China doesn't think that way - war freak and megalomaniac.They just want to live peacefully but at the same time secure there country.

Problem is most Americans live under the perception that no country should challenge U.S;that every country should bow to what U.S wants, and failure to do so will become an enemy.

Countries are like human beings.They grow and as years go by, mentality and attitude change unless your are retarded (no pun intended).

"Fool me once... shame... shame on you. Fool me twice... it fool me... we cant get fooled again."

"Fledgling" superpower status? Third-largest country by land-area, second-largest economy, the largest military and 20% of the world's population. Doesn't sound very fledgling to me...

Good points.

One point the article made was that even when China built an aircraft carrier of its own, it would take years to learn to operate. The Russians built two and never learned to operate them to any effect. Much the same applies to China's "superpower status." It is new to them and they still have to learn to operate it. They will make some mistakes (as we did on our way up) and there will have to be some tolerance and some forgiveness and probably some help along the way.

The point about China not attacking anyone else is a good one. But you have to remember that by pretty much containing its sphere of influence to its immediate border, China only magnifies events that happen in its littoral waters and on its border. In other words, China sees no interest in the Caribbean, for example, but considers the Yellow Sea its private lake as a result. Much the same applies to Taiwan, which the Chinese still consider a "rogue" province and part of their country. This is much different that their proxy state of North Korea, which everyone, Chinese and American, just wish would go away.

China is so tied to the U.S. economically that they have few choices. The problem is that the Chinese military, like even the U.S. military, is a factor that is isolated from the mainstream economy by low pay and very different living and working conditions. And the leadership in China fears the military to a degree.

Were Chinese-American relations to sour, probably the first thing that would happen would be that the U.S. would be pushed into an inflationary spiral by rising prices of goods. This would essentially devalue Chinese holdings in U.S. currency and bonds and would tank their economy. And pause in the growth of the Chinese economy is going to cause massive unrest that can only be controlled by the military. And the Chinese leadership loses influence. This is a vicious cycle that we don't want to get into.

Ericko;Yes there is a big misconception because of China's size that it has been a superpower.Only recently have they been recognized as superpower. Reality is they still have a ways to go.
@ Chris; Yes we are lucky the days of expansionism are over.Most seem to be happy within their borders with the exception of Nk,and Taiwan. Also the islands off the Vietnam coast. China has itself to worry about more than worrying about any country attacking them at the present.As your last paragraph states they are more interested in making money not war.This does not mean we should keep them in check as best we can.

Spoken like a true Pacifist

@ Tarzan; Feel again brother.

"This does not mean we shouldn't keep them in check as best we can" keep them in check is what I meant to say.

China isn't going to attack anyone. The Chinese are too smart for that, having watched us and how even small wars can bleed a domestic economy. They're establishing themselves as an economic superpower, and probably soon will be the center of the economic universe.

war is money!!! look at the rockefellers in WWII, they sold oil to both sides.

War is profit.

Why else do you think we are fighting this invisable "war on terror" for the last decade? we are going to kill all the "terrorists" right?

we are ignorrant sheep ppl. try to wrap your minds around it

JW, that is just the tip of the iceberg. With our corporations going to China and other eastern countries looking for cheap labor they took the jobs and much know how with them. There was no penalty for doing this which is something else that should be changed. Someone brought up hair dryers " $15-$20 China and $35-$40 U.S. It should be noted though that, China 6months -12 months useage and 12 months plus U.S. useage. Yes you can get a pair of cheap jeans from China that last a few months BUT you can get a pair that will cost you over $150 that will last a bit longer and at that price could and should be manufactured here. It is our corporations that sold us out, not to keep in conpetition with competitors, not to produce lower prices for U.S. citizens but to get a higher bottom line figure. This includes European corporations as well as Japanese business. This is what gave China their economy their leaders did not have the knowhow knowledge to get to the state of economy that they now enjoy. Heavy tariffs should be put on the imports of goods made in the far east by the corporations that looked for cheap labor, that way it will square off any discrepancy and enable us to build our economy back up again.

@ Trueblue I agree completely.

@smart_sound,

Those Chinese to English translation programs DO NOT WORK! They only produce gibberish. If you don't believe me, look at all the web sites you get by googling "funny chinese signs."

There going to have to protect their interest in the US in the future since they are buying up all our debt. The US is turning slowly into a cesspool from these 2 wars. How long can the US export jobs and maintain its military might around the world. You had better start learning to speak Chinese.

"Why build his huge military machine if they have no plans to use it?"

Why did we build ours?

Also, I'm not sure Russia is even in the same ballpark anymore, unless you are saying they are because of nuclear deterrent. But if so, then you have to include several other countries, too.

To put Chinese military spending into perspective, if they spend $76 billion on defense in 2011, that will be $30 billion less than they are spending extending high-speed rail. They're adding about 9000 kilometers of track and buying a bunch of new locomotives (with some GE engine parts, if any investor is interested) this year for $106 billion, and the plan includes about the same level of expansion again next year.

Paul, I got an e - mail (which I later delted) that ranks the world's top ten militaries. I remember some but not all of them, I remember Italy was ranked #10, China #3, Russia #2, and US #1. Sorry I can't gove you that site, but as I said I read it and deleted it.

@ Vyper; One of the ways that the next world war can start is if the Chinese attack Taiwan. By law we are required to come to their defense,and believe me we will. China as i stated will not be an aggressor,or agitator they will answer to some type of provocation.ie Taiwan claiming independence would surely do it.
We have a one China policy and do not recognize Taiwan's independence,as long as this holds there will probably never be a reason to go go to war.Not saying it cant happen just the likelihood is much less. China is all about saving face and have been lagging behind for years so a little flex is no worry and should be expected. No one can truly say how the world will be 20 to 30 years from now,being prepared is the key and keeping the edge on the technology.

Taxi - I see your point and recognize the validity of a lot you are saying, but I think it goes a little deeper than that. The Chinese have a national inferiority/superiority complex: they feel like they've been shoved to the back of the bus for a long time while simultaneously sincerely believing that they are very much superior to other peoples, to the point of being "outside the law" when it comes to pushing their agenda on others. In the second regard I have to admit that they sometimes seem frighteningly close to the American mindset in the 1890s-1930s in many ways. The concern I have with the one China policy is that it can be construed by them to tacitly agree with an eventual PRC takeover of Taiwan: we may have a treaty with Taiwan, but I suspect the argument may be "how can you have a treaty with someone that doesn't exist". Where this all comes into play is if the Chinese do manage to bring online a creditable military option to negate our carriers: without decks to fly from we are severly limited in our ability to respond to Chinese agression.

I guess my whole point is boiled down to this: as long as we maintain a way and a will to militarily respond to Chinese agression in a way that will do them more damage than us, the status quo will be maintained. If they get the upper hand - and they are fast getting there, I think - then I submit that all bets are off.

US and China will never go to war because finding a diplomatic solution to any crisis will always be more desired than the consequences of open war. China will not invade Taiwan unless they declare independence first. A large percentage of Taiwan's population favors reunification so that isn't even close to happening.

"among the young people in China" Are these the policy makers? Are those concepts current or are they from 30 years ago, before China's transition to capitalism? Any country with economical growth and especially with great raw materials needs, would enlarge its military, with emphasis in its navy in order to protect shipping lines that guarantee the supplies their economy needs. It is also a matter of pride, if you have money, you buy a luxury car, same for the Chinese, they would pursuit better and more sophisticated weaponry.

The more our economy and theirs interact and depend of each other, the less chance for conflict.

What a bunch of... well, suspect opinion, lol.

Why would the Chinese want a shooting war with us in the next 20-30 years? We're no threat to them. We buy their stuff. They kinda need us to keep our economy alive so we can pay them back all the billions they loaned us.

The thought that they'd prefer a war over continued economic advantage just strikes me as silly. About as silly for Best Buy to plan on having snipers picking off its customers as they get out of their cars in the parking lot.

The one part of this puzzle left out is that in 30 years these old Chinese leaders will be dead. The young chinese people will be the ones to take over from them and if they have had the taste of a good economy and freedom, negotiations will take on a different light. The biggest problem in this thinking is, if chinese leadership is family orientated in any way like N. Korea, there will be no change in the outlook.

I'm stunned by some of these replies. Canudigit says that there will never be a war between us because finding a diplomatic solution is always preferable. Agreed, it's preferable to reasonable people, but I think the number of wars that have been fought throughout history would prove him wrong, since that indicates that a diplomatic solution is not always achieved in time to prevent the shooting. Romilio wants to dicker terminology and timelines - but evidently didn't read my post very well. I said "a young Chinese immigrant", indicating pretty well that the "young people in China" is NOW, not 30 years ago. He also asks if these are the policy makers: may I point out (as Trueblue did) that in the timeframe I mentioned they will BECOME the policy makers? May I also point out that these young people didn't come up with this happy thought all by themselves: they got it from somewhere and my understanding is that it is coming to them through their authorities and elders. Trueblue depends on their taste for McDonalds, Levis and Rock and Roll to sway them from their course. Maybe, but I'd rather not bet the future on it. He does however point out that the type of leadership that comes in will be the deciding factor: well, the Chinese have a long history of bringing in leaders who think the same way as the last guy. Finally Paul M just blows the whole thing off because he expects the Chinese to want to keep us as customers <sigh>. Paul, they have the whole world to be their customers: why continue to buy resources from someone when you can just conquer and take them, while simultaneously eliminating the one major obstacle to your eventual domination?

I need to point out that you last four are all expecting the Chinese to act like good little Americans and see reason. Good luck with that. I've told you what I know and what I believe is self evident to anyone who wants to look. Don't want to believe, fine. You're part of the problem.

We're not just customers. We're their biggest customer, at least for the time being. But if the Chinese were to conquer us militarily, they'd be stuck with the ruins. They'd go from having a consumer-based economic friend who buys a lot of their stuff to a defeated and occupied former shell of that economy.

What is it the Chinese have ever said or done to make you think they are contemplating an attack anywhere, not to mention beyond the reaches of their own continent? Oh, right, that immigrant kid. Well, I'll see your kid and raise you one of ours who believes we brought down the trade towers ourselves, another who believes Obama is an alien (the outer space kind) and yet another who believes China already has an Atlantic coast.

Vyper,

I suspect what you said "a young Chinese immigrant". Did you articially create one? Or just an outlier? As I know, most young Chinese people like US and Americans very much. The only problem I see is some Americans, especially politicians, treat China/Chinese as a potential enemy, which pushes Chinese away as friends.

The question that I would like a good answer to is: "Why should we guarantee Taiwan that we will come to their aid if China pushes the issue and decides to retake the island?"

Is it really in our best interest to face off against China over Taiwan? Is it really worth it? For what???

20-30 years from now our middle class will be gone if our current situation does not change. Its the Asian countries rising middle class that China will focus on. They don't have to attack us greed and corruption is destroying this country. They are also smart enough to see invading countries get you no where. They are going around the world buying up oil leases and so forth while countries hate the US and snub us.

Paul - All I had to do was open my eyes and read the news. They are building their military at a pace that is nothing short of stunning. They are also someone's biggest customer: Russia is selling them nuclear submarines in large numbers. The Chinese government now operates the Akula attack submarine, Russia's most technologically advanced undersea weapon. Numerous independant news reports - not just an "immigrant kid" - show beyond a doubt that they are building up their armed forces at a frantic pace. Oh, but I guess we should all rest easy: they're obviously doing it to protect their trade routes to the US, right? And Jimmy, no I didn't just "create" this guy (his parents did). You have no argument so you launch an attack on my character: very typical of the average politcal ostrich. You just parroted the same thing that the German American Bunds were saying about Nazi Germany: we were going to "make them an enemy". Yeah, just like I'm going to make someone rob a bank because I find it odd he's in the parking lot with a gun. There will always be some fool that listens to the one sentence in a post and figures if they can find a way to throw sand on it that it somehow makes them right. Most of the Chinese that I know here like America too. The Chinese...HERE. Most of the Iranians or Iragis that are HERE like America too. I think we can both agree that most of the Chinese are not HERE - they are in CHINA. Please be a good ostrich and stick your head back wherever you''ve been keeping it - you were much less annoying. I'm truly stunned at the number of people here who won't read the news, won't look at the reality of what's happening, who are more than willing to put on blinders and figure that we're ok as long as we're buying our Keds and stereos from the Chinese.

I wonder if the Chinese and Russians sit around thinking:

"Look at those new Joint Strike Fighters! Look at that Aegis! Look at the GMLRS missile for the multiple launch rocket systems! Those Americans obviously are building up at a frantic pace and preparing to attack us!"

The only thing is it wouldn't like quite so silly saying that about us, because we are spending on defense at a frantic pace. The Chinese are spending $70-some billion a year.

If they can present a meaningful conventional threat against us at one-tenth the cost, maybe we ought to buy defense from them, too. We get everything else from them. Let's contract out to the guys who know something about how to get a bang from a bu... yuan.

Actually Paul no one is really sure what Russia and China are spending on military projects, countries are known to lie(especially ones with unelected rulers). They say $70 billion, but that's rather low. Double it and double it again and that might be close.

VYPER, I didn't say anything like that you are a disappointment. If you consider your taste of freedom to McDonalds, jean etc. so be it. I have never worn jeans in my life ( I am 72) old son. But I like the thought that I can express an opinion here and anywhere else and I like the idea I can go where I want to at any time without having to report to anyone. Boy you have some kind of strange idea of freedom. you had better get a life old son. Try leaving the snakes out.

I see in your post 9.12 and read about "pouring sand" that is what you do. I don't necessarily disagree with your comment but you should not put words in others that were not there ie. Macs, jeans and r & r.. To come up the right way in negotiations you cannot change words it makes you look foolish and irrelevant. People do remember what they say and what the write down, well at least some of us, so when we start talking to these people we damn well better know what we are saying

Paul M

In response to your comment that China doesn't want a shooting war with us due their dependence on our markets for their financial well being. Chinese leaders have said in a very public way that their ultimate goal is to decouple from the world economy. The lack of bite to their economy during the world recession we are in has been touted as proof that they are on the right track. They belief their huge population can sustain a prosperous, self sufficient economy voiding the need to cooperate with world demands. Their achilles heal is a lack of petroleum---which they can secure in the neighborhood with the right incentives. I don't think their ultimate objective is a shooting war with the US, unless the timing of an incident such as Taiwan would offer an opportunity to further weaken the US. Why would they want to risk blood and treasure in a war involving the mainlands of both countries when they can achieve there objectives by helping to destroy the US from within. The recipe is simple. Once decoupling is achieved, pulling your treasure investment from the US, and use your economic might to push for a new world currency that favors the Chinese exchange rate with the yuan due to the strength of their economy.

George, do you mind sharing your source on that information. I'd like to read it.

I agree, well put. The US is actively working to build up a string of democracies in Asia to counter China's weight.

There will never be a war. The relationship is competitive, not adversarial.

Wishful Thinking. Remember Japan?

Tarzan7 Japan attacked us because we refused to sell them oil, because they were building many warships, so they needed to take it from the nearest place, the Dutch colony of Indonesia, they also needed natural rubber from the English plantations in Malaysia and Burma, bottom line raw materials the Western colonial powers had and refused to sell to Japan to force them to decrease the size of their navy and the US fleet was in their way, right there in Guam, Hawaii and the Philippines.

As long as we don't try to asphyxiate the Chinese economy, it won't be a reason for war.

Sounds like what the US is doing in the mid-east and has been doing for decades invading for resources.

Their not wanting to go to war with us. They are going to control this country by buying up our debt and taking our jobs. Greed and corruption in this country is easy for the Chinese to buy policitical leaders now and in the future. No cap on campaign contrubitions and do not have to disclose the source. Have to look at the bank accounts of the judges who passed these new laws.

seriously? Its Clinton's fault? You think airplane blue prints from ANYTHING 10 years ago has ANY relevance today? America DOES need to wake up and get serious with educating our youth, but the American Male is NOT weak! We're STILL the sleeping giant, wake us at your own risk..

wayne the basic F-15 design is 30 years old.

I'm sure they steal a lot from us, through spies, but most of the technical basis for their core military technologies are bought legally from the Russians and produced by the Chinese under licenses the Russians are all-too-keen to provide. In the long-run, we have to assume that anything the Russians have developed (other than nukes, and the Chinese don't want those), the Chinese will be able to procure. They don't have to steal that stuff. Eventually, within a few short years, they will have enough of their own R&D capability as well.

It is widely believed, that the Russian government has authorized Russian engineers and scientists to work directly in Chinese weapons labs.

The J-20 stealth interceptor reportedly uses both a Russian engine (during its test phases.. to be replaced eventually with an indigenous engine) and Russian stealth technology.

Don't blame China for our government and american corporations selling the american public out. You want to charge someone with treason start with CEOs of american companies and the puppets they put in office. They are destroying americas working class. Wages are going down jobs are being lost but prices are going up. They want americans to work for next to nothing and take away benifits while their incomes are spiraling out of control.

China scientists and engineers are lot smarter than their US counterparts. They do not need to copy from others butwill develop top-notch technologies on own effort in no time since the Chinese government has put great emphasis on scientic research and development.

Those top notch technologies in US are well guarded and would not be easily stolen unless you have a traitor like Pollard who stole US secret to a rouge state. China is advancing in high tech areas as evidenced by their creation of the world's fastest super computer, space probe and launching of missiles and satellites. Do not suggest they stole the technology from US.

I had a discussion with my boss at one time. He thought that he should have got a higher percentage of his wage if he was to get a higher bonus than me. He did eventually understand that using the same percentage figure for us both he would still get a higher amount as a bonus as his wage was far higher than mine. I put it to you that 3% of billions is far less than 2% of tens of billions assuming economy growth. That means that their arms expenditure went up not down. Work it out.

I thought I said the same thing.

but we haven't cut back our military budget as proportion of our GDP. China's just increased their's in proportion with their growing economy, while shrinking it's total manpower at the same time (therefore drastically upgrading the quantity of its forces). Unfortunately for us, this is basically an inevitability now. To keep up we will have to raise our proportion of military spending to wartime levels (as proportion of GDP) and keep it there permanently... something no country can afford.

This is a new type of enemy (or rather frenemy) for us: an economically prosperous and highly populous country with a compact (as a % of their total population), all-volunteer military. In the long-run, outspending them would require us to radically transform US society into something that we will not want to recognize today... in other words, a very very bad idea for us.

I don't know what the answers are here.. how we can persuade China to spend progressively LESS on their military as a proportion of their GDP, each year.. knid of a tough one.

Come on California get your mathamatical brain out. If the GDP goes down using the same proportions so does our military budget. If the GDP does go up and we use the same proportions then our military budget goes up. Changing the proportions will make a difference with changing GDP either up or down but you have to know both figures as to whether it went up or down.

I basically was trying to say exactly what you wrote. Either I'm a lousy writer or you didn't do a close enough read of what I wrote. China has endeavored to maintain military spending at 2% of GDP, but their GDP has grown massively and will contine to do so. The US seems to target about 4.6% over time, and our GDP grows more slowly.. perhaps negligibly in the future. If that policy proportion-of-spend/proportion-of-budget policy is maintained, and barring wartime increases on the part of either country, we can expect Chinese military spending to increase more than US military spending, such that total spending in China should eventually equal or exceed US total spending somewhere in the future.

For example, say that the US economy grows at 1.0% per year, average, for 25 years, and at the end of 25 years we spend 4.6%. That's a $17 trillion GDP and $766 billion annual military budget in 25 years time.

Then assume that the Chinese economy grows at 6.0% per year, avearge, for 25 years, and at the end of 25 years they spend 2.0%. That's a $39 trillion GDP and $772 billion annual military budget in 25 years time.

You can argue with those growth rates, and proportion of spend by the respective governments may change as a matter of policy, but I don't see how you can argue the math.

Plus, such a military crisis gets them nothing, even if they don't lose. No, they're not quite like us. They actually think a little bit about costs and benefits.

Excuse me ? Their not good at combat? Kicked the US and allies butt in the Korean war and the US had to retreat. Was the longest and most costly retreat in US history. Hope you noticed we did not win in Vietnam nor would we have won if we continued that insane war. I would really like to see the US solider go up against a military that could drop bombs on them and morters and so forth and see how great the US solider does. Korean War was the last time the american solider has faced a real army and had to retreat. So before you claim how great the US military is today there is no evidence to back that because the US military invades countries that are thrid world and even then they are not winning.

No they don't. Since military spending is by definition domestically focused (except what they buy from the Russians), you have to attach the PPP exchange rate, not the nominal one to much of that spending. It's probably closer to $100 billion, in terms fotheir disclosed numbers. Assuming that REAL Chinese military spending is closer to 2% of their PPP GDP, is probably closer to $180 billion today (2% of $9 trillion). This means that by 2025, their total military spending will be something like $340-$400 billion - similar to the rolling 10 year US average historically.

In the longterm, we simply cannot outspend a country whose GDP is going to grow at 6%+ a year, 2% of which is devoted to their military, with an economy that's going to grow at 2%- a year, with 4.6% of it devoted to the military. That's a recipe for penury.

Remember, China aspires to maintain 1.8 million men and women (right now, they have more than that, but they're in the process of reducing manpower) under arms with a population that'll stabilize at 1.3 billion - costing 2% of their GDP. We have 1.8 million men and women under arms and a population of 300 million (and which might eventually reach 450 million) - costing 4.6% of GDP. Also, they are aiming to have a 100% college-educated military by 2015 or so, and, by the way, to do the obvious math, if their military spending equals our own by 2025, as does their total manpower, spending per soldier will also equal ours.

This is a no win situation for us, irrespective of whether we increase or decrease miilitary spending at the margin. Unless China destabilizes or gets involved in some type of civil war, we have to consider it as inevitable that they will eventually (over 15 years) equal or exceed our military capability. This is bad news, but just because the prognosis is bad, doesn't mean it won't happen.

Joe, I assume you are talking about the retreat from Chosin Reservoir. The 1st Marine Division was surrounded by 10 Chinese divisions, in bad weather so our troops had no air cover. They fought a 70-mile retreating action. During the course of that, four Chinese divisions were destroyed (meaning suffered more than 30 percent losses in military terms). And 1st MarDiv got out from the trap.

Plus, that was 60 years ago. Combat skills atrophy over time. So while we may argue over whether the Chinese kicked our butts or whether we actually kicked theirs, the important thing to remember is no one there is still in uniform.

By the way, the Chinese stood down those four divisions and never stood them back up, out of respect for what the Marines had done.

California - the Chinese are spending $106 billion this year on high-speed rail. Does that really sound like a country preparing for war against the U.S.?

The evidence seems more pointed toward economic competition.

Paul-1,

History isn't a very good indication here. Remember, the better equipped and trained Chinese ground forces were annihilated by the Vietnamese but managed to destroy the Indians. Results against Russian ground forces were mixed in the two border conflicts those two countries fought. Russia 1, China .5. hehe.

Paul-2,

I'm not saying they are. I'm just saying that they will inevitably outspend us, and be able to upgrade quality to levels that will compete with us, even if they keep the 2% spendnig clip and we maintain 4.6%. We need to adjust our policy to reflect this inevitability. I'm not saying that they or we would ever want to fight a war against each other.

Chinese are not good at fighting? Rubbish,Chinese marines beat US marines in drill exercise and will beat US in real war.

Actually Dorf they didn't truly beat the Marines...Nor did they stop the Soviets from beating the hell out of them in the late 80s...Or defeat Vietnam's Army...Or successfully beat the Indians down...Or defeat several pathetically small(relatively) Japanese armies who captured China's entire coastline...or retake Taiwan.

But the Chinese have won an artificial contest, against an enemy that always trains with a hand tied behind its back. Yes that proves...well nothing.

US corruption - companies like KBR and Halliburton - do not increase our military capability. They suck valuable resources, harm our armed forces and detract from our force projection capability, more than they help support mission objectives. They're patronage machines, not force multipliers.

Don't confuse them with the Convair's, Raytheon's and Lockheed Martins of the world, which actually develop new, force multiplying technologies.