US B-52 Bombers Appear in Chinese Military Training Game


In an article entitled “Sword to cut off the head of devils!” the website of China’s state-run newspaper Global Times showed a screenshot with a Chinese soldier pointing a rocket launcher at two B-52 bombers flying overhead. The screenshot is from the latest update of “Glorious Mission,” the official training video game of the People’s Liberation Army, on a level that takes place on the contested Senkaku Islands.

The two B-52 bombers in the game are likely a reference to the two B-52 bombers the U.S. Air Force flew over the region on Nov. 26 after China declared an air defense zone over international waters in the East China Sea. The move was hailed as an act of defiance against growing Chinese aggression.

Glorious Mission was originally called “Glorious Revolution,” when it was first released as a training tool for the Chinese military. It was later made available to the Chinese public and is heavily laden with propaganda for the ruling Chinese Communist Party .

While the game’s level that allows members of the Chinese military to fight the Japanese on the Senkaku Islands was announced in July, the scene of B-52 bombers flying overhead appears to be a recent addition. The two planes are also not the first to represent American forces in the game. From its initial release, the game featured enemy troops with uniforms and vehicles of the United States and its allies.

The Global Times story explains the virtual training mission in excited detail. It begins by painting a verbal scene of the Japanese invasion of China during World War 2, then casts the dispute over the Senkaku Islands in the same light.

It says, translated from Chinese, that in “the setting sun, on the beach beautiful and bustling, greedy Japanese coveted this piece of paradise” and “attempt to plunder our precious cultural heritage.”

It then briefly explains the player’s role in the game, where they’re challenged to defeat the Japanese and “deport the invaders.”

The Senkaku Islands, part of the Ryukyu Island chain, have been under Japanese control since 1895. The islands came under U.S. control after World War II. When the U.S. returned the islands to Japan in 1972, both Mainland China and Taiwan also laid claim to the islands.

Tension has been growing around the Senkaku Islands, called the Diaoyu Islands by China. The Chinese Defense Ministry announced an Air Defense Identification Zone over international waters in the East China Sea on Nov. 23, which included the islands, and threatened “emergency military measures,” against any who opposed it.

The incident has led to several confrontations, including China sending fighter jets to tail American and Japanese planes, as well as naval confrontations. The formation of the air defense zone followed a similar series of confrontations between China and Japan over the islands.

MORE:

Europe Shown Getting Nuked in Promotion for China’s Moon Rover

US Questions China’s Intentions on ‘Air Defense Zone’

Chinese Fighter Jets Tail US, Japanese Planes

Award-Winning Hong Kong Journalist Tells Why Beijing Refused Visa

 



  • Major Bumtickle

    Yawn. Want to cause some grief for the ruling government of China? Then renegotiate our trade deals with them. Include fairness to labor, and strict pollution controls. They’ll have to comply or face the wrath of the multitudes of its citizens whose jobs are on the line due to their expansion.

    • Chuhyona

      That would take strong leadership, which the US is lacking at the moment.

      • MaxAR15

        Obama is busy hanging those drapes again

        • Dutra

          And riding that poofter bicycle around the Rose Garden.

  • Devey Elise

    It amazes me that we continue to allow chinese crap into this country at all. Seriously.

    • Mugzi

      Well, they’re our landlord…kind of hard to tell the landlord to shove it…

      • Major Bumtickle

        England, and France combined, own approximately the amount of U.S debt that China holds, so we might be giving more credit than that which is due.

        • matism

          Heh. You want some entertainment? Look at the amount of US debt that the Fed holds!

    • 69Chiwowwa

      Your greedy repukeagain and democrap masters have planned the Chinafication of America’s retail industry.
      .

  • Nick Vanocur

    Somebody hack into that game and show the Chinese missiles missing the BUFFS.

  • Steven G Smith

    Seriously, this isn’t that big a deal. Hollywood had to CGI the latest version of “Red
    Dawn” to change the Chinese invaders into North Koreans. Besides, no Man
    Portable Air Defense System (MANPADS) is going to touch a B-52 flying at
    altitude.

    • matism

      But B-52s flying at altitude are dead meat to any other air defense missile system. Which is why the BUFFs fly low level missions except when there is no credible threat from same.

      • http://www.itsthepits.org/ San Diego County Citizen

        US Navy and Marine Air will take care of all significant ground-to-air threats well before the heavy bombers show up. And I don’t think the Chinese Navy possess much threat to the US Navy, nor the Japanese Navy for that matter!

        • Freiburg

          Maybe another political contribution to the Clintons by the PLA will produce the same results as before – massive transfer of U.S. technology to assist PRC military and space efforts. Hillary Rod-Dam Clinton is botoxed and clean shaven and ready to complete the ongoing destruction of the U.S. as a world power.

      • Steven G Smith

        B-52 technology has come a long way since Vietnam, but B-52s would only be used after other systems have removed or degraded a potential foes air defense capabilities; however, since we’re talking about China the threat of ICBMs is more of a worry, especially when considering their growing space program and the associated rocket technologies. Besides, the topic here is a video game made by the Chinese. They can have their missiles do anything they want or imagine.

    • jerseydave

      Well, one thing worth considering, besides the point about high flight which is spot on, is that the Chinese are so big in world markets that China had to CGI them out of the movie. That’s real power to shape public opinions. China would be smarter to use that and economic power, instead of threatening islands and such, but logic and war fever can be two different things. Hopefully China realizes it is much better to keep making huge profits economically than rattle war drums.

  • Chuhyona

    John Kerry is vacationing in the Mekong Delta, reminiscing on the 3 1/2 months he spent in Active Duty with his personal photographer. I’m sure if he has time after he writes up a couple of more Purple Heart recommendations, he will talk to the ChiComs. Is that Jane Fonda’s hand holding the missile launcher ?

    • Melvin Leppla

      John Kerry and Jane Fonda are the lowest form of human life, they’re even below cow manure.
      I apologize I had forgotten that John Kerry is speaks French. “Le Bovine Poo Poo”

      • Freiburg

        At least bovine crap has a useful purpose . . .

      • jerseydave

        Ooh let’s put Jane Fonda in a B-52 and para drop her on China if there’s a war, that will fix them.

    • Anonamous Guy

      Did he shoot himself again to get another medal he claimed he threw over the wall at the White House?

      • CharlestonBoy

        Actually, he’s there because he wants to “spen{d} Christmas Day in Cambodia” a second time.

    • Robert Mull

      Maybe the reason he went there was they are making a video game and they needed him in his little boat shooting himself in the azz lol

      • magic1114

        And he’s wishing “Grenade Boy” were there with him so they could reminisce over his missing legs…

  • Torontoisthecenteriftheworld

    How many American video games portray Russian, Chinese military as the enemies? This is just retribution in the gaming world.

  • looneytoonsindville

    I have seen similar5 but American training video games where Chinese Premier “Dung Pu Shiit” was filmed swallowing a grenade with the pin pulled. Similar results.

  • M T

    Both China and Russia are still nursing their sore and bleeding butt-hurts over losing the Cold War. The propaganda makes their masses more hostile to the West, than their leaders are.

  • cop

    Battlefield 4 lets you play as chinese against americans. Its a game.

    • FFF

      The difference is that BF4 is entertainment and the game in this article is for military training.

  • adbirds

    That’s nothing. At SUKHOI.ORG you can download a corporate promotional video of Sukhoi “Flankers” shooting down B52s.

    • jerseydave

      They have to get at least two to even the score, in Vietnam B-52 tail gunners took down two migs for no air to air losses in return.

      I won’t even mention the edge the AD-1 Skyraider has on them…. ;)

      Seriously, though, the idea of major power vs. major power conflicts again isn’t that fun. Still, we must be vigilant, keeping a balance of forces is key to peace, Ronnie Reagan style.

      • ilyas252

        right up there with trickle down sucker

      • adbirds

        My only point is that Sukhoi has a video using B52 as the enemy aircraft since they market their Flaker series fighter jets and weapons systems to our potential enemies. It’s common sense and not that surprising. You can find the well developed video download on their gallery page.

  • caligula

    China is by no means a lightweight opponent, but they are currently heavily outmatched by the USA in every aspect of the military from hardware to technologies. keep in mind they just unveiled their first aircraft carrier and finally landed something on the moon. they are getting more advanced, but are still decades behind.

    If the two countries went to war head-to-head tomorrow without using nukes, and rest assured they are building up for such a conflict, the USA would destroy them fairly easily. the ONLY thing they have going for them, which allows them to use such aggressive and bombastic language and propaganda, is the fact that they indeed have those nukes.

    • CharlestonBoy

      You are severely delusional.

      • caligula

        LOL. not really. but i appreciate your specificity.

      • http://www.itsthepits.org/ San Diego County Citizen

        And you apparently have no realistic assessment of Chinese military capability nor their long term Geo-political goals. One aircraft carrier does not a Navy make. Their airlift capability is even worse. The only threat the Chinese have, are nukes, which is why we should turn both North Korea and Iran into glow-in -the-dark glass parking lots sooner than later.

        • John Qunicy

          While it is true that the ChiCom PLA cannot project its power effectively beyond it’s borders…it would be very difficult, indeed, to fight a ground war, in China, against (even a poorly equipped) PLA. 1 billion soldiers is a lot of soldiers.

          But it would be fun to try….so long as every American liberal fought on the side of the Chinese. Lots of them have needed shootin’ for a long, long time.

        • CharlestonBoy

          HA!
          Their “long term Geo {sic}-political goals”?
          Within the next two years, they are going to make a run against the Japanese for the Senkaku island chain.
          Just last week, a Chinese amphib ship blocked the course of a US Navy destroyer.
          Also last week, B-52s were ordered out of what the Chinese consider their own airspace, and they complied.
          As to “capability”, their new Jin-class missle subs can hit the US from 9000 miles out.
          The J-20 stealth fighter beats anything the Russkies have and would give an F-22 a run for its money.
          They also have the world’s largest standing army.
          Then again, folks like you dismissed them before Korea turned into a bloodletting and their involvement in ‘Nam cost us thousands of lives.
          They’re definitely not afraid of us.
          And thanks to the “decisiveness” of our CIC, they don’t have to be.

      • Royg

        This person forgets that we have the weakest leaders in all of American history. Our butts are hanging out!

      • Bill Gryan

        His assessment is correct at this moment in time.

        But 20 years from now, when all of us are 300 pounds and breathing heavily from the effort of cashing our welfare checks, China will be a serious opponent.

  • TantohadGPS

    His name is Sum Ting Wong.

    • CharlestonBoy

      Old, old, old joke.

  • Kooby Mulfa

    The fix is to send more jobs to China.

  • Bob Coco

    A B-52 would not be that low over China.

  • Robert Mull

    Maybe we should have a game where we can see their slanted eyes. OH wait that would be racists. But I could care less.

  • Plep

    If our bombers fly that close to the ground they can probably be brought down with nerf guns.

  • Ruckweiler

    The Red Chinese WANT a brawl. They think that the Korean War validated their beliefs/tactics. The Communist leadership would be willing to lose 300-400 million in a war as the cost of doing business as long as it furthered their long term goals. A Communist can’t change his stripes.

    • Kortney Dunkle

      I tend to agree. We’d better prepare for war whether we like it or not, it is being
      forced upon us. I blame a lot of factors but the Chinese look at our weak ass
      President, Hollywood Perversion, our racial tension, our debt load and poor
      economy as indicators of their rise and our vulnerablitliy. They won’t survive a
      nuclear exchange (even if they fire first), but I don’t think they believe that.
      Very alarming situation and most Americans are preoccuplied with the NFL, and NCAA. We have been dumbed down and have lost of manufacturing base. The
      Chinese know it. The mainstream media will tone down the reality of this threat.
      We may wake up dead thanks to our traitorous media.

      • ilyas252

        you are a prime example of that dumbing down

        • Kortney Dunkle

          And just how is that ? I could take you in any geopolitical debate bud. Our advisaries are conservative
          by nature, they are chagrinned by what they see in our society. To you it may not be weakness, but to them
          it sure as hell is, trust me.

          • ilyas252

            you think you could take me in any geopolitcal debate! hahaha!
            try this, read your first post. read it again. one more time with feeling. get the mop and bucjet, don’t feel embarrassed, even if it’s a pathetic first try.
            i used to teach high school what you wrote, would not even my ‘dumb’ year 10 class would stoop so low.

    • ilyas252

      neither can a captitalist. time to join the 21st s.

  • GI Joe

    With us owing them trillions, leave it to the stupid Chinese to want to cut the head off of the enemy.

  • HosedInAmerica

    What’s all the heartburn with this? The Chi-Comms are our friends and trading partners! Every American politician and corporate lacky who actively participated in and/or advocated the scam called “Free Trade” by exporting American technology to Red China is directly responsible for Red Chinese aggression. They’re getting ready to fire the 55,000 factories we’ve exported to Red China back to us on the missiles that we “Free Traded” the technology to them.

  • http://www.itsthepits.org/ San Diego County Citizen

    The progressives, statists and communists always need to manufacture a villain to blame for their own failures: China, North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, and Obama’s USA.
    Death to Tyrants!

    • John Qunicy

      You forgot the Evil War Tyrant, George Bush. He’s to blame for: the Franco-Prussian War, the War of 1812, the War of the Roses, the Peloponesian War, the Boer War, the War on Womyn, the War between the Empire and the Jedi Knights…and toe fungus.

      • jerseydave

        ROFL! Nicely done.

      • RedGA

        You forgot the Bush Doctrine, global war on terror, and endless regime changes that get us deeper in the mire.

  • Froddoislost

    HA HA . . . once again the Chinese prove to be stupid beyond any notion we might have had for them.

    Gonna shoot down the two B52′s with a shoulder fired rocket? The B52s? Within just a couple thousand feet of the ground forces . . .

    Yeah, whatever man.

    Put it right up there with your pissant little “stealth” fighter aircraft with afterburners, your WWII era, obsolete in Russia a decade before you bought it aircraft carrier and your ridiculously noisy and slow “boomers” that are about as useful in Naval defense as the Monitor or Merrimack would be today. And just about as capable of launching ICBMs.

    Gotta love them Chinese.

    “We maka big problem for round eye devil. Dey no no what hita dem when we shoot dem wif our magical dragon gun . . . den dey have to stop fighting for shore!!” “Thanka God lasta democrat president sewla us missile technology so we can nuke dem back!!”

    • laguna

      You are a fool. China is much stronger than you think…

      • jerseydave

        China’s power is in the debt they own of ours, but ours is in the massive amounts of money China makes trading with us. It is insane for the Chinese to want war over the Senkakus or any other thing, they do too well as it is just selling stuff and growing their economy and military with the profits. It’s time to chill on the testosterone overload and for the Chinese gov’t to say “Dude let’s just keep selling whole Walmarts full of stuff to the USA.”

      • Bruiser in Houston

        No laguna, they really aren’t. Their hardware is at least a generation behind ours, especially their Navy. While we’ve been fighting a land war, and developing new weapons… they haven’t.
        What do they have? A lot of screaming infantrymen with rifles, an air defense air force, and a brownwater Navy.

      • Froddoislost

        Yes yes, a couple billion peasants with pitchforks and a small nuclear arsenal.

        They are the fools; for more than two decades they have shipped a large portion of the Gross National Product to the United States in return for pieces of paper that say we owe them other pieces of paper.

        They are going to be mighty surprised when they find out all those little green pieces of paper we promised to pay them aren’t worth a load of bread.

        Communists are a bit thin on economics. Chinese are a bit thin on strategic military thinking, as evidenced by their interest in a couple rocks in the western Pacific and their repeated and childish attempts to demonstrate their military superiority.

        5 minutes. They can take LA, we would decimate their entire country back to the stone age and leave their urban areas uninhabitable. Over a couple of rocks in the western Pacific.

        What a bunch of maroons.

  • warpsix

    The Chinese Slave workers make Good crap these days. Buy with confidence, the Profits from what you buy today will be turned into Bombs to be used against us tomorrow.

  • IdolHanz

    WHY ARE THE CHINESE BECOMING BELLICOSE? The United States weak dollar policy is hurting them.

  • IdolHanz

    Buff’s won’t fly to a fight first—-that will be B-2′s and B-1′s. In a strategic role, Buff’s will use standoff weapons—cruise missiles and the US Navy’s subs would be doing the same.

  • IdolHanz

    ANSWER THE QUESTION—-”Why Are the Chinese Becoming Bellicose Now?”

    • John Qunicy

      I’ll try…”Because they perceive Obama is a weak “leader” and know he can be intimidated.”

      Is that the correct answer?

    • Doug

      Because our own greed has come back to haunt us. We are funding the very war machine that will drop bombs on us. American corporate greed sent the manufacturing engine of our economy off shore to China which gave them access to our entire industrial base. They know, and we know damn well that we couldn’t ramp up fast enough to war manufacturer what we needed to fight a war with them with even if we wanted to. Have you started learning Mandarin yet? #scaryshit #wakeupamerica

      • HosedInAmerica

        You nailed it Doug! Like I said every politician and corporate lackey who has a hand in this “Free Trade” insanity is repsonsible for this. End “Free Trade” NOW!

        • jerseydave

          Of course the other side of the equation is, if Americans stopped buying their stuff, their economy would implode. So peace makes a heck of a lot more sense for everyone.

          • Doug

            The problem with the PRC is their military industrial complex (like ours) has a grip around the throats of their politicians. If the Generals finish their armament ramp up and think it’s a good time to go to war and strike first you can bet the politicians are not going to get in the way of the guys with the guns.

      • Grutch

        I look forward to the day they do. I hope they start with Los Angeles and San Francisco.

        • RedGA

          They own both. Why would they bomb what they already own?

          • Bruiser in Houston

            Urban renewal, if you catch my drift.

          • Doug

            Technically they don’t “own” us. China owns about 5 Trillion of the 16 trillion public debt. So what better way to literally have a “fire sale” than to set the USA on fire. Then they just march in and take over. No purchase necessary when you demolish a country with nuke. Of course they also wouldn’t be able to inhabit the nuked parts for about 100 years. It depends on how much blowback they’re willing to deal with aka. “collateral damage”

      • 94c2500

        “Attention Wal-Mart shoppers, donations to the Chi-Com military now being accepted at your nearest checkout lane.” …

        • Doug

          You know I had that same after thought right after I posted my original comment. lol

    • Bruiser in Houston

      Because they know Obama won’t respond.

    • ilyas252

      oil; both sides want it.

      • Joda

        Yup, it’s always about money. Oil = industrial production = money

        • ilyas252

          =self righteous posturing= stupid people swallowing=war.
          it’s what the mic want, the world’s too peaceful now, no sabre rattler in the white house.

          • Joda

            and war = even more money. Access to massive oil reserves is needed for the war effort. And the cycle continues…

          • ilyas252

            orwell said something similar, keep the war going, it’s the con trick, point the fiinger, keep the public occupied, minds away from their game

          • Joda

            The public don’t even care to know the game, that’s the trouble we’re in. It’s becoming obvious that there is a game but still it continues. The main way they keep people ignorant and preoccupied is with sports, celebrity culture, whatever people fill their lives with, and that is not an accident. They won’t know what hit them.

          • ilyas252

            that’s the two way conundrum, you’ve got an elite who push bullshit and you’ve got a public who revel in it. some poor choices all round.
            they do act all surprised, shocked and horrified, don’t they?

  • John Qunicy

    Where, oh, where is the liberal hand-wringing over the Glorious Socialist State’s war mongering? C’mon libs…I know you’re out there….surely you can find SOME way to blame Bush for the saber rattling coming from the PRC.

    • RedGA

      Ummm…saber rattling has come from the PRC for a while. Are you seriously blaming Obama for this training video for their military?

    • ilyas252

      do some searching on the history of the islands. go on do a first in your life, get an education.

  • magic1114

    If that picture were a real scenario it would be spine chilling. The only bright spot would be that the crew members that managed to bail out would always look good while in the POW camp. If China has nothing else at least they have an abundance of good laundrymen!

    • jerseydave

      Well, also the B-52s would probably be flying a lot higher, out of range of any shoulder fired weapon, and that infantryman might well find himself staring up at a lot of small black dots that are getting bigger. I can’t imagine being under an “Arc Light” run would be too much fun.

      Will the Chinese gov’t please wake up and realize they do a lot better selling Americans stuff and making huge tons of money than fighting over any silly islands?

      • Woodrow D Woodpecker

        they need oil

  • tpalya

    Wonder if Obama is ever going to get tired of being punk’d by our enemies?

    • burned_out

      The pillow biter loves it!

      • ArtieBobo

        Fart knocking SOB….

    • ilyas252

      averted war in syria and removed chemical weapons without firing a single shot. how’s bushy’s war in irag still going?

      • crazyJsmith

        Are you serious? It was outright public outrage at the thought of another war along with the British Gov’t voting it down – IT HAD NOTHING to do with a strategic decision made by Obama – that SOB wanted us to fight a limited war with Syria and his Boy John Kerry was throwing a damn hissy fit that he couldn’t start a war there. It was one of the few recent cases where the people actually rose up and said no to the politicians, including your Trojan Horse Obama, You are completely ignorant and blinded by your ridiculous political attachment. Bush was horrendous and Obama has taken his lead – this is so much more serious than Red team Blue team – stop being a part of the problem

        • ilyas252

          ever heard of unilateral action, bushy’s little tactic?

          obama pretended he was doing the same, the russians and the syrian nut job caved in and that wasn’t a strategic decision?
          obama’s a great president, comparing him to bush tells me your’e just another boring right wing nihilst with pretensions to neutrality.

  • Crewjobs

    I wonder if there is a scene in the video game where the Chinese aircraft carrier is sunk by torpedoes fired from one of the U.S. Navy’s Virginia class attack submarines?

    • Woodrow D Woodpecker

      or a hand grenade thrown from a row boat !

      • Bill Gryan

        The carrier does say “Made in China” on the bottom, after all.

        • Bruiser in Houston

          Actually, their carrier was a refurbished Soviet era model.

    • Bruiser in Houston

      Or a few dozen Walleyes fired off by a squadron of Plastic Bugs (F-18s).

  • Red Wolf

    In the meantime: Battlefield 4…

  • JJ

    Obama is America’s Commander in Chief. Be afraid Americans. Be very afraid.

  • formerusaf

    I can’t wait to see their new version “Glorious Revolution” once the Obama Administration sends the PLA the USAF’s operational tactics within new ADIZ.

  • IRI33T

    I love kickin’ Chinese butt. History will provide more targets of opportunity provided by Asian parents.
    Thank you on behalf of all ammunition and weapons systems manufacturers.

    • Frank

      You’re either 8 years old or you’re a complete failure at life. Find something productive to do please.

      • rataezo

        Hes just trolling, nobody can be that stupid but then again its something a right wing loon would say. They are all talk anyway.

    • IRI33T

      Ahhh whats wrong you little traitors?? DOn’t like it when a REAL AMERICAN stands up?

      TO frickin BAD, you’re going to get a lot more of it in the future.

  • ilyas252

    before you war mongering self righteous dopes continue blathering as kyoura simple question: how much do i know about the history of these islands?

    perhaps then you could progress to the next level, i should use my search engine instead of my mouth…

    once you’ve done that you could then ask yourself the next question; why didn’t the media tell me are they as ignorant as me?

  • rataezo

    The US military does the same thing.

  • Woodrow D Woodpecker

    I went to China two years ago. At night on TV about 5 channels show movie / soaps that are about the Chinese (portrayed by handsome male actors and beautiful Chinese actresses) fighting wars against invaders, presumably Japanese (played by ugly bucktoothed stupid looking actors and actresses). The Chinese are heavily propagandized.

    • ilyas252

      unlike americans australians and brits. murdoch much?

      • ReluctorDominatus

        Please…the only propaganda you see comes from the WH and their willing pets in the media.

        • ilyas252

          care to elaborate? i’m sure fox keeps you well supplied. how’s the garden?

  • Bruiser in Houston

    Harpoon did it better, fifteen years ago.

  • Bruiser in Houston

    Newsflash for our little Chinese friends. Buffs don’t fly low enough for you to aim a rocket launcher at one. They’ll either send a hundred cruise missiles from international waters, or if on iron bomb duty they’ll fly over you at thirty feet, following terrain, until they pop up and ruin your day.
    Worse, if it is a B-2, you’ll NEVER see it. Hahahahahahahahahaha

  • WrapR

    Yeah..right ….

    I’ve used some of the MADE in CHINA electronic s h i t …
    I d be surprised if the “rocket launcher”: did not also sub as a Microwave to warm rice with ….

    C G S

    Chinese Guidance systems ….It s not quality ..it s quantity …. round eye …

  • Geoffrey_Britain

    Those B-52′s are flying just a bit low…and I guess they worry the Chinese high command.

  • True Blue

    I see a lot of chanting about how China wouldn’t stand a chance, and how “one aircraft carrier doesn’t make a Navy.”
    Well, I have some news for you, it isn’t One old Russian Carrier, it is 5 (five) Carriers the ChiComs have bought in the past few years, including the HMS Invincible; several they “claim” are “night clubs” They have also been building cruise missiles designed specifically to outwit out own Aircraft Carrier’s defense systems -by moving at 25 times the speed of sound.
    And their first move would obviously be to dump the trillions of dollars of American debt they own onto the market -which would crash our pathetic economy overnight and bring on prices of around $100.00 for a SLICE (not a loaf) of bread.
    Speaking of the economy, a lot of people seem to think that China is dependent on us to buy their worthless crap- got news for you, their industry could convert to a war footing overnight without a hiccup. Remember their GOVERNMENT OWNS all those industries anyway. What do they care if they are making bombs or consumer junk -that they LOAN us the money to buy?
    Right now, we are looking at 1939 all over again -only All of our industry has been killed or driven offshore and into our enemies arms and Stalin has purged Our military of its best and brightest. With 17 TRILLION in debt, China knows it is only a matter of time before we go Greece and default, meanwhile, they are eyeballing the entire Pacific and Indian Ocean region and licking their lips.
    As for the Nuclear talk; simple math -they already outnumber us 300 million to 2 BILLION; almost 7 to 1 and they have Always considered their population “disposable”. What, three or four years ago they lifted the “one child per couple” rule? Why would they do that except to build up an even greater surplus population, to replace casualties?
    Pull your head out of the sand and try to realize the very serious threat in the air -especially with all the warlike rhetoric coming from Chinese news agencies (which are ALL Government run…)
    It will probably start with Korea and escalate FAST from there.

    • WrapR

      Nuclear war is bad for business .
      Kill the goose that lays the golden egg and ..China… stuck holding the bag ..of debt.
      Do the math …..

      DO the math again and you will also find ….of the 2 billion people in china ..

      one billion nine hundred and ninety nine thousand and nine hundred …
      are toothless non English rice farmers in the countryside…

      of the remaining ….
      99.9% of those are prisoners ( workers) at slave labor camps (factories)

      That leaves .1 % with teeth , English and a diet more diverse than rice…and dog meat and a real JOB ..worker for DADS prison (factory) as upper management with a Harvard Degree in Business..

      • True Blue

        Our “Goose” doesn’t lay “golden eggs” it lays Federal Reserve Notes -which are worth EXACTLY the paper an ink they are printed from. Hell, they DO NOT CARE how many pieces of worthless fiat paper we “owe” them, it is Always about geopolitical POWER. Think Japan gave a damn about scraps of toilet paper when they wanted more territory and raw materials? A toothless rice farmer stops a bullet as well as you do -and cheaper.
        And -Since when do Maoist Communists care about anything being “bad for business”? What is money good for? Power; that is the endgame here. Power, pure and simple, and China wants it.
        Seriously, I am trying like hell to warn you, but you want to argue about it…. do as you please.

        • WrapR

          Great..so ..a land locked army ..and a NAVY of five decommissioned carriers from Russia ..makes ..makes …..makes a what ?

          Makes for a bunch of Hungry short angry yellow people walking around eating rice and waiting for a ride on one of five boats to the US mainland ….

          • Jonathan

            imo Chinese government cares little for their own people who are expendable and a human resource.

          • WrapR

            Sure…but….they will have to die in China as there is no way to move them in mass numbers ..not without them being blown to little tiny glowing bits of green while in blue water ….

          • Andrew Dyson

            There are plenty of ways to move them. You are forgetting the merchant ships. Thousands of them. They don’t have to ship them on war ships.

          • WrapR

            Right..is there any part of the Ocean you think the US navy can engage merchant ships ?
            How many Merchant ships would it take to go toe to toe with an aircraft carrier group?

          • Andrew Dyson

            They will be a little busy taking on the numerically superior Chinese navy. In 10 years given the US navies draw down and the Chinese navies increasing purchase of blue navy war ships, it will not even be close.

          • WrapR

            So..the Chinese are going to use 5 carriers and some merchant ships to cross the ocean in secret…shhhhh…
            and then invade…Los Angles?

            I was in Hongcouver Kanaduh ….I d say the Chinese best bet is to use Canadian immigration and Chinese eateries in Kanaduh …to move the red Chinese army into position as Kitchen help….in Hongcouver…

            Then they just have to use a BC fairy to do them ….

            I’m sure I meant BC ferry …..like gay Chinese enjoy having sex with Canadian men ..did you see that one gay Canadian post a video of himself eating his Chinese boyfriend?

            .carful when using kanaduh …eh :)

          • Andrew Dyson

            In 10 years they could do it in the open given the current rate of the us military decline and the chinese military increase.

          • WrapR

            No..not Even France wants China to invade the US …..England would at least send a prince to take a look

          • Andrew Dyson

            England has less warships now than any time since Elizabeth the first.

          • WrapR

            I know this is tough to believe ..having tried to kill mass numbers of cockroaches myself ….but..even a french nuclear weapon dropped in the middle of several thousand chinese merchant ships
            full of little angry yellow fellows….
            will turn them all green ..make them easier to see at night for strafing runs :)

            Not to be outdone ..the English would then also drop a Nuclear weapon on the Chinese

          • Andrew Dyson

            They chinesse also have nukes. Think like this is why the aircraft were all neatly parked on the runways in pearl harbour on 7/12/1941

          • WrapR

            Yeah…anyone with a nuke is old school frankly…thats why china might do better attacking Europe…

            Area denial is where it s at using , ” digital guns” firing billions of round per minute . Having a large formation when confronting such weapons is a hindrance…good luck

      • Jonathan

        The chinese can use that debt as a pretext for war. they would then seek to invade the usa and take their payment in hard assets rather than paper money.

        • WrapR

          I want to see those invasion plans….Sneak attack across which ocean?
          They would have to convince RUSSIA and Canada to let them use their Territory for a land movement of the billions it would take to occupy the US

          The supply chain would be long ..especially if they nuked the US heartland …a long supply chain is vulnerable ….

          The Red Chinese army can only hold ground on their home turf.

        • Asian Conscience

          Dont think they are that keen. Never heard of notion of banker attacking their own investment. They cant afford to demographically anyways, not with their single child policy army.

      • Asian Conscience

        umm how does english have anything to do with living standard? Btw most people live in the city. Lol wtf? Slave camp? Can you quote your source?

  • Diocletian

    The real threat to the U.S. is economic not military. The U.S. has allowed corrupt bankers and corporations tarnish the reputation of this nation.

    Corporate bankers committed mortgage fraud that bankrupted Europe and never were prosecuted. U.S. corporation continue to commit fraud and use corrupt practices like Blackstone.

    German citizens were pointing to John Corzine as an example of corporate theft that is not prosecuted. A reason not to leave their gold in U.S. hands.

    The U.S. corruption has given every nation a reason to take a chance that China couldn’t be worse.

    • Carl Sagan’s Bong

      The real threat to the US is starting to trend military too. Obama has eviscerated top leadership, 12 or more top generals, admirals, and other top commanders have been fired under this guy’s watch ( a conservative estimate: that’s about 300 combined years of military experience that isn’t leading the military anymore), along with 200 or so officers throughout command structures.

      This guy has weakened the country both militarily and economically. We’re in dire straits all around.

      • ReluctorDominatus

        Kind of like Stalin did with his military eh?

  • Jonathan

    russia is more dangerous imo

    • Carl Sagan’s Bong

      Good thing they don’t have overlapping ideologies.

      Oh…

      • Jonathan

        china is a threat. im thinking russian chinese alliance could be real bad.

        • Carl Sagan’s Bong

          Like WWIII bad. Had we a strong leader, we wouldn’t have gotten to this point. With 3 more years of this guy and another year of a super senate of D’s, we’re in pretty big trouble.

          • Jonathan

            america would burn, nuclear attacks, government already expects this with DUMBS deep underground miilitary bases. anyway what about us? good riddance as far as they are concerned. they can come out of their holes and declare marital law and have total control like they want.

          • Jonathan

            so they can pose as saviors when they provoked the attacks and did nothing to stop them and they can bring about their NWO. out of ashes the pheonix rises. that is their insane plan. i think it will back fire big time and they will not be able to defeat the commies as easily as they suppose. they will pay for their treason and letting america be destroyed.

            this is just my guess work and speculation. this is hopefully all wrong. i surely hope so.

        • Kortney Dunkle

          We might be in serious trouble and all indications are that they would side against us. Both countries pulling some
          ham handed s**t, just like Japan did in the 30s.

  • OdummiePOSusurper.

    Do you people know that china has copies of B52 planes and they imitate the real ones . So guess what The Chinese could down some fake B52′s to make a crisis. The united states has copies of Russian and Chinese planes too.

    • capoprimo

      Do you realize that the B-52′s are darn as old as I am and I’m an old man!

  • garseeya

    Don’t forget the drones.

  • Andrew Dyson

    Nobody on the planet is increasing their military in terms of spending and technology faster than the Red Chinese. They have one carrier group now, but could mass produce them in very short order. They can ship hundreds of thousands of men and vehicles with a complete supply line with their thousands of civilian cargo ships. People forget that civilian ships and aircraft are quite easily converted for military transportation.

    • ReluctorDominatus

      And all are extremely vulnerable without protective screening warships. I remember around 1990 when an assessment was done US vs. USSR naval conflict…the assessment was that the soviet navy would have a short exciting life. Same with the Chinese in afraid…even with ten years of producing more targets.

      After punching a hole in the defensive screen I know I wouldn’t want to be waving my little red book on board one of those converted civilian ships.

    • JohnFalcigie

      Do you really think their cargo ships loaded with soldiers could make it past our Navy and Air Force? And If they pulled that off, do you really think our Army and national guard could not handle them?

      But if they could pull all that off. what do you think would happen when they faced 100 million armed citizens of America? Talk about a Chinese Vietnam….

  • JohnFalcigie

    Some of you are highly misinformed…..

    China has 1 training carrier and are planning on building 5. They have no naval aviation history, the US has 70 years of it. China’s recent trials with J-15 failed, that means they do not even have suitable fighter Jet that can land on one. The US has 1000′s of 5th Generation fighter-jets that routinely land on them and can shoot down chinese Fighters from 30-40 miles away with BVR radar-guided missiles. China’s air force is loaded with less advanced 3rd & 4th generation fighters jets that do not have air-to-air missiles that can strike you from 30 to 40 miles away.

    The US has 19 Aircraft Carriers, 10 are the nimitz-calss supercarriers, that carry 90 fighter jets and 9 are WASP-class and carry a mix of helicopters & planes. Each one of the 10 Nimitz Class carriers are 100-110 tonnage, China’s sole carrier is 60 tonnage and currently does not have a single tested fighter jet they can use in a real conflict.

    The US has 10 carrier strike groups, each one has a Nimitz Class carrier, and are usually accompanied by Destroyers, Frigates, submarines, guided missile carriers and sometimes a WASP aircraft Carrier. Since China doesn’t have a true battle ready aircraft carrier, they don’t have a strike group, just battlegroups. The US strike groups are all networked with Aegis anti-missile systems, which can handle pretty much anything China tries to throw at them. Sorry USA haters, but China’s Navy would be destroyed quickly if decided to tango with the US Navy.

    And those of you who are worried about the DF-21 radar guided Anti-carrier missile. Its never been tested on a maritime target, only on land. Neither has it been tested against our highly advanced radar jamming technology (ask Pakistan how we entered 2 Chinooks into their territory during the OSB Seal Team 6 operation without them knowing.) These missies have not even been tested against our missile defenses. And in a few years the new Laser mounted anti-missile defense will be in operation, goto youtube if you want to see it shootdown a drone in a recent test.

    Sorry China, you can test your boundaries like a little kid all you want, but you know darn well the reason you have never attacked Taiwan or Japan is because the US would destroy your Navy. And do you think the US will keep paying its debt to you if you get in a war with us?

    • Andrew Dyson

      And last year they didn’t have any naval air power. We are drawing down, they are building up. Do the math.

      • JohnFalcigie

        Drawing down, Do the math? Our military budget is $419billion, China’s is $30 billion. We have 2 new aircraft carriers under construction. We have the new F-35 5th generation stealth fighters in production right now, 100 have been built and 300 are more are being built. We have 192 F-22 stealth fighters. China has 1 untested stealth fighter jet.

        • Andrew Dyson

          China has 5 carriers under construction and half the parts for the jets jets are made in china.

          • JohnFalcigie

            They actually only have 4 under construction, each one is half the size of the US’s carriers. The fighter jets are what make a aircraft carrier, not the ship and our fighters are way more advanced. And for the record only some military parts are made in China, the aircraft, ships and missile technology are made in America.

    • Vince Foster

      0bamao is fixing that quickly.

      • JohnFalcigie

        can’t disagree with you there, but the house has slowed his foolish intent down some.

      • Lance Wagstaffe

        I’m always amazed at the level of vitriol directed at the President who is successfully cleaning up the steaming mess left on Uncle Sam’s living room rug by the Bush administration…and doing it in defiance of a GOP scorched earth policy comprised of opposing everything, even measures it previously approved or authored.

    • Kortney Dunkle

      You are very well informed. Impressive. Still, they appear itching for fight and have suggested the use of Nukes as an equalizer.
      They’ re quite belicose.

      • JohnFalcigie

        I would not worry, we still have enough nukes to destroy the the world twice. As Ronald Reagan put it, Mutually Assured Destruction if a nation fires one. Plus China does not have nearly as many and sooner or later the Laser missile systems will be in place.

        • ReluctorDominatus

          Mid course defensive missiles are being expanded and the Navy is becoming very adept with the newest generation SM2 configurations…and that does not count the newest evolution of ground based mobile interceptors such as THAAD and others. ICBM’s may be obsolete within the next decade.

    • Templar8

      There’s no question that China is far back of the US in military capability. But it is virtually impossible to keep that gap with the US skitttering between go and slow on development.
      China will keep a steady pace of modernization, I am quite sure. Remember the Tortoise and the Hare? If we don’t keep to our knitting, we become the Hare.

      • JohnFalcigie

        I agree, I just think we are staying on top, judging by our military budget being $419 billion and theirs is $30 billion, we are still are staying way ahead of the curv. I know their labor is cheaper, but almost everything they do is a rip off of foreign technology. The so-called carrier killer is still just a modified Russian missile. Their unproven stealth jet is believed my many military analysts to be an attempted copy of our stealh technology. And the J-15 appears to be a backwards engineered Russian Mig, which failed its carrier trials, which proves trying to rip-off technology does not always prove to be proficient.

    • RealityCheck

      Sometimes, it’s frustrating. We live in a time when very few of our young men ever serve their country, in the military or any other way. But we have so many young military strategy “experts”, often wrong, but never in doubt. And, so many of them are left-leaning, politically, for some irrational reason, which means they’re anti-establishment, which translates into anti-US Military. The irony is that it’s the military that enables them to live in a country like the USA.

      • JohnFalcigie

        I love my country, I am hoping for a 2014 Senate victory against the left!

        • Flechette

          2014 is critical. If conservatives (note that I do not necessarily mean “Republicans” as many are just RINOs) do not get control of at least part of the government we are toast.

          The lefties will gladly sell out their own country for promises of kinder, gentler Socialism to run everything.

          • JohnFalcigie

            Agreed!

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            Conservatives in the US have a long, well-documented history of spilling the blood of American soldiers in support of multinational corporations. Only the most deluded and uninformed believe otherwise.

            Conservatism has failed. The only questions remaining are how long it will take for the victims of right wing propaganda to wake up, and whether they’ll do so in time to save the United States from yet another conservative-led military disaster like Iraq.

          • JohnFalcigie

            Liberals are like HIV, they destroy the American immune system and kill us from within

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            Ah, yes…another failed conservative analogy. Red States are America’s welfare queens, sucking the system dry even as their willfully-ignorant denizens loudly proclaim their independence. Hard-working Blue State residents are all that stand between the US and complete economic disaster. If they could get rid of all the conservative layabouts, the United States would once again be great.

            http://www.businessinsider.com/red-states-are-welfare-queens-2011-8

          • JohnFalcigie

            Actually I am well aware of that study…. It omits one important fact. Social Security is not welfare and those numbers include Social Security payouts. Florida and other low cost of living states are popular destinations for retirees on a fixed budget. If you subtract Social Security payments, almost all of those states are getting about what they put in.

            Its nice to peddle propaganda to uninformed individuals, so go back to HUFFINGTION POST where they eat up your half-truths

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            Oh, there’s far more than just that one study…as you know perfectly well. And I’m sure you’d like to disallow just about anything that points out what a drag the Red States have been on America.

            So let’s look at some facts. Red States are at the bottom of the heap in terms of education, wages, health, and a ton of other indicators of general success. And a lot of those states, contrary to what you say, aren’t big targets for retirees. Florida is. Mississippi? Alabama? Not so much.

            Forbes Magazine, which is hardly a bastion of liberal propagandists, analyzed 22 health indicators, many concerning children (who aren’t for the most part “retirees on a fixed budget”). Red States were at the bottom.

            The teen birth rate in Red States is disproportionately high…and guess who winds up paying the tab when babies have babies? Hint: the answer will have “blue” in it.

            Red States have higher crime rates, and crime is definitely NOT an old folks’ game. Red States have higher rates of drug abuse, and overwhelmingly more Red Staters die in car accidents.

            Red States have a higher percentage of residents below the poverty line than Blue States. In fact the states with the highest percentage of residents living in poverty are Texas, Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi. Gun violence is higher in Red States. Child mortality is higher in Red States. Do I need to go on?

          • Flechette

            Such articles are misguided. The calculation of “GDP” includes services (which are not “production”) like back rubs.

            If everyone in California gave each other a backrub and Kansas produced just one acre of corn the formula for GDP would show California as a powerhouse when in reality Kansas would be richer.

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            Your example is extreme. Policing, education, the military and pure research all fall into the “services” category.

          • Flechette

            …and how does “policing, education and the military” help the economy? The Soviets did a lot of those things…

          • Flechette

            I think that you are confusing “Conservatives” with Neo-Cons” which are different enough that they have been given a new name.

            While misplaced foreign adventures are a big deal, I am talking about losing control of our *own* country. Obama and his buddies are so arrogant that they are now openly sneering at the Constitution. If we do not get them out of power soon then they will not ever leave power- why would they?

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            If you’re willing to make that distinction, I’ll grant it. As for your Constitution, it was toast the minute your elected officials voted in the Patriot Act. The only way you’ll get back to being the Land of the Free, is if you somehow persuade both parties to deep six it. It will take both, because killing it would certainly affect security along with freedom, and if both weren’t signed on, one would use the repeal to beat the other like a red-headed stepchild in the first election following a successful terrorist attack.

          • Flechette

            Every “conservative” I know was vehemently against the Patriot Act, the creation of the DHS and TSA. This is a great example of the disconnect going on.

            The Republican base (or traditional “conservatives”, if you will) have *no* voice at all. Their elected leaders go RINO almost as soon as they get into Washington and then they vote right along with the Democrats making such monstrosities as the Patriot Act, DHS and TSA.

            This is why people like Cruz are getting support. We are SICK of RINOS!

        • Lance Wagstaffe

          If you loved your country, you’d be voting FOR the left. The right has had its way ever since Reagan, and it has torn America’s middle class to ribbons.

          • JohnFalcigie

            Same old lies from a different guy

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            Conservatives aren’t a big fan of facts. Lately, facts have a strong liberal bias.

          • JohnFalcigie

            Facts, you like facts You mentioned Reagan in one of your earlier marxist postings….

            Can you explain how under Reagan tax revenue more than doubled by lowering taxes from 71% to 35%.

            Obama Vs. Reagan FACTS:

            The GDP Growth Rate – Obama Vs. Reagan
            Under Obama 1.07
            Under Reagan 3.5%

            Unemployment Decrease and Debt increase Obama Vs. Reagan
            Obama – unemployment decreased .05% with $6 trillion increase in Debt in 5 years
            Reagan – unemployment decreased 1.8% with $1 trillion increase in Debt in 8 years

            Real median family income Obama Vs Reagan
            Obama – Decreased $2627 in first term (2nd term numbers not out yet)
            Reagan – Increased $4000 over two terms

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            Reagan increased the US National Debt by more than any president in history. And he nearly tripled the national deficit even while raising taxes (on the middle class, not the rich) eleven times. In fact, he raised taxes seven of his eight years in office. Meanwhile unemployment skyrocketed to more than 10% in the wake of his 1981 tax cut. Federal spending also ballooned on his watch. That tax cut, by the way, was so disastrous it succeeded in raising the actual debt to roughly three times the total debt for the previous 80 years of US history.

            Meanwhile, on the ethical/moral front, Reagan supported apartheid in South Africa, illegally funneled arms to Iran, and helped create the Taliban and Osama by training and arming fundamentalists in Afghanistan. And we all know how THAT worked out for America, don’t we! ;-)

          • JohnFalcigie

            Its funny what a hypocrites liberals are. I suppose JFK did it right when helped Vietnamese Where 55,000 Americans died. Reagan supplied money and arms, not soldiers to a nation that was invaded by the USSR, you can try to spin anyway you want, but it can’t be compared to Vietnam,

            And what a lie! Obama has increased national $6 trillion in 5 years. Reagan increased it $1 trillion. You going to try to play the percentage game and act like $6 trillion is less than $1 trillion? And unlike Obama, Reagan saw unbelievable growth and spent the USSR out of business.

            On taxes…. He lowered the top rate from 70% to 35%, He raised taxes on consumption items such as the fuel tax to pay for highways. And the revenue that the government increased the most in was income tax, Genius. Its funny how lying hypocrites can continually try to spin data to prop up your failed leftist polices. Ask anyone with brains if $6 trillion in 5 years is worse than $1trillon in 8.

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            I guess it’s all cool for people who have no respect for their own country’s constitution. Reagan violated it like a priest on a choir boy.

            And please try to keep percentages in mind. As a percentage of the total, nobody’s yet got close to Reagan’s debt-orgy. And a good part of “Obama’s debt” is the direct result of legislation signed by Bush, and from putting Bush’s two wars on the books. I realize conservatives love to load up daddy’s credit card, then deny responsibility, but it doesn’t work that way. Bush’s foreign adventures cost at LEAST $2 trillion, probably more.

            But back to Reagan. According to the Congressional Budget Office, thanks to Reaganomics the richest one percent of the U.S. population saw its financial wealth grow 109 percent from 1983 to 2001, while the bottom two-fifths watched as its wealth fell 46 percent. During the Reagan administration, the number of families living below the poverty line increased by one third. At the time, the Savings and Loan debacle was the biggest financial scandal in US history. It got knocked out of first place by the Bush financial meltdown, which almost threw the whole world into a depression.

            And as for Reagan “winning” the Cold War, I’ll just let the former US Ambassador to the USSR speak on the matter: “The suggestion that any United States administration had the power to influence decisively the course of a tremendous domestic political upheaval in another great country on the other side of the globe is simply childish. Thus the general effect of the extreme militarization was to delay rather than hasten the great change that overtook the Soviet Union” [by strengthening Soviet hard-liners].

            I guess I’ll just end off with a quote by Ronny-boy on the Taliban: “These gentlemen are the moral equivalent of America’s founding fathers”.

            Heck of a job, Ronnie!

      • Arbutus

        How many of our recent wars have been necessary to enable us to live in the USA? They’ve strayed a long way from defending our country. I think it’s important for us to get beyond the mentality that says war is the answer to every world problem.

        • Asian Conscience

          Yah. Brings to mind that quote: Pax melior est quam iustissimum bellum – Peace is better than the most just war (A. M. Les HazArts Légendaires)

          • JohnFalcigie

            War is horrible! We are lucky to live in the United States

        • JohnFalcigie

          I agree Iraq was a stupid war, but some conflicts are worth the stability they bring. Everyone called Churchill a warmonger when he wanted to take out Hitler while he was building up his army, not so many years later over 100 million were dead from WW2.

      • Michael

        It is amazing all of the chairborne rangers here. We may be able to take China in a naval battle but, consider we would be sailing halfway around the world. The Red not so much. They would be using land based aircraft too. We have no ASM Tomahawks anymore and most surface combatants are sailing with half empty Harpoon canisters.

        Remember the Russian saying, “Quantity has a Quality all its own.” Anybody remember the Winter War and its aftermath?

        Never underestimate your adversary.

        • JohnFalcigie

          I agree with much of what you say. I just would like to add that I did not say we could invade China successfully, nor would we want to. I just said they are not as much of a threat to us as some have suggested on the posts I was reading. Contrary to what many think, we are not occupiers, but liberators, were not looking to making a 51st state or to expand our territories, just protect our interests.

        • Lance Wagstaffe

          China is probably the main reason why the US has refused to sign the international treaty banning land mines. China’s standing army outnumbers that of the US roughly two to one. The Russian quote is accurate. Pure numbers can pay off.

          • JohnFalcigie

            Maybe in the 1940′s, numbers meant something, but today they don’t mean much. There can always be a guerrilla insurgency, but a much smaller army with an advanced military arsenal, can effectively destroy an opponent’s military that outnumbers them 10 to 1.

            The first gulf war is a great example of this… At that time Iraq had the largest ground military in the world, and their soldiers almost outnumbered the coalition 2 to 1. When the war was over there was 190 coalition deaths and 30,000 Iraqi dead and the coalition was the side that won.

        • Duncan Fell

          You have a strong ally in Australia. Australia can be used as a staging base and has the natural resources to build all of your weapons i.e. Rare earth minerals.

      • Lance Wagstaffe

        Who are these “young military strategy experts” you speak of? What decision makers are influenced by their views? Do you have any proof? Can you supply any names and biographies? C’mon, let’s see something more than unsupported assertions.

        • Duncan Fell

          You should just research and come up with your own referenced rebuttal’s rather than trying to discredit someone by asking them questions. When you place the burden of proof upon those who you disagree with you look like an incompetent school child that likes to play academic.

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            When somebody makes an outlandish assertion, it isn’t my job to waste valuable time discrediting it. Anybody who has had even a little post-secondary education understands that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Only a truly ignorant person could fail to comprehend this basic fact.

          • Duncan Fell

            No. Anyone with tertiary education realises the difference between writing an academic paper and a comment section for a newspaper. So again, to make demands for referencing on a comment site on the internet is playing academic. I felt compelled to point this out as it is a hugely common foible.

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            This is the comment section of a newspaper? Who knew! Comment sections of newspapers require considerably more of an Op Ed writer, or even one submitting a letter to the editor. You know what they don’t have? Trolls. Trolls like the one above who makes an absolutely ridiculous comment, then tries to suck prospective victims into putting their research skills at his disposal in order to cloak it in spurious legitimacy.

            Waggy don’t play dat.

    • David Wesely

      Their navy is a joke compared to ours, but not to the navies of Taiwan or Japan or Vietnam. The Japanese Navy knew we would destroy them if they attacked Pearl Harbor, but they followed orders when their national leaders told them to do it. All it will take is for the Chinese leaders to decide that the “spineless US leadership” will not go to war to protect Taiwan or Japan or Vietnam (and how many guys my age would want their grandchildren sent to defend Vietnam? Most of my friends would say “Them VC bastards have it coming!”) The Chinese leaders can repeat the stupidity of December 1941 as easily as Japan and Italy and Germany.

      • JohnFalcigie

        The US would most def. defend Japan, our 2nd biggest international base is there. China is much more likely to try to test us on Taiwan and with this president, it might work. But if we did defend Taiwan, they would have foolishly miscalculated, because our Naval air force would blow their ships out of the water before they could they could pull of an ambitious landing with soldiers. The thing about Obama is he is full of pride and I don’t think he would want his legacy to be the president that let our allies fall to the chicoms, but I never know with this guy.

        • Lance Wagstaffe

          Do you really believe the decision to declare war on China would lie with one man?

          • JohnFalcigie

            You should go back the Huffing and Puffing Post you find a lot of people to agree with you there.

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            Actually not. The HuffPost is overrun with conservative trolls and other fact-averse people. There’s fewer of the breed over here, though they seem to be equally out-of-touch with reality.

          • JohnFalcigie

            Overran with conservatives? Every time I post a conservative comment I get hammered by 20 liberals attacking me.
            But basically your saying you only want to hear a one-sided argument, get people who agree 100% with you, because you got it all figured out. From what little I know of you, that sounds about right.

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            I could turn that around 180 degrees and be just as accurate. In fact, it’s looking more and more like the HP moderators have been allowing conservative trolls to run wild on the site.

          • JohnFalcigie

            Run wild on the site? Liberals hate censorship, unless it is shutting up opposing views, then they cry out for it

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            BS. The only time I ever flagged a comment over there was for outright racism or lewdness (either of which could get through moderation with creative spelling). Unlike conservatives, I don’t mind a debate…especially since objective facts are on my side.

          • JohnFalcigie

            Talk about flip flopping, you just said you don’t go there because there are too conservatives on the site and allowing conservatives to run wild, but now you like a debate?

            You sound like John Kerry now. You voted for the $67 billion before you voted against it

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            It’s so depressing when conservatives can’t read the words plainly written in front of their face. How, O Wise One can any sane person have a debate with a troll? I’m only engaging with you at this point because you might suck in somebody honest but relatively uninformed. I have no doubt Jeebus could ride down out of heaven on his armoured T. Rex and tell you GW was real, and you’d stand there arguing that it isn’t.

          • JohnFalcigie

            I hope an uninformed person comes and reads because you’re like a school boy getting whooped on every angle by me.

    • Duncan Fell

      The way to beat China is to defeat their Navy. Thats all you have to do. Invading would be a mistake, however you could attack Tibet and Hong Kong and liberate and hold those areas. This would effectively defeat China.

      • JohnFalcigie

        If either country tried to invade each other it would be a blood bath. I’m not aware of Hong Kong wanting to be liberated, I’m friends with a Hong Kong business man and he says they’re pretty happy, because China has not tried to put controls on their government or press. Hong Kong people really are Chinese.

        • Duncan Fell

          Hong Kong knows they would be happier without China! My point is more that in a such a repressed country like China you can pick points of the nation that would be less likely to rebel against occupation.

          • JohnFalcigie

            I’m sure they would be happier in Hong Kong without China.

            And since China has always been divided, I’m sure they would have people that would welcome a U.S. invasion, but probably more against it. Things have changed alot over there, they are more like a capitalist country now with a dictatorship government. They have economic freedom on a great scale now.

    • Demosthenes Smith

      Well written and informative post. I have often imagined “what if” scenarios if a full blown world war engulfs the planet. There are so many potential variables involved that is extremely difficult to mentally war game a military engagement with China. Like it or not, China is blossoming into an economic and technological superpower. They just landed a rover on the moon. It’s my opinion that their greatest asset (and perhaps also their biggest Achilles Heel) isn’t technology or economic prowes- it’s their billions of people. I read somewhere that due to sheer numbers, China has more people with genius I.Q.s than the U.S. has people. In a full blown conflict, how would China get it’s massive infantry on U.S. Soil? Even with hundreds and thousands of sea and air based transports, I wonder how many could actually get through our naval and air defenses to reach U.S. Soil. This is where things get scary. Any such assault and invasion would be after a sneak attack with EMP weapons. Remember the videos of an apparent missile launch off the California coast a few years ago? Some speculated that it was launched by a Chinese naval vessel disguised as a commercial cargo ship, and it was very close to the U.S. coastline when it happened. So, like in WW2, Pearl Harbor and other U.S. Pacific based bases would be prime targets initially. So, again, how would you get that massive infantry based army across the vast Pacific Ocean?

      • JohnFalcigie

        I have thought about this scenario myself, this is how I analysed it (and I am not claiming to be a military expert)

        The biggest issue with using non-amphibious assault ships to stage an invasion is there is no way these vessels could make a any real landing assault. you can’t exactly pull on the beach with them, they have to be docked at a port, which means they would have had to some how successfully taken control of a port, but the air force would blow that port up long before a container ship could ever doc there.

        Since, China does not have a blue water Navy, They really could only transport troops through cargo ships, they would have serious difficulties. First of all, they lack the maneuverability and reinforced steel with kevlar, like real war ships, so if by some miracle they got past our Navy, our air force with anti-ship missiles would pick them off pretty easily. And with our anti-ship missile technology, our air force could probably pick off their warships pretty easily too.

        But here is the real kicker, say they are lucky enough to land troops and get past our much more advanced army. What in the world are they going to do about our 100 million armed citizens, talk about a suicide mission. There is an estimated 350 million privately own guns in America, that is more than we have citizens, we are the most well-armed nation on the planet before you even consider our military.

        Truthfully, we don’t want to invade them and they don’t want to invade us.

  • Xanadu2

    For a nation (China) that has to steal technology to even be close to “up to date” the future doesn’t look too bright. Then again they have Barry, effectively in their corner tearing down the country that made it possible for him to be “something” when he is in reality nothing more than a small, petty, egotistical, incompetent, narcissistic “nothing.” So I suppose China does have some “hope.”

  • capoprimo

    WE have no business in that part of the world? We’ve been there since the 50′s it’s territory owned by the Japanese with whom we have a mutual defense agreement as we do with Taiwan. Wake up, if we don’t stand up to China we might as well begin to learn to love Egg-Foo Yong.

  • ntvnyr30

    when a top U.S. Navy admiral states that the biggest threat is “global warming” and when the U.S. holds joint military ops with the Chinese, then we probably deserve what we are inevitably going to experience from China due to rampant incompetence and hubris in the US military

    • Lance Wagstaffe

      The admiral is correct. Global Warming is going to cause an awful lot of problems that have military implications. And China will very likely be part of those problems.

      • ntvnyr30

        Global Warming is a myth. This has been disproven in the last year when evidence of data fudging was discovered. The fact that people are still clinging to this myth–like Prince Charles for one–is embarrassing

        • Lance Wagstaffe

          Only tinfoil-hatted conspiracy theorists believe GW is a “myth”. Please quit wasting people’s time.

          http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2013/oct/02/climate-change-denial-skeptics-psychology-study-conspiracy-theories

          • GallopingGoat

            I agree with you, but must say I prefer the term Climate Change, as there will be extremes that don’t fit the baby-food interpretation of GW (evidence above).

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            I actually like “Climate Change” better too, but I’ve gotten into the habit of calling it GW. And I agree with you 100% about it confusing people who don’t understand “extremes” mean bigger winter storms, too.

      • JohnFalcigie

        Interesting Global Warming… Funny how we had the coldest arctic summer in history and did you see just last week the coldest temperature ever recorded on Earth in Antarctica?

        I bookmarked this the other day for people like yourself…. http://nypost.com/2013/12/05/global-warming-proof-is-evaporating/

        • burnt press

          @JohnFalcigie:
          Meanwhile the ice at both polar caps is melting at very alarming rates

          • JohnFalcigie

            Just out this year show its accumulating in new places in the arctic.

            Answer this question… If so much ice has melted, why haven’t the lowest lying islands in the world lost any shore?

            Global Warming Alarmists, claimed for years Tavalu was sinking because of the melting ice caps and they have been proven wrong:
            http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/02/tuvalu-and-many-other-south-pacific-islands-are-not-sinking-claims-they-are-due-to-global-warming-driven-sea-level-rise-are-opportunistic/

          • GallopingGoat

            Actually, it has to do with the H20 distribution being subject to gravity and the shifting jet stream. All of the extra water will not redistribute evenly as it does in a glass of water.

          • JohnFalcigie

            Distributes evenly? I take you have never been to or scene pictures of the north or south pole, up and down mountains of ice all through out.

            When your 100degrees below zero water freezes almost instantly, there is no dripping down anything. It often comes down as snow or ice and at warmer parts of the year when it is just below freezing and snow and ice come down, they accumulate on the mountains of ice, creating new uneven layers.

          • GallopingGoat

            I was referring to your comment of low lying islands and the fact they’re still here.

          • JohnFalcigie

            Sorry, this comment system is difficult follow sometimes, i can’t always tell what comment is for what.

          • JohnFalcigie
          • Lance Wagstaffe

            Google “Republic of Kiribati”
            .

            or there’s this: http://www.skepticalscience.com/sea-level-rise.htm

          • JohnFalcigie

            Typical liberalism, after almost 20 years of trying to prove Tavalu was sinking due to Global Warming, the data proves you wrong and then you go try stake your claim in another location. I’m working, but here is a happy liberal source http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10222679

          • EmpressL

            Hawaii’s Big Island adds 3 acres of land a year due to volcanic activity. I am not convinced one way or the other. We have a pond with a walkway around it. 15 years ago when we built it, rarely did the water cover the walkway and usually mid summer my husband had to dig the bottom deeper to keep a reservoir for tadpoles and minnows to eat the mosquito larvae. This summer it covered the walkway most of the summer and only now is it somewhat dry. It could be we had a wet summer. We are waiting to see what happens next year.

          • JohnFalcigie

            There is a lot of scientists who believe warming has more to do with activity on the sun than on the earth. This year has been one of the least active on the sun and the coldest arctic winter since they started keeping records (google it). Just last week the coldest every temperature ever recorded in Antarctica.

            http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2013/12/10/antarctica-cold-record/3950019/

          • EmpressL

            Yes! I read that article. But also the North Pole is losing Ice. This November, the overall extent in the Barents Sea was the second lowest in the satellite record, with the lowest occurring in 2012.

            http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/

            I guess we will have to wait and see what the trends are. Like I said, we’re waiting to see what happens next year. We are keeping an open mind.

          • JohnFalcigie

            The BBC just came out with a newer story less than two months ago. Showing the opposite has happened, I am surprised they reported, because all of the ultra-liberal networks in America like CNN, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, and ABC ignored it or buried it deep in their sites.
            http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25383373

            Those networks are a sham and seem more intent proving their beliefs right than reporting the news. There is a lot at stake for them, because they have been pushing an agenda for so long, their pride and credibility is on the line.

          • EmpressL

            I think it’s called, “Covering A$$!

            “Considering last year was the record low, I’d sure hope that this year showed some sort of rebound! Unlikely that you get two record breakers in a row.

            Strange that people who ignore 160+ years of temperature data, 1000s of years of long-term data & 35 years of satellite data suddenly pay attention to this single data point. Cherry picking on a rather extreme level there.”

            Try looking at this chart over 1,400 years.

            http://www.google.com/search?q=last+thousand+years+of+ice+melt+chart&client=safari&rls=en&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=bKiwUs-sNoi5kQeTkYGIBg&ved=0CDsQsAQ&biw=920&bih=458

          • JohnFalcigie

            I’m not cherry picking nothing, if you are using 1400 years of data you would have read that it was hotter between 950-1100. How do you explain that? What carbon emissions by man were taking place then?

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            This guy’s full of it to overflowing. If you want a detailed take-down of all the BS he sprays, you can get it here, among other places: http://www.skepticalscience.com/oneliners.php

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            In fact, about 98% of scientists believe GW is happening, and that it’s manmade.

          • ilyas252

            a lot of them eh? funny, most reports have it at about 95%+

          • ntvnyr30

            Yes and by taxing Americans while letting China and India pollute the atmosphere at will, we can prevent global warming. What a joke! It;s only man’s arrogance that believes it can stop natural occurrences. When is the last time we prevented an earthquake, tornado or tsunami?

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            False analogy. And we can’t stop the temperature rise that’s already in the pipeline. We can still avert a real catastrophe. And you need to study a little science before you start making remarks about man’s arrogance. I bet you didn’t doubt that a full-on nuclear war would bring a nuclear winter.

          • ilyas252

            it is man made; that is not natural.
            the cons said the same in australia, why should we be the first? it’s
            called leadership, it’s called setting an example.

          • JohnFalcigie
        • Lance Wagstaffe

          The New York Post? Oh, please! Why not give me a link to the National Enquirer instead? It’s more credible.

          • JohnFalcigie

            You can simply verify the implied facts from outside sources if you don’t trust them, I do it even from sites I trust. That’s why I am informed and you are a propaganda peddler

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            You’ve got that exactly backwards.

        • EmpressL

          You should watch “Chasing Ice”.

        • Lance Wagstaffe

          You think one season changes everything? ROFL. Here’s a couple of graphs. Read them. And please don’t bother citing the New York Post for anything except crotch shots of starlets. The National Enquirer has more credibility.

          http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/09/you-cant-deny-global-warming-after-seeing-this-graph/

          http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11639-climate-myths-the-cooling-after-1940-shows-co2-does-not-cause-warming.html

          • JohnFalcigie

            1 Season?

            The peer-reviewed journal Climate Dynamics, a non-political scientific journal has admitted that there has been a 15 year pause in warming.

            The BBC just reported the huge build-up of ice
            http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-25383373

            On every turn, global warming alarmists like yourself are being shot down with factual evidence disproving them. Your just like your buddies at the University of East Anglia and Pennsylvania State University trying to fudge the numbers to back your lies

        • ilyas252

          global warming is one aspect of climate change along with weather extremes, like more floods, more hurricanes more cold weather…
          and as for your comment below about a pause in warming, re-read what i just said and then do take into account that the stats used for climate change go over many decades, a short period does not invalidate data.

          if that article is is peer reviewed, they would have been picked up on that if they tried top say that it debunked climate change; wild guess here, you’re cherry picking.

    • JohnFalcigie

      Oh yes, that’s what military admirals are known for, assessing Climate Change data. I suppose when I go into the supermarket this week, I will ask the cashier how I should invest my 401k

  • ReluctorDominatus

    It is a different world today and although our constitution is still the bright start of governance the economy is a world economy even more so today than it was before WW2. The trick is to only engage where our national interest is at stake and knowing how to define and recognize that national interest.

  • jjthetraveler

    Never forget china is a ticking bomb. Their economy, aging population, ratio of male to female and rampant corruption (just to name a few) will cause an implosion soon. The inevitable results of single party rule.

    • Duncan Fell

      China is said to be an efficient economy but that is far from true. An economy cannot be efficient if it is bases on subsidies and controlled currency. China is going to have a civil war soon like Syria that will see its provinces split apart.

  • Brian Willis

    the bible says russia china and a slew of other nations attack america in a looting spree. says ezekiel 38.

    (reading ezekiel 38 the prophet ezekiel looking ahead into the future describes america as “the mountains of israel” when he penned this vision jesus had not yet come so to him the mountains of israel means mountains of gods people, who he would have visioned as the jews. but with jesus we got a new covenant and gods chosen are christians. Since the jews fell out of favor and are not gods spiritual israel anymore this passage refers to america which was yet to be. but read ezekiel 38 it describe america well…a land of unwalled villages, people gathered from many nations, a land once desolate but inhabited and the usa is the highest continent on earth we literally live on top of mountains. the mountains of israel translates to Mountains of gods people…..which are christians. Theres a church on every street corner all of our presidents claim to be christian so despite what you think this is gods country and our govt has been hijacked)

    Im gonna take a wild guess off of the info from jerome corsi that an emp strike on the usa will be the precurser to this looting. with our grid down and the military under the command of the traitor obama who will order them all away. were in for a doozy. our fight against the red chinese and russians and the al queda hordes all armed by the obama and hillary machine will largely be a civilian vs them fight. thats why they want our guns banned. you cant count on an organized us military defense with all cummunications down and electricity out. my theory of an emp kinda matches up to the bible as well because it says for 7 years after this great invasion we (us the winning americans) will loot those who were looting us and for 7 years we will use their stuff for “fuel” its interisting to say the least. in other words be using their junk to light fires and such cuz there will be no electricity.

    read up more on this by a preacher in 1857 giving a sermon before congress on washingtons birthday where he prophecied all this would take place and described it as the world of communism coming to america the land of liberty in a great invasion and he named russians….not even an enemy at the time. read it……the invasion is on page 3

    http://www.firstchurchoftheinternet.org/studies/pitts.htm

    • Arbutus

      If nations attack the USA, it will have nothing to do with the prophecies in the Bible.

      • EmpressL

        China attacks the US every day financially speaking and their ally is Walmart.

      • Brian Willis

        it will have everything to do with the prophecies of the bible. and god actually will be allowing it to happen to:
        A) glorify himself when he destroys monarchy, islam, socialism and the world will see how god saves america which is a christian nation..his new chosen promised land set up by our godly founders.

        B) the invaders will destroy all the haughty wicked godless scum here in the usa. and people in their distress….even atheists will call on god for help…something this nation hasnt done in a while.

        But anyways its going to happen dont have to believe me…your eyes will see it :)

    • Gojira

      No where in the Bible does it mention Russia or China.

      • Brian Willis

        the names mentioned symbolicly refer to russia and china. “meshek and tubal” were sons of noah and moved into and founded what is now russia and china. it goes on to mention more names which represent most of the eastern hemisphere which will all invade the usa.

    • Lance Wagstaffe

      The bible is a decent read about primitive desert tribes and their superstitions. It’s no more than that, and has no more relevance to modern life than the assembled works of J.K. Rowling. Sorry to say it, but there is not one iota of objective proof that god exists.

      • EmpressL

        They have been waiting over 2,000 years for comformation. How long does it take to realize you’ve been “STOOD UP”?

        • Lance Wagstaffe

          ROFL. Thanks for the best laugh I’ve had so far today.

          • EmpressL

            I laughed at it myself. When they start talking about their benevolent, forgiving, compassionate church, I always post this:

            The Church

            “Anyone who attempts to construe a personal view of God which conflicts with Church dogma must be burned without pity.”

            Pope Innocent III

            http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vatican/esp_vatican29.htm

            Kinda shuts them up!

          • Lance Wagstaffe

            That’s an EXCELLENT quote.

    • EmpressL

      Ezekiel was dreaming.

    • ilyas252

      your long comment needs a considered, studied response: DRIVEL.

  • Flechette

    I note that the little back-history the video game (which talks about WW2 Japan and the current conflict over these island) gives to the player conveniently overlooks the whole Communist Revolution and the millions who died under its rule.

    Go figure!

    • JohnFalcigie

      China forgets who helped liberate them in WW2

      • David Wesely

        Not really. In the first 24 hours after they declared war on Japan the Soviets sent more troops, guns tanks and planes into China (Manchuria, which the Chinese consider to be part of China) to fight the Japanese than the USA had sent in the entire war. Of course, we had pretty-well destroyed the Japanese Navy and Japanese cities, but that was not where the Chinese could see us doing it. We sent a lot of aid to Chiang Kai Chek, too, but not as much as the Soviets sent to Mao, so the side that won the 1945-1949 civil war does not remember us as doing as much to defeat the Japanese, as we did to oppose them coming to power. Gratitude is not usually a major influence in the decisions of dictators. But fear often is, so the ability of the Red Army to overrun Manchuria in a few days is far more of a lesson than the Americans sending the Flying Tigers and building the Burma Road.

        • JohnFalcigie

          That was only Manchuria, we helped arm them, and provided air support and helped to train them. Plus we did have a fair amount of boots on the ground assisting them.

          • David Wesely

            As I said, the Chinese consider Manchuria to be part of China. They do not consider Iwo Jima or Tarawa or Guadalcanal, let alone North Africa, Italy etc, where we did most of our fighting to be China, and almost all the help we did give was to Chiang, not Mao, so they do not remember that as “help” either, but as supporting “the class enemies of the Chinese people” in their revolution. So why would they be grateful? We had a few thousand boots on the ground (almost all in Chiang’s territory) while the Soviets had a half-million troops (and political cadres) backing Mao. And the left insists that it was the Red Army invasion, not the two A-bombs, that defeated Japan…

          • JohnFalcigie

            David, I did not say we liberated them, I just said we HELPED liberate them. And I think Manchuria is part of China, I do not disagree at all, The USSR kicked the Japanese’s butt, probably one of the most lopsided victories before modern warfare.

            But without the US supplying arms and air support, the Chinese would have been in much worse shape than they were. So even if the leftist Chinese did not like the people we helped, we still helped the Chinese people, regardless of what their political affiliation was when we did.

          • ilyas252

            true that up to a point; the chinese could have had an easier time if they weren’t in the middle if a civil war; so the us helping one side…

          • JohnFalcigie

            I think we had to choose a side because if we did not they would have been in just a bigger civil war by arming both sides. Which would have just made them more focused on fighting each other than fighting the Japanese.

            We probably would have never aligned with the USSR had Europe not sat idle why Hitler built up his military. We would have instead just fought against Germany and the USSR. But then again Hitler might not have invaded the USSR if Europe put up a fight, things could have turned out so much differently.

          • ilyas252

            yes but the reasons for choosing are interesting; they were a bunch of righties (corrupt to the hilt and psychotic), kicked the commie can- good for local consumption.

            lots of conjecture there;
            hitler always wanted to invade the east (poland, russia), slavonic peoples-second only to the jews as being ‘unfit’- and thereforor slave labour and eventual genocide. the east was ‘living space’ for the geramn people- weinberg has a section on this.

            europe put up a fight ’cause he invaded poland, gateway to russia; if the west had left him alone…

            russia’s contribution to the war effort is sorely underrated and misundestood because of cold war propaganda. 85% of the german army was tied up on the eastern front.

          • JohnFalcigie

            Germany and the USSR both invaded Poland together. Germany attacked the western side and the USSR the Eastern. At the beginning of WW2, the Russians and Germans were Allies. Germany got greedy after their easy invasions of Belgium and France and thought they could take Russia with the biggest invasion in history.

          • ilyas252

            my rerading is that hitler wanted that space, both poland and russia. the alliance was a marriage of convenience for both sides; the russians took it after the west took too long to make an alliance with the russian (big bad communists).

            no doubt their stunning victories made hitler (though not his generals)
            confident of taking on the russians. not as bright as he thought, old adolf.

          • ilyas252

            the battle you’re referring to happened early in the war before hitler attacked russia. a russian general by the name of zhukov made his reputation on that one. after that for the rest of tghe war there was an uneasy truce, neither side wanted to get involved, too much happening elsewhere.

          • JohnFalcigie

            No it didn’t, this battle happened after we finished Germany off. The Russians agreed at the beginning of being allies with the US, they would help the US defeat Japan after Germany was defeated. It started right before we dropped the bombs.

          • ilyas252

            nope! we’re at cross purposes.
            me: the japanese attacked the russians in manchuria (the Battles of Khalkhyn Gol) in 1939.

            your point has been the russian attack after the european war was over; it’s been given little treatment and seen as a belated attempt by stalin to gain kudos.

            i see how your previous comment (way above), makes sense!

          • ilyas252

            the left said that? which left?
            btw, america was helping chang kai-shek; hardly the communists pin up boy

          • David Wesely

            The American Left (who else could be so stupid?) see “Oliver Stone’s Untold History of the United States”
            although I have heard this swill from college professors as far back as 1970. They base it on the fact that it took a few days for the Japanese Emperor to make up his mind to surrender after the first bomb, giving the Soviets time to jump in just before the bell rang. By the same logic, news of my birth in 1945 (it was in the papers, surely the Abwehr would have noticed it) caused the Germans to surrender, not the Red Army reaching Berlin.

          • ilyas252

            whatever left you’re talking about i’ve never come across it. most war histories point to the dropping of the bomb, though there is dispute here as the japanese it is said, were ready to surrender…

            you must have had so weird professors… btw, the stone book is great

          • ilyas252

            ‘fair amount’? care to quantify?

          • JohnFalcigie

            I know there was 60,000 we left there after WW2 ended, so my guess is probably over 100,000 during the war.

          • ilyas252

            ok my problem is and i’m no great scholar, but i do not recall reading about american ‘boots’ on trhe ground; sure chenault’s air force were troops, but maybe the point becomes academic…

          • JohnFalcigie

            i think the Chinese portion of the war was not really well documented like the Pacific battles and the European front. I have had to read a lot on it to get much info on it.

            The US was weary after 4 years of major war with over 500,000 troops killed, I think the public was highly against getting overly involved with a war they did not know much about because all the media coverage was of Japan and Germany, not too mention the USSR would have sided with the Communists bringing us to into WW3.

          • ilyas252

            right on the first part but read ‘a world at arms’ by gerhard weinberg probably the best and latest overview of the war with some depth.
            america’s 200mil were weary after 5000,000 casualties? russians lost 30mil, they’re still counting.

            don’t get your last para. the russits defeated the germans (read up battles of kursk, stalingrad and battle of moscow- the first time the nazis were stopped in wwii).

            they were in no shape to carry on another war and neither were they interested. neither were the allies, everyone wanted to go home and lick their wounds.

          • ilyas252

            you helped arm the nationalists, not the communists

  • JohnFalcigie

    The strangest comment I have seen on here is the Chinese sending their troops in cargo ships…

    Think about it…

    If they could get past our Navy and Air Force, then they would have to deal with our Army and Marines.

    And if they could get past our Army and Marines….

    What the heck are they going to do about the 100 million armed citizens?

    Talk about China’s Vietnam. I would feel bad for their next of kin…

  • David Wesely

    This is making a mountain out of a molehill. For 140 years – from 1790 to 1930 – the US Army and Navy used the British as our “maneuver enemy”, that is, when we were running wargames or planning exercises, the enemy we were facing were always the Brits or the Limeys or the Redcoats, and the enemy ships on the floor at the War College were HMS Revenge and so on.

    Our last formal War Plan Red – for war with the British Empire – was written in 1930 and caused quite a stir when it was leaked to the Canadians a few years ago. But the reason for using the British as the enemy in our plans was not that we still hated them after the War of 1812, but that there were only two countries – Britain and France – with navies big enough to have any chance of invading us after 1815, and Britain was the bigger of them. Plan for the biggest threat and you will be able to handle smaller ones.

    In spite of having versions of War Plan Red going back over 50 years, in 1917 we joined the First World War on the side of Britain, not against it. And we did this again in 1939 (covertly)

    well before the Japanese bomber Pearl Harbor we were already helping the British to sink German ships) . Just having made plans for a possible war with country X does not mean you are going to carry them out.

    In fact, preparing such plans can serve to convince your leaders that such a war would be a really bad idea and get them to “cool their jets”. This does not always work – Japanese Navy wargames in the 1930s kept showing that they would be destroyed in a war with the US, but their leaders refused to believe them, and ordered the Pearl Harbor attack anyhow. On the other hand, it appears that Italy never made any plans for war with the USA or ran any wargames with our ships as the maneuver enemy before WW2, but Mussolini was happy to declare war on us to demonstrate loyalty to his pal Adolf, without even telling his Admirals and Generals before he did it!

    So the Chinese are running wargames with obviously American-equipped enemies. Well, we are their obviously biggest potential threat, and therefore the logical maneuver enemy. If they go to war with us, it will not be because they ran a bunch of simulations with us as the enemy, but because they have concluded that war with us will get them something worth the certain price and possible risk.

    • ilyas252

      well put. and after 1930 they had war plans for a japan. seriuously what do people expect? gaming is meant to add realism, not fantasy for the participants.

      • JohnFalcigie

        Well the game is to train their soldiers not for citizens to play. But I think China is trying to send signals to the world through their claim on the islands all the military stuff they are releasing about their carriers and stealth fighters that they want to let the West know they are force to be reckoned with. Like a young man trying to prove himself.

        I think we should do everything we can to stay out of a war with them, but I don’t think we should let them take taiwan or attack Japan, that would only embolden them to do something more stupid.

      • David Wesely

        Yes, and plans for war with France, Mexico, Chile, Argentina and so on. Though most of these were more like training exercises for the people who were learning how to write war plans, like the Technical Intelligence report Soviet Writing Implements (AKA Pencils) that I worked on at APG in 1970.

        We had been working on a serious plan for war with Japan (Plan Orange) at least since we had broken up the Japanese-British Mutual defense treaty in the 1921 Washington Treaty negotiations. It is interesting to consider whether that might have worked against us and Britain in the 30′s. Had Japan been relying on the British to protect them from the US, would they have abrogated the Washington treaty to build more battleships that they could not use in China? And if still bound to help their British allies, would they have declared war on Germany in 1939? In any case, google “United States color-coded war plans” for more interesting hints. I think it was Admiral Nimitz who said that before WW2 we had wargamed every move the Japanese made (except the Kamikazes), and just about everything they did not do, too!

        • ilyas252

          3rd attempt at responding…
          thanks for the link, i’ll look it up…

      • bastalready

        You found this place…goodie!!!

        • ilyas252

          i think someone quoted an article and here i am! nice to meet you!

          • bastalready

            My pleasure, sir.

  • dabub

    I thought we were at war.

    • EmpressL

      What war is that?

  • Faye Faye

    The US bullying behavior will only motivate China to speed up her military and space capability.

    Very interesting, the US is scare of provoking Russia. What a coward !

    • burnt press

      @Faye Faye:
      The objective of our current resident of the white house is to reduce our military to the level of our opponents.

      • JohnFalcigie

        He likes a fair battlefield…lol I suppose next he will only allow our soldiers to carry magazines that are limited to 15 rounds, following the Colorado model.

  • JohnFalcigie

    How is it in your alternative reality? Can you say hi to Mickey and Minnie for me?

    • Lance Wagstaffe

      When all else fails, go for the ad hominem attack. You have a nice day, now. ;-)

    • EmpressL

      If you had invested when Clinton came into office and sold when Bush got in (which is what we did) you would have made a killing. The stock market had gained 8,000 points in Clinton’s 8 years. During Bush Administration over 8 years they lost about -1,500 points.

      If you purchased when Obama got in you would have gained 3,000 points. If the market continues at this pace Obama will have added 7,000 points in 5 years to the market.

      http://money.cnn.com/1999/12/31/markets/markets_newyork/

      We have NO new wars.

      • Lance Wagstaffe

        I bow to the Empress. Brilliantly said!

        • EmpressL

          Thank You! Thank You! I am bowing to you!!!! I am your follower.

          Lets see what he comes back with! HEEEEEE!

  • GallopingGoat

    Case in point, GW leaving the G8 Emissions Summit in 2009 with the parting shot, “Goodbye from the world’s biggest polluter” after he refused to sign the international accord. We have little of a leg left to stand on to ask more of any other country after his catastrophe of a “reign.”

  • undsoweiter

    Uhhhhh, it’s a video game. Shouldn’t we be concentrating on the more imminent threat of zombies?

  • disqus_0ngJTpA5hf

    So the dumb americans can constantly put such pathetic propaganda and war-mongering hate in their game, films and all their media…but when China does it even sligtly its wrong?

    Srsly america…just get f*cked. Tw*ts.


Top