China’s blunt warning to America: ‘We’re ready for repeat of Korean War or Vietnam if U.S. military stirs up any conflict in South China Sea’


#1

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3600609/China-warns-U-S-ready-repeat-Korean-War-Vietnam-American-military-stirs-conflict-South-China-Sea.html

**China’s blunt warning to America: ‘We’re ready for repeat of Korean War or Vietnam if U.S. military stirs up any conflict in South China Sea’

China has warned the United States not to ‘stir up any conflict’ in the South China Sea and said it was ready to replay the Korean War or Vietnam if provoked.

Liu Zhenmin, a vice minister in China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said: 'The Chinese people do not want to have war, so we will be opposed to U.S. if it stirs up any conflict.
‘Of course, if the Korean War or Vietnam War are replayed, then we will have to defend ourselves.’

China has adopted an increasingly aggressive posture in the South China Sea as it seeks to intimidate neighbors Vietnam and the Philippines over the Spratly Islands, which are believed to be at the center of an oilfield.**

A tribunal at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague is expected to rule in the next couple months on Beijing’s claims to 1.4 million square miles of ocean, though China has already rejected those proceedings.

There has also been growing tension with the U.S. and its allies Japan, Taiwan and the Philippines.

Earlier this week the Pentagon claimed two Chinese aircraft intercepted a U.S. EP-3 reconaissance plane near Hainan island in an ‘unsafe’ manner.


#2

So are we ready for Trump to negotiate a deal to avoid a war?


#3

I’ll pass on that great opportunity.


#4

China threatens war with the U.S. and threatens international navigation in the South China Sea. Russia builds up its military and its nuclear deterrent and threatens NATO. North Korea builds ICBMS and nuclear weapons. Americans are not worried. They are happy playing video games and keeping up with social networks.


#5

Me too! :o


#6

They are not a match for us militarily, but they could crush us economically just by dumping the dollars they hold.

We do not need to get into a tussle with them. Let them have the bloody islands !

ICXC NIKA


#7

Yes and no. China and Russia know that our military has been greatly weakened over the last several years and are pushing our buttons to see how far the can go without a response other than our gove. saying, “Tisk, tisk.” Each island they grab or each small territory that is annexed puts them just a bit closer to what we have in those areas. Both nations are feeling an economic slide and a “good little war” would grease the milatary machine. Wars will uptic both of their economies. So yes, those little chunks of land are not worth dying for, but our own military machine is lubricted by big business and the hawks circle…waiting. So pray for peace all around.


#8

Yes, our military has been weakened by the endless tours in the middle-east. We invaded the wrong country and now we are paying the price.


#9

We’ve had internal peace and U.S world hegemony for too long to seriously fear it.


#10

Would you mind explaining further?


#11

We haven’t had a war in the Lower 48 since the Civil War, the U.S has reigned unchallenged militarily by another world power since the end of the Cold War, and Nixon made the Army volunteer, which means the average U.S resident has no connection or investment in what happens across the sea.


#12

Unfortunately what begins with islands often ends with nations…


#13

You must remember that America actually had a will to oppose communism in aiding South Korea when it was attacked by the North. Many, many brave young Americans fought and died for political freedom for the West. When Russia decided to put nuclear weapons on your new very best friend Cuba, your President, a war veteran himself, stared them down. Your enemies feared you.
Now Russia is setting up military control of Syria; and is supplying Iran, your new very best friend with intercontinental ballistic weapons. China is thumbing its’ nose at you by building bases to control international shipping lanes essential for world trade. It knows you neither -have the will or the political capacity to stand for your own beliefs. Your leader is the weakest president since Jimmy Carter and your army is too beset by political correctness to be a real fighting force. It has pretended to wage a war against ISIS for two years and Russia has done more damage to the Islamists in three months in spite of ISIS being only co-lateral damage to its main attacks on Assad’s immediate enemies.
Your enemies are no longer afraid of you. You have lost any hegemony you might have had in the middle east (not that you will miss it, as shale oil is now available). Your Mr. Trump has told your allies that they are on their own. Hillary has not made comment, but no one would believe anything she says anyway.
I would expect further probing and posturing from all your enemies, Iran, Russia, North Korea, China… all with nuclear capacities…(Sorry, forgot Iran has made a promise not to develop anything …LOL)


#14

Not to invoke Godwin but I am reminded of…

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Die_for_Danzig%3F

**Why Die for Danzig? (French: Pourquoi mourir pour Dan(t)zig?, Polish: Dlaczego musimy umierać za Gdańsk?) is an anti-war French political slogan created on the eve of World War II.[1

The phrase originated in the title of an article (Mourir pour Dantzig?) by the French Neo-Socialist writer Marcel Déat, published on May 4, 1939 in the Parisian newspaper L’Œuvre[fr][2][3] The article concerned one of the Nazi German ultimatums to the Second Polish Republic, regarding the demand to transfer control of the Free City of Danzig (Gdańsk) to Germany.[4] In the article, Déat argued in favor of the appeasement policy.[5] He asserted that France had no interest in defending Poland, and that German Chancellor Adolf Hitler would be satisfied after receiving the territory he (rightfully, according to Déat[6]) demanded. He accused the Poles of warmongering and dragging Europe into a war.[6] Déat argued that Frenchmen should not be called to die paying for irresponsible Polish politicking,[6] and expressed doubts about whether Poland would be able to fight for any significant amount of time.[3] “To fight alongside our Polish friends for the common defense of our territories, of our property, of our liberties,” wrote Déat, “this is a perspective that one can courageously envisage, if it should contribute to maintaining the peace. But to die for Danzig, no!” (« Mais mourir pour Dantzig, non ! ») [7]**

Before they knew what had hit them, the Third French Republic had a German flag flying over the Eiffel Tower and had been divided into two zones, one militarily occupied and one a puppet state.

So Danzig very much mushroomed into something way bigger.

Despite the fact that in 1939, France supposedly had the best military in the world:

amazon.com/French-Army-1939-45-1939-40-Men-At-Arms/dp/1855326663

**The French Army of 1939 was considered by contemporaries to be the strongest army in the world at that time. **

Complacency.

Now given the distance between the U.S. mainland and China, that ain’t gonna happen, obviously…but what about your overseas military bases?

If you aren’t willing to defend freedom of navigation and the territory of your allies, but surrender a whole region of the world to Chinese domination …well, it could give the Chinese a few ideas as to how far they can go, ideas that might lead to global catastrophe.


#15

Sad, but true.


#16

EVERY TIME that the United States cuts its military budget to below 5%, we get into trouble.

Without fail.

Right now it’s been at 3% for several years.

Here is a graph.

airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Magazine%20Documents/2016/May%202016/0516chartspecial.pdf

You can see for yourself.

The graph starts after World War Two.

But our military spending was very low prior to World War Two.

There is a previous version of this graph that shows the earlier spending.

And how low it was back then.

Military spending is like an insurance policy.

You do the research and development.

You do the deployment and the training.

If trouble comes, you are ready.

But if you don’t do the spending and the R&D and the training, and then if trouble comes, then you are unprepared and you get butchered.


#17

China says it has a hypersonic missile that can take out our aircraft carriers.

A couple of years ago, a Chinese submarine popped up … surfaced … in the middle of our Pacific fleet and totally surprised our Navy.

What you need to do is constant R&D and deployment of new weapons systems.

The ocean is part of the physical universe and can be studied.

The atmosphere is also something that can be studied. And has been studied.

Lasers have been around for a long time. A hypersonic missile is vulnerable.

Similarly, you can develop detection and weapons systems to counteract submarines.

We used to have an underwater system of hydrophones that covered huge areas of the ocean and we could monitor submarines all over the place.

I have no idea what we have now.

But cutting the military budget is not the way to develop new things.

Is it wasteful?

Sure.

But if you need it, you better have it or you are toast.


#18

Trump has stated many times that he will rebuild the U.S. military so that it is so strong no one will dare to challenge us.


#19

In order to discuss these issues, you need data.

The Air Force Association publishes an annual review of the whole U.S. military situation.

Mostly Air Force, but also the other branches.

This appeared in the May 2016 Air Force Magazine:

airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Magazine%20Documents/2016/May%202016/0516chartspecial.pdf

So, the data is as recent as there is.

If anyone is interested, if you get the snail mail copy, there are pictures and descriptions of the current inventory of equipment, and etc.

airforcemag.com/Pages/HomePage.aspx

for the on-line version.

Every month they publish “The Chart Page” with all kinds of miscellaneous information and data.

They have done this for many decades.

I can call them to see if I can get the earlier versions of the annual review.

I do have their printouts and used to have their on-line data for earlier time periods.


#20

They have a lot of men due to their male child preference. And they are communist.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.