Conflict with China a ‘high likelihood’, says top Australian

Page 3 of 5 [ 72 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 15,168
Location: Australia

08 May 2021, 7:56 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
Australia is low hanging fruit. Low in population and rich in rescources that a densely populated rapidly industrializing country, like Japan in the Forties, and China today, would want to grab.



:thumright:


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet." Humour is not meant to be taken seriously, yet many on the left pervert its intent.
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


I luv Joe Biden! Democracy first!


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 26,089
Location: temperate zone

09 May 2021, 1:17 am

cyberdad wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
Hysterical mountain built atop a real, and growing anthill of danger.

Not gonna happen today, tomorrow, nor the next day.

But absolutely Australia needs those alliances (that Trump tried so hard to dismantle) with pacific rim countries and with the US to face an ever more assertive China in the future.

Australia came close to falling to another Asian power, during World War Two. Japan. And relied on Britain, and the US, to survive then.

Australia is low hanging fruit. Low in population and rich in rescources that a densely populated rapidly industrializing country, like Japan in the Forties, and China today, would want to grab.

But there is another region much like that- hard to defend, low population density, storehouse of mineral wealth, that also dangles in front of China's covetous eyes even closer to China than Australia. That place is Siberia. The largest part of China's ally -Putin's Russian Republic. So thats one thing Aussies can be thankful for. Putin's Russia is in more immediate danger of having it's limbs devoured by China than is Australia. Lol!


China can do both...in addition to Africa and South America simultaneously.


It cannot project raw military power in every direction like that. Not yet. The US is the only superpower that can do anything like that now. Though China is seeking to gradually build up long term soft economic leverage in Africa, South America, and even in Europe ( and even here in North America) as we speak.


I'm sure the Celts, the goths and the Egyptians said the same thing about the Romans :lol:

China has watched how European colonists did the very things you are speaking about over a couple of hundred years. China know they have time on their side. If a handful of British adventurers and their paid mercenaries could take over the entire Mughal empire then why should China think they couldn't do the same?


Why did you bother making this post?

We are talking about right now. Not in the long run.

Your contention was that RIGHT NOW China has the military capability of seizing control of the whole Pacific Ocean from the USA and then can project power via sealift across oceans to invade other continents. Any military expert would laugh at that contention.

But now you are changing your story, and now claim that you meant in the long run, and not the immediate present. I implied that they are building up soft power and ARE a threat in the long run. So you changed your story to actually agree with me, but continued to argue with me anyway, and you make lame historic analogies that dont prove your point ( you cant prove your point even when youre right ha ha).

Britain in India is nothing like anything that can be repeated today. And it took a hundred years for Britain to take over India anyway. Its the US that is analogous to the Roman Empire, not China. Our string of pacific bases on the far side of the Pacific is analogous to the Roman frontier at its height.

For China to do what you ORIGINALLY claimed that they could do, which is to invade other continents, it would in effect be restarting the Pacific Theater of world war two. But with China taking on the role played by Japan as the instigator and aggressor in the war.

The interesting question is "could China repeat what Japan did in December of 1941, and seize control of Southeast Asia, and of the entire of the western Pacific in the few weeks after Pearl Harbor?".

The answer is that its hard to say. Japan had certain advantages that China doesnt have today. But also had disadvantages that China doesnt have.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 20,215

09 May 2021, 4:00 am

You are projecting your own views that China think in short term like a a western government that thinks in terms of 3-4 years for the term of their government.

But the Chinese think quite differently to western Europeans. The Chinese leadership/military think/plan ahead for years (even hundreds of years). They watched and learned from early history the rise and fall of empires. They are both expanding (on multiple fronts) and consolidating their global power slowly and steadily.



MrsPeel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 1 Oct 2017
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,393
Location: Australia

09 May 2021, 7:10 am

To those who say we are getting excited about nothing and the threat is greatly exaggerated,
what about this threat to bomb Australia if we dare interfere over Taiwan?:

https://www.news.com.au/world/asia/chin ... 28a0543e34

Quote:
The editor of a Chinese newspaper considered to be a mouthpiece of the Communist dictatorship has said Beijing should consider “long range strikes” directed at Australia.

Editor-in-chief of the stridently pro-Communist Global Times newspaper, Hu Xijin, made the extraordinary comments in an editorial advising Beijing how it should react should Australia join the US in protecting democratic Taiwan from invasion.

“Australia must know what disasters it would cause to their country,” he said in the tub-thumping piece published late on Friday.



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 20,215

09 May 2021, 7:16 am

MrsPeel wrote:
To those who say we are getting excited about nothing and the threat is greatly exaggerated,
what about this threat to bomb Australia if we dare interfere over Taiwan?:

https://www.news.com.au/world/asia/chin ... 28a0543e34

Quote:
The editor of a Chinese newspaper considered to be a mouthpiece of the Communist dictatorship has said Beijing should consider “long range strikes” directed at Australia.

Editor-in-chief of the stridently pro-Communist Global Times newspaper, Hu Xijin, made the extraordinary comments in an editorial advising Beijing how it should react should Australia join the US in protecting democratic Taiwan from invasion.

“Australia must know what disasters it would cause to their country,” he said in the tub-thumping piece published late on Friday.


I'm quite happy to let China take Taiwan, they consider it an internal problem.



MrsPeel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 1 Oct 2017
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,393
Location: Australia

09 May 2021, 7:25 am

Wow. Are you serious?
23 million Taiwanese are not going to be happy about a Chinese takeover.
(Note: for comparison, population of Australia is 25 million)



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 20,215

09 May 2021, 7:29 am

MrsPeel wrote:
Wow. Are you serious?
23 million Taiwanese are not going to be happy about a Chinese takeover.
(Note: for comparison, population of Australia is 25 million)


Taiwanese are predominantly mainland Chinese, the nationalist leader Chang Kai Shek escaped there with thousands of nationalists and took over the island displacing the indigenous Gaoshan people long ago.



MrsPeel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 1 Oct 2017
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,393
Location: Australia

09 May 2021, 8:33 am

Well, yeah... but isn't that a bit like saying the Caribbean islands were populated by African slaves who displaced the natives - so it's OK if an African nation wants to take over Jamaica, since they're all of the same race?

I mean, I know that's not the best analogy, as we're talking more recent history when it comes to Taiwan, and deeper cultural and linguistic ties. But surely the point is not the race / ethnicity of the population so much as whether they are self-governed? The fact is, the population of Taiwan at present is subject to the governance of the Republic of China and not the People's Republic of China.

Edited to add: I have no political axe to grind here, I wouldn't be against a unification of China and Taiwan if it was undertaken by peaceful negotiations. My concern is if China were to try and take it by force, against the will of the Taiwanese government and people.



Last edited by MrsPeel on 09 May 2021, 8:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 26,089
Location: temperate zone

09 May 2021, 8:42 am

cyberdad wrote:
You are projecting your own views that China think in short term like a a western government that thinks in terms of 3-4 years for the term of their government.

But the Chinese think quite differently to western Europeans. The Chinese leadership/military think/plan ahead for years (even hundreds of years). They watched and learned from early history the rise and fall of empires. They are both expanding (on multiple fronts) and consolidating their global power slowly and steadily.


Youre the one "projecting your own thoughts". Not me.

I am the one who stated that china thinks in the long term. You are the one who spouted ignorant nonsense about how China AT THIS MOMENT has capabilities it doesnt have. Stop trying to pin your own ignorance onto me please.



Last edited by naturalplastic on 09 May 2021, 8:55 am, edited 1 time in total.

naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 26,089
Location: temperate zone

09 May 2021, 8:54 am

MrsPeel wrote:
Well, yeah... but isn't that a bit like saying the Caribbean islands were populated by African slaves who displaced the natives - so it's OK if an African nation wants to take over Jamaica, since they're all of the same race?

I mean, I know that's not the best analogy, as we're talking more recent history when it comes to Taiwan. But surely the point is not the race / ethnicity of the population so much as whether they are self-governed? The fact is, the population of Taiwan at present is subject to the governance of the Republic of China and not the People's Republic of China.


Its the same old quandary. Do you stand up to the adversary? Or do you appease them?

Hitler made a series of territorial demands. England and France gave in. The last one was giving pieces of Czechoslavakia to Hitler in the agreement signed at Munich by Chamberline. The accepted narrative is that that just encouraged Hitler to get more aggressive and led to WWII. Chamberlain was and still is villified for "appeasement". After that we said "no more Munichs" as we went into the cold war. During the cold war we vowed stand up to aggression. The result was..quagmires like Vietnam. So the next generation said "no more Vietnams" just like their parents had said "no more Munichs".

If China threatened Taiwan...what should a western alliance do? Stand up to china and vow to defend Taiwan? Or try to buy peace by letting them have Taiwan?

I dont see an obvious answer.



magz
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2017
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,069
Location: Poland

09 May 2021, 9:00 am

naturalplastic wrote:
MrsPeel wrote:
Well, yeah... but isn't that a bit like saying the Caribbean islands were populated by African slaves who displaced the natives - so it's OK if an African nation wants to take over Jamaica, since they're all of the same race?

I mean, I know that's not the best analogy, as we're talking more recent history when it comes to Taiwan. But surely the point is not the race / ethnicity of the population so much as whether they are self-governed? The fact is, the population of Taiwan at present is subject to the governance of the Republic of China and not the People's Republic of China.


Its the same old quandary. Do you stand up to the adversary? Or do you appease them?

Hitler made a series of territorial demands. England and France gave in. The last one was giving pieces of Czechoslavakia to Hitler in the agreement signed at Munich by Chamberline. The accepted narrative is that that just encouraged Hitler to get more aggressive and led to WWII. Chamberlain was and still is villified for "appeasement". After that we said "no more Munichs" as we went into the cold war. During the cold war we vowed stand up to aggression. The result was..quagmires like Vietnam. So the next generation said "no more Vietnams" just like their parents had said "no more Munichs".

If China threatened Taiwan...what would a western alliance do? Stand up to china and vow to defend Taiwan? Or try to buy peace by letting them have Taiwan?

I dont see an obvious answer.
Russia is holding Crimea - but they avoided open agression to gain it, they used "little green men" instead and opportunistically used instability of Ukraine of that time.

That's how it's done nowadays. No one wants to be assigned "the agressor" because this would earn them open enemies - so instead, more subtle, shadowy moves are made.


_________________
Let's not confuse being normal with being mentally healthy.


MrsPeel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 1 Oct 2017
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,393
Location: Australia

09 May 2021, 9:03 am

I'm not too knowledgeable on political matters, so feel free to correct me.
My reading of the situation is that China is leaning on Australia in the hope that we will depart from our solidarity with the US in favour of maintaining economic ties with China.
If they can succeed in that, it reduces the likelihood of a coordinated response to any military action or expansion. It fragments the opposition.
Divide and conquer.



MrsPeel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 1 Oct 2017
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,393
Location: Australia

09 May 2021, 9:10 am

naturalplastic wrote:

Its the same old quandary. Do you stand up to the adversary? Or do you appease them?

Hitler made a series of territorial demands. England and France gave in. The last one was giving pieces of Czechoslavakia to Hitler in the agreement signed at Munich by Chamberline. The accepted narrative is that that just encouraged Hitler to get more aggressive and led to WWII. Chamberlain was and still is villified for "appeasement". After that we said "no more Munichs" as we went into the cold war. During the cold war we vowed stand up to aggression. The result was..quagmires like Vietnam. So the next generation said "no more Vietnams" just like their parents had said "no more Munichs".

If China threatened Taiwan...what should a western alliance do? Stand up to china and vow to defend Taiwan? Or try to buy peace by letting them have Taiwan?

I dont see an obvious answer.


Agreed.

I don't like the idea of appeasement, especially with regard to a takeover of a self-governed de-facto state of 23 million. And would China stop there?

But I can't stand the idea of war either.

It's a no-win situation.



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,780

09 May 2021, 10:48 am

As I recall, China has informally established two "Red lines" which would prompt a Chinese invasion of Taiwan:

1) If Taiwan attempts to declare itself an independent country
2) If the US attempts to station troops on Taiwan

If neither of these happen, China is likely content to simply engulf Taiwan through the sheer influence of its growing economy, as it is already doing.


_________________
Omit needless words.


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 15,168
Location: Australia

09 May 2021, 5:51 pm

MrsPeel wrote:
To those who say we are getting excited about nothing and the threat is greatly exaggerated,
what about this threat to bomb Australia if we dare interfere over Taiwan?:

https://www.news.com.au/world/asia/chin ... 28a0543e34

Quote:
The editor of a Chinese newspaper considered to be a mouthpiece of the Communist dictatorship has said Beijing should consider “long range strikes” directed at Australia.

Editor-in-chief of the stridently pro-Communist Global Times newspaper, Hu Xijin, made the extraordinary comments in an editorial advising Beijing how it should react should Australia join the US in protecting democratic Taiwan from invasion.

“Australia must know what disasters it would cause to their country,” he said in the tub-thumping piece published late on Friday.


:thumright:


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet." Humour is not meant to be taken seriously, yet many on the left pervert its intent.
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


I luv Joe Biden! Democracy first!


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 15,168
Location: Australia

12 May 2021, 5:21 pm

Quote:
ScoMo says preparing for war with China is doing his job

Prime Minister Scott Morrison has backed Defence Minister Peter Dutton in warning Australians that we need to be prepared for military conflict with China.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/subsc ... de=premium


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet." Humour is not meant to be taken seriously, yet many on the left pervert its intent.
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


I luv Joe Biden! Democracy first!