Another cold war ? China and U.S.


by thorium1010
Tags: china, cold
PhysicsMonk
PhysicsMonk is offline
#19
Jan23-12, 05:24 PM
P: 13
Quote Quote by MarcoD View Post
You cannot use MAD, it's both an hypothesis and a doctrine, not a tool.
Seriously? NUKES
PhysicsMonk
PhysicsMonk is offline
#20
Jan23-12, 05:30 PM
P: 13
Quote Quote by skippy1729 View Post
How can we have a cold war with China? Who will buy their plastic dog-crap? Who will but our monopoly bonds?

Skippy
This shows serious lacking. China also buy **** load of stuff, and a source of demand for the bric, and their markets. Without china, the whole markets of Africa, Brazil, Russia etc will fall, and so will US exports to those markets, and Chinese markets. The US companies are depend on sales in China. China also make export civil engineering, and capital goods like bridges etcs. The quality of Chinese products are actually getting really better, much faster than say Japan, and Germany when they started.
MarcoD
MarcoD is offline
#21
Jan23-12, 07:06 PM
P: 98
Quote Quote by PhysicsMonk View Post
Seriously? NUKES
My comment was on terminology. I agree that you can use nukes, but I disagree that you can use MAD. MAD is a theory that countries will not nuke each other. IMO, so far, it has proven correct, but I am one of the people who don't believe in it.

When you say that a China/US conflict may escalate to using nukes (which actually is what MAD doesn't predict), I agree with you.

Personally, if you look at the strategic advantages of a China//US conflict, there are none, or rather, the disadvantages are greater than any advantage. So I expect conflict not with China personally, but with an Arab, African, or Southern Americas nation (there where the resources are).
Evo
Evo is offline
#22
Jan23-12, 07:40 PM
Mentor
Evo's Avatar
P: 25,927
Quote Quote by PhysicsMonk View Post
This shows serious lacking. China also buy **** load of stuff, and a source of demand for the bric, and their markets. Without china, the whole markets of Africa, Brazil, Russia etc will fall, and so will US exports to those markets, and Chinese markets. The US companies are depend on sales in China. China also make export civil engineering, and capital goods like bridges etcs. The quality of Chinese products are actually getting really better, much faster than say Japan, and Germany when they started.
Post the research from reputable sources that back you up before you post again.
edward
edward is offline
#23
Jan23-12, 08:11 PM
PF Gold
edward's Avatar
P: 861
IMHO opinion we are tagging along with what satellites China has launched and what their capabilities are for reasons other than a cold war nuke situation.

China recently began operating their own version of a GPS navigational system. Up until recently they had to rely on ours. Ironically most of our hand held systems are made in China.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...791556284.html

We would never nuke China. They have reverse engineered our manufacturing and now make our underwear

I think this will be about technology and not nuclear one upmanship.
shashankac655
shashankac655 is offline
#24
Feb15-12, 08:00 AM
P: 36
I would love to see another cold war but not the Arms race part of it only the Space race part of it but i doubt whether it would happen in the same scale.
jduster
jduster is offline
#25
Feb15-12, 11:05 AM
P: 46
I don't see a hot war as a possibility, but a cold war, very likely. In fact, we may be already in a cold war with China, depending how you want to define it.
Pattonias
Pattonias is offline
#26
Feb23-12, 10:12 AM
Pattonias's Avatar
P: 378
In all seriousness, I see the Chinese/American conflict as an economic war. Neither the US or China have anything to gain from armed conflict, quite to the contrary they both have a lot to lose. The Chinese are using their sudo-socialist/capitalist direct manipulation to maintain a stable economy while most of the capitalist countries are suffering under a credit driven economic collapse.

If you are looking for a true cold war, look to the middle east. Iran is posturing to become a nuclear power and the war-weary west is trying figure out what to do.
CaptFirePanda
CaptFirePanda is offline
#27
Feb23-12, 10:48 AM
P: 27
I would say agree, somewhat, with Pattonias. The tension between the US and PRC is not so much caused by ideology - it is more based on economics and natural resources. Resources are the key, imho.

China has a significant amount of very important resources and, in some cases, is able to significantly control global supply (they currently hold ~95-97% of the supply of rare earth elements). This is where most, if not all, of the difficulties will lie. The US hasn't had this kind of competition for resources and, with a shaky economy, the country is not well-positioned to fend off PRC interests.
mheslep
mheslep is online now
#28
Feb23-12, 12:41 PM
PF Gold
P: 3,021
Quote Quote by phinds View Post
Do you think China and the US are deeply concerned that we will have a nuclear war with each other?
Right, something like that is the prerequisite for a cold war: the threat of a catastrophic nation destroying hot war that would be so costly not only to the principals but the entire world, so that both sides resort to vicious small proxy wars and covert actions instead. What we have here with the US and China is mild disagreement by comparison.
SHISHKABOB
SHISHKABOB is offline
#29
Feb23-12, 05:15 PM
P: 615
China isn't anywhere near as powerful as the Soviet Union was. I think that the phrase "cold war" should be reserved for competitions between regional superpowers. At the moment the USA is the only superpower on the regional scale of the entire planet.

I could see it happening some day, but it's not going on right now.
mheslep
mheslep is online now
#30
Feb23-12, 05:42 PM
PF Gold
P: 3,021
True for Chinese Navy, Air Force and equipment. Chinese military strength has always been in man power and as one might guess today they have the world's largest active army by man power.
CaptFirePanda
CaptFirePanda is offline
#31
Feb23-12, 06:46 PM
P: 27
Quote Quote by SHISHKABOB View Post
China isn't anywhere near as powerful as the Soviet Union was. I think that the phrase "cold war" should be reserved for competitions between regional superpowers. At the moment the USA is the only superpower on the regional scale of the entire planet.
I think the 1960's-1980's definition of superpower no longer applies. We've come through huge economic, technological and social "booms" so to speak. The global culture is very different now than it was then. Resources and not firepower will determine the ultimate winners and losers.

You significantly under-estimate the PRC and it's ability to influence global stability.
SHISHKABOB
SHISHKABOB is offline
#32
Feb23-12, 07:58 PM
P: 615
Quote Quote by CaptFirePanda View Post
I think the 1960's-1980's definition of superpower no longer applies. We've come through huge economic, technological and social "booms" so to speak. The global culture is very different now than it was then. Resources and not firepower will determine the ultimate winners and losers.

You significantly under-estimate the PRC and it's ability to influence global stability.
if "superpower" has been redefined, then so has "cold war"

I don't disagree that China is a big player, but I do disagree that it is the kind of player that could tango with the USA in the same way the USSR did.

I'm being a little nit picky I guess, but when I think cold war I think of THE Cold War. The situation between the USA and China is NOT the same as the situation was between the USA and the USSR.
CaptFirePanda
CaptFirePanda is offline
#33
Feb23-12, 08:38 PM
P: 27
"The Cold War" between the USSR and the USA involved two military superpowers. A cold war, however, just requires the two sides to engage in political/economic actions against each other. Military aid to other nations (in order to carry out proxy wars) and/or espionage are also aspects of a cold war.

North Korea and South Korea, as an example, have been involved in a cold war for quite some time now.
SHISHKABOB
SHISHKABOB is offline
#34
Feb23-12, 08:45 PM
P: 615
Quote Quote by CaptFirePanda View Post
"The Cold War" between the USSR and the USA involved two military superpowers. A cold war, however, just requires the two sides to engage in political/economic actions against each other. Military aid to other nations (in order to carry out proxy wars) and/or espionage are also aspects of a cold war.

North Korea and South Korea, as an example, have been involved in a cold war for quite some time now.
Right, I see what you mean now.
DrClapeyron
DrClapeyron is offline
#35
Feb24-12, 09:01 AM
P: 128
I only have data up to 2009, so bear with me here.

China consumed 4.795 million bpd of oil in 2000; they produced 3.248 million bpd. In 2009 they consumed 8.324 million bpd of oil; they produced 3.798 million bpd.

China's 2000-2009 annual oil consumption growth: 6.32%
China's 2000-2009 annual oil production growth: 1.75%
China's 2000-2009 annual oil net import growth: 12.66%

In 2015 this is what the numbers could look like:

Consumption: 12.023 million bpd
Production: 4.214 million bpd
Net Imports: 7.809 million bpd

In 2020 this what the numbers could look like:

Consumption: 16.334 million bpd
Production: 4.596 million bpd
Net Imports: 11.737 million bpd

It will be interesting to see what this decade will have in store considering world oil production has peaked since 2005; though many analysts believe this will lead to increased production from nonconventional sources such as tight oil and tar sands.

Source:

http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.asp...on+consumption
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ready-happened
CaptFirePanda
CaptFirePanda is offline
#36
Feb24-12, 09:28 AM
P: 27
Quote Quote by DrClapeyron View Post
In 2015 this is what the numbers will look like:

Consumption: 12.023 million bpd
Production: 4.214 million bpd
Net Imports: 7.809 million bpd

In 2020 this what the numbers will look like:

Consumption: 16.334 million bpd
Production: 4.596 million bpd
Net Imports: 11.737 million bpd

It will be interesting to see what this decade will have in store considering world oil production has peaked since 2005; though many analysts believe this will lead to increased production from nonconventional sources such as tight oil and tar sands.
I don't want to come off as nit-picker, but those numbers are projections so they could look like that in 3-8 years.

Overall, I agree with the increased demand from unconventional sources and this has many implications.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
china exports China General Discussion 3
VOTE - You're So Cold, You're So Cold!! General Discussion 10
PF Photo Contest - You're So Cold, You're So Cold! (8/9-8/15) General Discussion 43
Any one from China General Discussion 22
do cold blooded animals do best in cold weather? or hotblooded? General Discussion 13