Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News India and China at war?

  1. Jul 14, 2009 #1
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 14, 2009 #2
    Nonsense.
     
  4. Jul 14, 2009 #3

    mgb_phys

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Where would you stage it? Belgium is far too small for a fixture of that size, I suppose you could rent Siberia.
     
  5. Jul 14, 2009 #4
    I doubt it. But if they did, we'd be looking at World War III.
     
  6. Jul 14, 2009 #5

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    And why would that be? World War 3?
     
  7. Jul 14, 2009 #6
    War with Pakistan is more likely.
     
  8. Jul 14, 2009 #7

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    This guy pulls this out of the air without any military intelligence as a basis. Ridiculous.
     
  9. Jul 14, 2009 #8
    The world is far too interdependent for a massive regional conflict not to have global repercussions. The first step would obviously be to try and broker a peace settlement, but if that fails the rest of Southeast Asia as well as Pakistan would quickly join the fray. Countries like Japan or the United States that have vested interests in the area or are intimidated by a more powerful China would naturally keep a close eye on things and be ready to intervene. Naturally, the alliance system would come into play.

    If things got big enough, there's always the chance Russia might join in the hope of expanding into resource-rich central Asia. Depending on how long the conflict lasts, I can definitely see it expanding. Granted, the actual fighting would probably mostly take place in Southeast Asia and maybe spread a bit from there, but I can definitely see far-off countries getting involved.
     
  10. Jul 14, 2009 #9

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I think we learned our lessons about actually fighting with our allies because they went to war back in WW1.
     
  11. Jul 14, 2009 #10
    In my opinion the prediction is absurd. I believe it to be unlikely for China to be an aggressor in any war anytime soon.

    The cultural revolution was so painful for China, they lost even more of their culture than did Europe in WW2, and it happened more recently. Since that time, there has been a "vacuum of belief" as a chinese colleague of mine put it, "the only thing [chinese] people believe in now is money", he said.

    How could a country that has been through so much strife so recently become an aggresor in a major war, I just don't see it happening.
     
  12. Jul 14, 2009 #11
    Perhaps. Still, many countries really don't want to see China any more powerful than it absolutely needs to be. Directly to the south, by Malaysia and Indonesia, is a major shipping route carrying oil from the Middle East to Japan and the United States. If China ends up dominating Southeast Asia, it could prove very inconvenient. And guess who's China's biggest rival in that region?
     
  13. Jul 14, 2009 #12

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Point is, no world war. We're all not going to go nuking and bombing our biggest trade partners. They won't either. There's way too much money involved. You don't become a superpower by alienating the world by bombing countries. They aren't that stupid.
     
  14. Jul 14, 2009 #13
    @ nervous china:

    I know that China is bit unstable but I am not sure if they are nervous (they are not even ready to apologize for past mistakes as they would if they were nervous):
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7932091.stm
    And from current understanding about the past Uighur riots, I believe they handled it quite well:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8140492.stm
     
  15. Jul 15, 2009 #14
    One thing we should all note is that it is no longer acceptable to launch large-scale campaigns that target civilians as in WW1 and WW2, and that we also have nukes nowadays of course. If there is any chance of a WW3 happening, it probably has happened, either in the cold war, with indirect warfare between 2 factions: commies and cappies, each headed by its own superpower. stuff like Ogden, Korea, Nam, 73, 67, Afghanistan and many others just show us how said war was conducted: relatively by proxy.
    The other candidate for WW3 would be the War on Terror, but that hasn't unfolded completely for me to really say much about.

    Of course, if a 3rd (or 4th?) world war between China and India does happen, expect a lot of the same. They will not launch direct attacks against each other, but will start a series of proxy wars and attempts at dominating various key markets, and resource centers. Water will not be an issue, since the two countries are so saturated, so border wars and such probably won't happen.
    We have to note, of course that stuff like that happening is unlikely, as China's economy focuses on things that India's economy does not, and vice versa. If stuff like this DOES happen, I expect the Chinese to emerge victorious. they have better infrastructure, and a more dynamic economy. India is running on 1950's infra. corruption in India is more of a problem that in China. stuff like that.
     
  16. Jul 15, 2009 #15

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I heard or read (I have to find the source) that Chinese police or paramilitary stood by while Han civilians attacked Uighurs in a Uighur neighborhood.

    The article talks about 'executions of' those responsible. But does that imply the Chinese government will selectively (partially) execute Uighurs and not Hans.

    The Uighurs who are native to Xinjiang are under pressure from the migration of Han Chinese to Xinjiang, and that has led to tensions between the ethnic groups. Apparently one of the initiating events in the Ürümqi riots July riots was an incident involving attacks by two or more Hans and a Uighur youth (source needed).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_2009_Ürümqi_riots

    Commentary: China's ethnic policies root cause of Uighur riots
    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/opinion/story/71613.html [Broken]

    China's ethnic policies root cause of Uighur riots
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ne...hnic_policies_root_cause_of_uighur_riots.html

    The China-India conflict is transnational, whereas the Uighur-Han conflict is intranational or internal to China. China has interests in territory which was part of Kashmir, and China and India (and Pakistan to some extent) have conflicting economic interests in south Asia. China has supported Pakistan in recent decades, but with the Uighur problems, it might rethink that support, especially if Uighur separatists are using Pakistan territory for asylum.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  17. Jul 15, 2009 #16
    It wouldn't be surprising. When I said handled well I did not intend to mean that in a fair way - the point I tried to make that government is more than enough capable to tackle that scale internal disturbances so they don't need something external to handle these kind of internal crisis.


    There are similar ethnic tensions in Tibet also I believe.
     
  18. Jul 15, 2009 #17

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    True - for both India and China, but the China-India border dispute has been stronger than any dispute between Pakistan and China. China has assisted Pakistan. Perhaps this is to keep India off-balance, the way Pakistan has used the Taliban and insurgents in Kashmir in order to keep India off-balance.

    Yes - the ethnic tensions are much the same.
     
  19. Jul 16, 2009 #18
    Probably because the majority of the ones killed were HAn.

    That same culture was directly responsible for turning China into the sick man of asia, it has been holding the country back for centuries.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook