# Will There Be A WWIII. Thoughts?

Discussion in 'World Events' started by clayton, Mar 31, 2010.

1. ### soullustRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,380

if that was the case why, are we buying made in china ?

and if this war breaks out, all i have to say is bring the fucking shit lets do this and get it over, NATO Vs the world, but only if we can all finally get along after wards.

"If all these states are invited to join NATO at the forthcoming Prague Summit, the Alliance's total population will have increased from 735 million to 839 million since 1999 - an expansion of 104 million or roughly 14 per cent (see table with data from 2000, the most recent year for which detailed comparative information is available). NATO's active armed forces will have increased by a similar proportion, from 3,448,590 to 3,986,045 — an expansion of about 16 per cent. Reserve forces, however, will have grown substantially in size, with the Central and Eastern European states bringing an additional 1,714,700 reserves to the "old" NATO's 3,774,000 - an increase of about 45 per cent. In contrast, the annual gross domestic product (GDP) of the Central and Eastern European states was only $372 billion in 2000, compared to$18,074 billion for the longer-standing NATO members - an increase of only 2 per cent in the Alliance's total GDP."

http://www.nato.int/docu/review/2002/issue3/english/military.html

kind of old but you get the point.
now lets not forget we have our own individual armed forces to add to these numbers.

3. ### claytonRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
132
If we break out in war with china we would have a loss of alot of thing because who do you think makes all of our iteams.

5. ### fedr8081100101Valued Senior Member

Messages:
6,706
Not really, actually we would gain a ton of things. It would be a massive boom to our lower quality work force. The demand for those things will remain the same or actually grow but supply will shrink to almost nothing. The laws of supply and demand will engage and factories will start producing tremendous amounts of these cheap items at higher quality and speed, unemployment will shrink. And China would lose a massive source of income.

Anyways, most of the stuff we get from China (not all mind you) is of poor quality and is very cheap, it's not like they build some sort of super smart guidance computer for our Tomahawks that cannot be built in the US.

7. ### claytonRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
132
That is true I didn't think of that.

8. ### fedr8081100101Valued Senior Member

Messages:
6,706
The US industry is one of the most incredible in the world. You see most other countries force all of their industries onto one thing intentional or not. ie. China's or massively centered around cheap products.

But the US's is incredibly diverse. You never really see just how massive the industry is because it is so spread out. But in a war of this scale they all go from butter to guns. And all of these industries come together and focus on a singular goal. And when all those factories are together they produce an amount of equipment that stretched the imagination. We started WW2 for example with 6 aircraft carriers. Even for the time period aircraft carriers were some of the most massively complex and dificult ships to built, equip, and man. You need planes, engines, trained personnel, steam compressors, hangar equipment, torpedo blisters, 5 inch cannons, anti air autocannons, etc... It's like buying a house, the actual house is only part of the cost, you need to furnish it, pay for electricity and water, etc....

We started that war with 6 of them, by the end of the war our industry had created 155 aircraft carriers that served in the war. That is unimaginable, hell, I cant even imagine just what our own modern industry could accomplish. I think we could easily outnumber the Chinese army in quality equipment. You see the advantage the chinese have is a large population, that means a lot of infantryman and a lot of workers. But not high quality equipment because you need to arm each man, if you give one guy quality you need to give the rest quality. And China can't do that. The US on the other hand does have a large (but not massive) active military and with so many tech industries and high quality workers we can turnout quality equipment at an unimaginable rate. And that what made the US so damned effective in WW2, our tech wasnt as good as the Germans but it was definitely above average and the numbers we turned out were not as high as russia's but they sure as hell were better than Germany's.

Our military is a compromise between the massive amount of personnel like Russia's in WW2 and the incredible quality as in Germany's.

9. ### claytonRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
132
Well that is true but You would think it we would lose alot because of how much imports we get from china.

Messages:
6,706

11. ### eupyongriRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
24
No WW III

I don't think that WW III will happen. We have learned bitter lessons through WW I and WW II, and now we know our planet will be totally destroyed if WW III happen.

12. ### fedr8081100101Valued Senior Member

Messages:
6,706
I doubt it. I have my doubts that many countries would be willing to use nukes.

Anyways, who would fight it? russia certainly wouldn't. Maybe China, but theyd get ripped apart.

13. ### Omega133Aus der DunkelheitValued Senior Member

Messages:
6,281
Yeah, China would lose.

14. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
No China appears to have already won the real war, which is economic, not bombs and bullets. For example:

(1)China is world's largest producer of gold and has locked up much of the available proven oil supplies in decade long contracts and controls a lot of the strategic minerals, like copper, tungsten, and 95% of global production of the rare earths. (Needed for strong light-weight magnets in motors and in batteries of electric cars.)*

(2) China has enough financial strength (dollars in reserves) to destroy the US economy any time it chooses, but will not dump them for a few years more as needs to convert to a domestic based economy. Until it does China hopes American and Europeans don't go broke. It is true that China will take a ONE TIME loss to send US & EU into deep long lasting depression with collapsed dollar, but EVERY YEAR they can buy what they need much more cheaply when US and EU can not afford to compete for their needed imports.

Slightly more than half of the entire US Government's cabinet has just left China empty handed after begging for China's help.

--------------------
* "Each** electric Prius motor requires 1 kilogram (2.2 lb) of neodymium, and each battery uses 10 to 15 kg (22-33 lb) of lanthanum. That number will nearly double under Toyota's plans to boost the car's fuel economy." From: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE57U02B20090831

** I am not sure but think there are two such major motors in a Prius and more than a dozen smaller ones for windows air conditioners etc. Even your computer's hard drive uses a neodymium magnet in its motor to be small, light weight and compact.

SUMMARY: China has Uncle SAM by the balls, but he has not yet realized it. He thinks his strong military will protect him. (His generals always plan for the last war - not the one they will face.)

Last edited by a moderator: May 25, 2010
15. ### Omega133Aus der DunkelheitValued Senior Member

Messages:
6,281
Well, i'd agree that they are possibly the best off economically. However, if it were a bombs and bullets war, they'd be screwed.

16. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
Agreed but as they have nuclear ICBMs* and subs that can launch them too, it will never be a bombs and bullets war.

Your might as well be taking about who can dig to the center of the Earth first as who can win a bombs and bullets war - Wake up America. See the real danger.

------------------
*Recall that last year they shot down a fast moving orbiting satellite - last time I looked Chicago was 100,000 times larger target and not even moving!

Last edited by a moderator: May 25, 2010
17. ### Omega133Aus der DunkelheitValued Senior Member

Messages:
6,281
Yeah but I don't think anybody would have the guts to launch a Nuke. Because it would spell doom for all of us. Including the ones who started it. In essence, it's suicide.

18. ### quadraphonicsBloodthirsty BarbarianValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,391
They'd have to have a nuclear force that could credibly withstand an American first strike for that to be true. They are not even close to that.

There is no war between the United States and China, economic or otherwise, in the first place.

19. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
Hard to do a completely successful first strike on submarines. Why I have long favored the US Polaris ICBM subs and opposed the land based ICBMs.

20. ### quadraphonicsBloodthirsty BarbarianValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,391
Not if you have superior submarines/navy. Or, especially, if the enemy subs are just sitting in a port anyway - China has never sent its ballistic missile submarines on patrol. This is not the Soviet fleet with crazy nuclear subs stationed under the polar ice caps for months on end - it's a nascent, untested program with only a few operational subs, up against the most advanced military in world history, with a decades-long track record of operating such nuclear forces.

21. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
That is probably true, at least for now, but not necessarily true by the time things got so bad in US that it would even consider doing a first strike against China. A 20% probably loss of only Chicago is unacceptable to the US. There will not be a nuclear war ever started except possibly by a one crazy old man ruler of a nuclear country. Any way I did say "completely successful first strike" was hard to do. BTW, Russia always kept several of its ICBM subs in port too as they are safe there from US subs. (When I say "in port" I really mean some where up a long river bay / estuary, like one of China's major rivers.)

Your statement that there is no economic war is confirmation of my statement that Uncle Sam does not even realize that China has him by the balls.

Last edited by a moderator: May 25, 2010
22. ### quadraphonicsBloodthirsty BarbarianValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,391
Motivation to go to war with China would have to do with conflict with China, not the internal conditions of the United States.

But not from US missiles and bombs. SSBNs are only a first-strike deterrent while they're on patrol.

No, it's an obvservation that "war" is a contest for political domination, which does not characterize the relationship between the two parties. Particularly in the economic sphere, where interations are generally positive-sum to begin with. One doesn't wage war by mutual enrichment.

23. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
You posted this before I finished my edit explaining that "in port" really means some where up a long river bay/ estuary such as one of China's major rivers.