Conventional War with the PRC? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series



Message

BeirutDude -> Conventional War with the PRC? (10/1/2020 11:26:18 PM)

So I was in a discussion about a possible conventional conflict with the PRC vs. the Western Allies (U.S., Japan, Aust. NZ, UK, etc.) and I made the point that unless we were pressed to support Taiwan or the ROK why would we even fight within the "First Island Arc" Seems to me that garrisoning the main islands of the Ryukyus, Philippines and other islands, and defending choke points against PLA(N) breakouts bottles up the PLA(N) with minimal risk and then elsewhere a world wide commercial anti-shipping campaign against the PRC Merchant Marine (preferably as prizes vs. sunk) would strangle their economy. My suspicion is they would be more prone to economic pressure than the west would be especially as we could make good some of the lost commerce from other sources but with a distant blockade they would be slowly strangled.

What am I missing?

I was thinking about this for some scenarios as well.



Gunner98 -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/2/2020 2:01:03 AM)

I think you're right. A knife fight in their backyard would not be the best place to be.

However that is not the sort of strategy that bolsters allies on their doorstep, so it is probably not in the public domain.



KnightHawk75 -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/2/2020 2:07:54 AM)

quote:

What am I missing?


The Belt and Road Initiative (the road\rail\pipeline infrastructure pieces) when it comes to ships being required for vast majority of direct import\exports? Not suggesting it can or would replace most ship trade, but for 2025+ scenarios with some sort of world-wide china anti-shipping initiative on-going (and I assume certain nations connected by land definitely not playing along) it could be a factor such that the increased risk\cost in sea transport might shift more trade transport to land routes as it becomes more feasible and more politically difficult to 'seize\capture\take a prize' from those routes. The added cost impact may remain (as does the cost of doing things on the interdiction side), but the ability to export\import what they need i imagine doesn't reach a point of strangulation. I could be totally wrong and it's a non factor, but just something that came to mind in that sort of CMO scenario.



Fido81 -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/2/2020 5:46:17 AM)

I don't see a coalition intentionally engaging PRC combat forces within the first island chain. But I should think that'd be where the coalition would want to strike to get at the PRC in depth. A strike on the mainland would be a serious escalation, but striking logistics and ISR facilities within the first island arc could be a way to attack the PRC in the rear without crossing that 'conventional strike on enemy homeland' psychological threshold.

I think in an idealized world OP is correct that allies are the only good reason to fight there as of now. But C:MO has taught me, if nothing else, that no plan survives contact with the enemy.

I'm less convinced that economic blockade would work effectively. If the coalition said 'choose between us or the PRC', it's quite possible in my mind that the majority of countries neutral in the conflict would choose to trade with the PRC. It's a larger, more unified polity than a coalition would be, has a bigger population, and has more buying power in many industries.



guanotwozero -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/2/2020 7:29:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightHawk75
The Belt and Road Initiative...

The problem there for PRC is that it reaches through intermediate countries to trading partners, so is extremely vulnerable to those transit countries shutting it down as well as trading partners being part of the blockade. While it's a network rather than a single path, blockade efforts could still drastically reduce the trade flow.



KnightHawk75 -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/2/2020 12:57:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: guanotwozero


quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightHawk75
The Belt and Road Initiative...

The problem there for PRC is that it reaches through intermediate countries to trading partners, so is extremely vulnerable to those transit countries shutting it down as well as trading partners being part of the blockade. While it's a network rather than a single path, blockade efforts could still drastically reduce the trade flow.


It is a weak link for sure, but I was thinking for the purposes of the scenario that some\most(?) of those land connected transit partners (the stans, ty,pk,ir,ru,bd,mm) are more likely than not, going to play ball with trade to the PRC officially or unofficially. Maybe that's plausible maybe it's not. I absolutely agree the land routes of substance can be disrupted (key bridges\rail stations\ports\transit politics) in transit countries, but to do so overtly could draw more parties into direct conflict. I was looking at that as an option\consequence\factor for the player in a large scene. Such as do I risk striking some key rail\bridge link in some at first current noncombatant territory say PK (or interdicting a neutral flagged ship say BR going to noncombatant port in PK carrying soybeans ultimately headed to the PRC) possibly having them go hostile and require additional sanction\blockade efforts in exchange for points\other trade-off or do I let it be.

Or not. :) Actually the more I think about it given what BD had in mind it may be too much to include geography\# of possible combatants, and split focus wise in the same scene anyway.



Gunner98 -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/2/2020 1:03:28 PM)

This would make a very interesting scenario from the PRC perspective as well...



guanotwozero -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/2/2020 4:38:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98
This would make a very interesting scenario from the PRC perspective as well...

Indeed it would.

My feeling is that most scenarios regarding a landward blockade would best be played as the PRC's opponents, as it would involve finding and neutralising land units - smugglers, convoys, etc, maybe a modern equivalent of the Ho Chi Minh Trail. However there could be more extensive scenarios perhaps representing the PRC backing a coup in a neighbouring country, e.g. Kazakhstan with its access to the Caspian, or better still Burma/Myanmar with its Indian Ocean coastline.

Realistically the bugbear would be Russia, which would be unlikely to join any blockade though would remain neutral militarily. It would be the PRC's landward lifeline, especially as Russia could make a fortune from an effective trade monopoly. I'm not sure what scenarios could be made out of that. Then again a post-Putin Russia may have very different priorities of which we can only speculate.

More conventionally a seaward breakout would be a very challenging scenario from the PRC point of view. It would likely need to either dominate the Malacca Straits (v tough) or else just punch a hole through the island blockade and push back the edges. No easy solution, depending on the number and strength of its opponents.



Gunner98 -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/2/2020 5:44:33 PM)

quote:

Then again a post-Putin Russia may have very different priorities of which we can only speculate.


Well we've got a couple decades breathing space before that happens...[;)]



KungPao -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/2/2020 8:29:37 PM)

Well, a blockade may work from tactical standpoint but it will take a long time "
We are experiencing a cold war v 2.0. But there is a huge difference between this one and v1.0. In 2.0 version it is very hard to have a "western bloc" vs "eastern bloc" scenario , instead the countries in the region may hold a complicate diplomatic relations just like the European countries have before WWI.
ROK is experiencing increasing competition from PRC on global market, but generally speaking, they are still in the same supply chain. The rapid decoupling process or the military conflicts between Sino-US could unintentionally hurt ROK's products.
Japan would love to see a cold war between China and US , this will be the best opportunity to have military normalization and increase diplomatic influence. But it is unlikely to have her commit into a long time blockade campaign
To ROK and Japan, China can use its domestic market as a carrot . A market of 1.4 billion population (or 1.4 billion disposable battery , as many of us joking) is a delicious pie that nobody can ignore.
Other counties like Philippines will see this as a great opportunity to get free lunch from both China and US. If a hostile breaks out, everything could become a business style money talk.
US will have to hold a strong cause to form a strong military alliance that can support long time blockade of China. Other than that , it must persuade other countries leadership that the war will be short. "Home before leaves fall." :) Otherwise , the alliance could easily fall apart.

quote:

My suspicion is they would be more prone to economic pressure than the west

I disagree, PRC is different from Imperial Japan.
While it is heavily rely on resource import from sea lane, it is basically a demand from a world factory, where resource and critical parts will be convert into final products and supply to world market. If a hostile breaks out then China will no longer able to export products and at the same time the demand of import diminish. China can still produce enough resource to meet domestic basic demand (oil, fertilizer and food). Of course CCP will have a hard time to buy the citizenfs loyalty. Yes, I guess young generation will be very disappointed if they cannot log into their steam account or see their favorite K-pop stars on TV. But CCP regime has a history that successfully keep itfs population in line with repressive rule, just think about Mao's China.



guanotwozero -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/3/2020 11:44:08 AM)

The PRC is clearly trying to make itself indispensable in world trade, but it's not so simple. It's built up its economy primarily on cheap goods, as it's attractive for other countries to buy. The quality is not so important because they're so cheap. However to step up a gear it needs to export quality goods and service, but that needs a different level of trust and guarantees, and that's in short supply under Xi's leadership. The population has become used to a rising standard of living, so their increasing expectation is a concern for the government. Hence their international trade is increasingly a double-edged sword for them.

If there were to be a blockade that would undoubtedly hurt; a sea blockade would increase the cost of doing business significantly, as land-based middlemen would all demand a cut for breaking sanctions. Trade there would be, but on a much reduced and less profitable scale. It would also hurt their erstwhile trading partners, but likely less so as long as they've not actually become dependant on Chinese products. Hence the recent concern over Huawei's involvement in telecoms networks - many countries are realising that PRC products should be kept out of certain areas. Another notifier of that is the current coronavirus crisis, where suddenly many countries found themselves beholden to China as they had cornered the market in protective gear; lessons are being learned and dependencies reduced.

That's why I think that a future blockade (if anyway effective) would probably hurt China more than its neighbours and other trading partners, for whom it would doubtless be a major inconvenience but not a crippler. The inconvenienced neighbours would also take up part of the slack by increasing trade with China's erstwhile customers and vendors.

As for CMO, we have the advantage that it's a mil-sim, not a political or economic sim. Designers just have to come up with plausible excuses for scenarios!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gunner98
Well we've got a couple decades breathing space before that happens...[;)]

At least - if anyone can find a way to wield control from beyond the grave, it'll be him!



BeirutDude -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/4/2020 3:39:19 PM)

quote:

A knife fight in their backyard would not be the best place to be.

However that is not the sort of strategy that bolsters allies on their doorstep, so it is probably not in the public domain.


Agreed! But Taiwan is a big Achilles Heel for us!



BeirutDude -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/4/2020 3:42:48 PM)

quote:

I'm less convinced that economic blockade would work effectively. If the coalition said 'choose between us or the PRC', it's quite possible in my mind that the majority of countries neutral in the conflict would choose to trade with the PRC. It's a larger, more unified polity than a coalition would be, has a bigger population, and has more buying power in many industries.


Agreed if we were just talking about an economic blockade but a Western Anti-shipping campaign they may have little choice as vessels in route to their ports may well be interdicted.



BeirutDude -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/4/2020 3:48:35 PM)

Great discussion everyone, interesting points by all!



DWReese -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/5/2020 12:49:30 AM)

Al,

You need to dump some of your PRIVATE MESSAGE files. Your mailbox is full, and it won't allow anyone to be able to send you anything. My messages to you have been rejected.

Doug



Fido81 -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/5/2020 1:52:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude

quote:

I'm less convinced that economic blockade would work effectively. If the coalition said 'choose between us or the PRC', it's quite possible in my mind that the majority of countries neutral in the conflict would choose to trade with the PRC. It's a larger, more unified polity than a coalition would be, has a bigger population, and has more buying power in many industries.


Agreed if we were just talking about an economic blockade but a Western Anti-shipping campaign they may have little choice as vessels in route to their ports may well be interdicted.


I think might well hold true in an anti-shipping campaign too. I'm not a logistician, but I think the value of goods to be sold to/bought from China by a ship over its war and post-war lifetime would be much greater than the value of the ship in most cases. I think that should be enough to encourage continued trade from neutral countries. If that isn't enough, since its economy uses central planning, I can see China sweetening the deal offering to replace sunk merchant ships for free/steep discounts. That seems like something a US-led coalition would have a hard time matching, and I think it'd make continuing to trade with the PRC a much more attractive option for a non-belligerent.



caohailiang -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/5/2020 3:14:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude
Agreed! But Taiwan is a big Achilles Heel for us!

how is that? i always thought that is the achilles heel for China



BeirutDude -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/5/2020 5:43:54 PM)

quote:




quote:

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude
Agreed! But Taiwan is a big Achilles Heel for us!


how is that? I always thought that is the Achilles Heel for China


IMHO Taiwan almost forces the USN-West's hand to go west of the First Island Arc and into the teeth of PLA(N), PLA(AF) strength to support and resupply them. It would be hard for the West to allow Taiwan to be battered and sit outside of theEast China Sea our with an extended blockade in the SLIM hopes of freeing Taiwan at the negating table later on.

Similar issue for the ROK but with more cover from bases in Japan.



caohailiang -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/6/2020 6:38:15 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BeirutDude
IMHO Taiwan almost forces the USN-West's hand to go west of the First Island Arc and into the teeth of PLA(N), PLA(AF) strength to support and resupply them. It would be hard for the West to allow Taiwan to be battered and sit outside of theEast China Sea our with an extended blockade in the SLIM hopes of freeing Taiwan at the negating table later on.


The risk of war is reduced, considering the subtle balance of power in this particular theatre.

From PRC perspective, PLA has a reasonable chance to take the island but no chance of breaking offshore blockade that is expected to follow. Because of worrying the long term economic impact to the nation, PLA will not venture any action unless completely cornered (such as formal declaration of TW independence or US military deployment on the island)

From US perspective, they will restrain from taking any further provocative move (such as above), because they would worry the strategic impact global-wise, in case of failing to defend the island.

This balance is very fragile, i am quite pessimistic it could last, say, beyond 2035



BeirutDude -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/6/2020 12:02:47 PM)

quote:

The risk of war is reduced, considering the subtle balance of power in this particular theatre.

From PRC perspective, PLA has a reasonable chance to take the island but no chance of breaking offshore blockade that is expected to follow. Because of worrying the long term economic impact to the nation, PLA will not venture any action unless completely cornered (such as formal declaration of TW independence or US military deployment on the island)

From US perspective, they will restrain from taking any further provocative move (such as above), because they would worry the strategic impact global-wise, in case of failing to defend the island.

This balance is very fragile, i am quite pessimistic it could last, say, beyond 2035


Seems like there was a balance of power in July of 1914... [&:] [X(] [8|]



pbrowne -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/7/2020 3:24:00 AM)

I think what some of this discussion has perhaps overlooked (but touched on by guanotwozero), is the CCP and it's assumption of an inherited 'Mandate of Heaven'. Above all, the CCP cannot lose face domestically. As time goes on, more mainland Chinese (Chinese) people will question the CCP's assumed right to rule. The days of the Chinese people being insulated from the realities of the world up to and during the Mao era before Détente in 1972, despite the increasingly frantic efforts of the CCP and Xi, will eventually disappear. This is the great fear of the CCP; losing it's tenacious grip on legitimacy. So the question is would a domestically insecure CCP feel comfortable backing down past a certain point?

Therefore it could be argued, that no slight on the PRC, and therefore the CCP, could be tolerated. For the last two decades, the CCP's legitimacy has been supported by rising standards of living. International travel by Chinese, especially holidays and buying into international real estate, has proliferated. Similarly, the number of Chinese students attending overseas universities has risen dramatically, to the point where here in Australia, universities having relied on international students, predominately from the PRC, for a large part of their income are facing financial walls with Australian borders closed due to COVID. Chinese are becoming accustomed to indulgences that rising prosperity brings, and the CCP knows this. Take that away, and the CCP are in trouble.

IMO, the PRC would have to regard any economic blockade as a declaration of war. As history shows, existential threats (real or propaganda induced) tend to promote right wing and nationalistic sentiments. Just what the CCP needs.

There is also the West's reliance on PRC manufactured products. Any embargo on PRC goods would have profound implications for the global economy. The COVID crisis has made us all aware of domestic manufacture and supply chain failings...just think face masks.



cristianwj -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/7/2020 8:46:39 AM)

Dear armchair generals, the disscuss above has nothing relationship with CMO.
Too many political debate will ruin this game, don't you think so?
It's true that there is relationship between politics and war, but I think it's just a background.
If some replies is OK or permitted by this forum, I hava a bunch of ideas to make some interesting scenarios.:)



pbrowne -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/7/2020 9:04:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cristianwj

Dear armchair generals, the disscuss above has nothing relationship with CMO.
Too many political debate will ruin this game, don't you think so?
It's true that there is relationship between politics and war, but I think it's just a background.
If some replies is OK or permitted by this forum, I hava a bunch of ideas to make some interesting scenarios.:)


I think this thread is about how a conventional war, or some intervention whether it is an embargo or blockade or something else, might form the background of a realistic CMO scenario on the China/Taiwan situation.

Maybe I'm wrong on that assumption.

Nevertheless, I think any fictional CMO scenario needs to be realistic and plausible, at least for the suspension of disbelief. Any military or other intervention always has to have it's roots in the political situation, especially at the strategic level, as the political situation determines the level of intervention and it's constituents.

I for one would love to hear your ideas for scenarios, especially on ones from the Chinese perspective. I think that would be truly great. [:)]




Zhaoo_Four -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/7/2020 9:23:11 AM)

quote:


ORIGINAL: pbrowne
I think what some of this discussion has perhaps overlooked (but touched on by guanotwozero), is the CCP and it's assumption of an inherited 'Mandate of Heaven'. Above all, the CCP cannot lose face domestically. As time goes on, more mainland Chinese (Chinese) people will question the CCP's assumed right to rule. The days of the Chinese people being insulated from the realities of the world up to and during the Mao era before Détente in 1972, despite the increasingly frantic efforts of the CCP and Xi, will eventually disappear. This is the great fear of the CCP; losing it's tenacious grip on legitimacy. So the question is would a domestically insecure CCP feel comfortable backing down past a certain point?

Therefore it could be argued, that no slight on the PRC, and therefore the CCP, could be tolerated. For the last two decades, the CCP's legitimacy has been supported by rising standards of living. International travel by Chinese, especially holidays and buying into international real estate, has proliferated. Similarly, the number of Chinese students attending overseas universities has risen dramatically, to the point where here in Australia, universities having relied on international students, predominately from the PRC, for a large part of their income are facing financial walls with Australian borders closed due to COVID. Chinese are becoming accustomed to indulgences that rising prosperity brings, and the CCP knows this. Take that away, and the CCP are in trouble.

IMO, the PRC would have to regard any economic blockade as a declaration of war. As history shows, existential threats (real or propaganda induced) tend to promote right wing and nationalistic sentiments. Just what the CCP needs.

There is also the West's reliance on PRC manufactured products. Any embargo on PRC goods would have profound implications for the global economy. The COVID crisis has made us all aware of domestic manufacture and supply chain failings...just think face masks.


Why not rethink the White English expanded from Britain to North America, Australia? Read true history.
IMHO,such the freak political paranoia to blockade China like pirate action just regard as what your forefather did.
Pirate DNA, conspicuously, were inherited by you.
The reason why you can discuss like the civilized manner? cuz your forefathers robbed money, then bought the Tail Coat.
And the Tail Coat with the original sin stands on the "civilized" highland to blame someone was dangerous and, in its real ourpose, it try to plunder a new round of treasure, lands and labbor.
How a freaky hypocrisy!
God bless you for your Mandate of Heaven. God bless you for your right of robbery.

------------------------
Weakness and ignorance are not barriers to survival, but arrogance is.



pbrowne -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/7/2020 9:40:49 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zhaoo_Four

Why not rethink the White English expanded from Britain to North America, Australia? Read true history.
IMHO,such the freak political paranoia to blockade China like pirate action just regard as what your forefather did.
Pirate DNA, conspicuously, were inherited by you.
The reason why you can discuss like the civilized manner? cuz your forefathers robbed money, then bought the Tail Coat.
And the Tail Coat with the original sin stands on the "civilized" highland to blame someone was dangerous and, in its real ourpose, it try to plunder a new round of treasure, lands and labbor.
How a freaky hypocrisy!
God bless you for your Mandate of Heaven. God bless you for your right of robbery.

------------------------
Weakness and ignorance are not barriers to survival, but arrogance is.


I am truly sorry if you are offended by my post. I sincerely apologise if that is the case, as no offense was intended.

I think I was just stating common knowledge and facts, with no intended bias. BTW, the Chinese Mandate of Heaven was taught in imperial China to justify divine rule, not unlike as you stated, the ideology of manifest destiny espoused by Great Britain and the USA to expand their empires.

Again, I think the whole concept of CMO is the test scenarios, especially from multiple perspectives. So, I would love to play out some different scenarios from the perspective of sides other than NATO and similar 'white' coalitions.[:)]



pathfinderdsdw -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/7/2020 9:45:29 AM)

It is unrealistic to imagine a conventional war with China, a giant a hundred times more powerful than Vietnam.
Economic sanctions is difficult to fully defeated him, after all, he's area and the land is too large, my advice is don't always use the fascist thinking to consider how to defeat, I might be pessimistic or too pacifist, but had to admit, choose confrontation with China is a stupid idea., Choosing to confront China is a stupid idea. The mobilized war with China will cause the world to decline for many years. I don’t intend to contribute to my hapiness life, why not consider peaceful competition with China in cultural and economic terms.



pbrowne -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/7/2020 9:46:53 AM)

BTW, I do have pirate DNA - as far back as the Vikings, and more recently in Irish whiskey smugglers. I'm also a direct descendant of a convict [8|]

Proud Pirate Pete



alexzhz -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/7/2020 10:00:29 AM)

It's a pity that this discussion is getting off the topic gradually, and some of the comments are filled with inconceivable political bias, especially pbrowne's reply.

Several years ago I thought all players belonged to one group which is called "CMO/CMANO players", but years after I realized that's not true, this game is so remarkable that all the players interested in politics and military affairs in real world are interested in it, and the players are heavily divided into different countries and standpoints, they might be alliance or enemy for now, and they will be alliance or enemy in future, therefore, in this forum, it's necessary to make any of the similar discussions friendly and reasonable. I don't want to see any flame wars here, though someone had actually lighted it up already. It's so ridiculous to discuss how to take down the CCP in a game forum.

For a long time I've noticed that people in western countries didn't really understand the modern China and its national governance mode, not because I'm completely indoctrinated by CCP, but because they were indoctrinated by their media. Their opinions to CCP(CPC indeed) are partially wrong, and I know it's hard to make their mind which had been brainwashed for almost 50 years changed in 1-2 hours, so there won't be a debate today.

It seems the friendship between Chinese players and western players is gone, or it never existed before. I’m so sorry but we can't keep calm and discuss a war plan on how to blockade China.

Just a remind, many Chinese players are concerned with this topic, and they will not absent in similar topics.



alexzhz -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/7/2020 10:49:45 AM)

No matter you agree or not, China will continue its growing by releasing its endogenous driving forces. The urbanization rate is to rise from 60% to 70% in the coming 10 years, which means almost 0.2 billion workers is entering big cities, enlarging the consumer market remarkably, and the consumption% in GDP rised from 47% to 80% in the past 6 years.
What if the household registration system removed in the near future?
What if the highly educated labor increased dramatically in rural area?
China has much to do with its reform of the economic system, and the blockade will never defeat the biggest economic giant(after 2035）, but slow down the world economic growth.
BTW, the latest figure shows US goods trade deficit with China reaches its widest point since the Sino-US trade war. Always remember that trading comes from comparative advantages, not guns and missiles.



Zhaoo_Four -> RE: Conventional War with the PRC? (10/7/2020 11:18:48 AM)

quote:


ORIGINAL: pbrowne
BTW, I do have pirate DNA - as far back as the Vikings, and more recently in Irish whiskey smugglers. I'm also a direct descendant of a convict

Manners maketh man. Thank you still have a rational mind. But I need correct one of your opinion.

China and CCP confirmly won't to be a global impire. It is widely noted that globalization is an irreversible wave to the world. Any imperialistic vain hope cannot come true. In Chinese word, the globalization is a "historic wheel" come and forward.

It is a so freak idea even in Chinese internal environmet that CPC will dominating the world. Nobody believe this sort of jibber-jabber, even the communists in Chinese.

Western Media is the best brain washer. The tension and statement of "dangerous china" make more Western people accepted. Moreover, it also impacts you. And then, you just listened & followed your media command and imagined an of devil, evil big monster in the dark back side of CPC. The win of your Media!

I agree that CMO just discuss the PURE military problem even it is hypothetical. However, now, Matrix forums may commence more political discusion. That's boring and meaningless. Chinese, CPC and China smeared for no reason. If no one point out the ridiculous bias, more people will think the "dangerous China" so.

quote:

BTW, the Chinese Mandate of Heaven was taught in imperial China to justify divine rule, not unlike as you stated, the ideology of manifest destiny espoused by Great Britain and the USA to expand their empires.


I may share my view for your reference. Just my suggestion.

Western ideology is so simple:

Firstly, They think the country only one way to prosperous is to be the empire and look for a way for global domination.

Secondly, The OLD EMPIRES did what they did. Therefore, they are afraid of some NEW EMPIRES to do the same on them.

Thirdly, They believe that China must be the new RULE MAKER over the world.

Finally, They say China is dangerous to the free countries on the world.
Q.E.D

However, the reality is that US and his brothers are still the (OLD) empires, but, currently, China did nothing and even not qualify as a new empire.

Dont you heared the win-win stratgy? There are more ways to international communication country by country in peace. Not only choose to be the empire. Sadly, "white guys" dont believe that harmonious development.

Nice talking to you，G'Day.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.8588867