take on a
role as #2?

 

[Geoffrey R. Stone]

Economy is everything to USA how far do you think USA would go to preserve it?
For USA anything impacting the economy can become an existential crisis. Do you
think after all the pride and glory USA had when Soviet Union collapsed does not
mean anything and USA would like to accept a communist defeat and take on a
role as #2?

I agree with what you're saying. If I understand correctly, you believe that the U.S. might be willing to do just about anything in order to retain its global hegemony. That is precisely why I believe that the only responsible thing for China to do, is to do its utmost in developing as credible of a defense as possible.

In a more ideal world, the U.S. and China would be able to accommodate each other better. In our world, China is unwilling to stay under the U.S.' heel, and the U.S.' is unwilling to allow an equal or superior to rise.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

I agree with what you're saying. If I understand correctly, you believe that the U.S. might be willing to do just about anything in order to retain its global hegemony. That is precisely why I believe that the only responsible thing for China to do, is to do its utmost in developing as credible of a defense as possible.

China is a much bigger threat to US then Soviet Union ever was.
USSR was only a military threat and a formidable one. China is a military
threat not to the extent USSR was but even worst they are a greater
economic threat and a greater competitor for finite resources.

 

[Geoffrey R. Stone]

China is a much bigger threat to US then Soviet Union ever was.
USSR was only a military threat and a formidable one. China is a military
threat not to the extent USSR was but even worst they are a greater
economic threat.

I agree. The U.S.S.R. focused on attempting to win the ideological and military competition. China is focused on attempting to win the economic competition. Because the U.S. military advantage is essentially underpinned by what is (or was) a robust economic foundation, a serious economic challenger is, in some ways, a much greater threat than a mere military competitor.

In that sense, the U.S. is no less a threat to China than China is to the U.S. They are both competitors trying to win the same prize.

In either case, I don't think that anyone in the world should hope for a military result.