What kind of a crazy article is this from UPI???

Lion

Senior Member
Not true. USN carrier operations are the same in peace or war.

Never been on a USN carrier have you? I have..five of them..Kennedy, Midway, Hancock, America & Nimitz.

Yes, once those fighter launch from carrier start to intervene in China conflict. It will become a free for all out war. As what many mention, is US willing to fight for Vietnam and Philippine against China for few minor territories dispute?

Remember, once you bomb Chinese target. China will target any US target with no regards(including economic measures). Before you say US will, lets look at history record for evidence..

That's why I say, sending carrier and do nothing..
 

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Remember, once you bomb Chinese target. China will target any US target with no regards(including economic measures).

Ya' don't want to do that. The US will respond in kind.

Before you say US will, lets look at history record for evidence..

Sure, >> Nagasaki, Hiroshima and the carpet bombing of German & Japanese cities & many economic targets were hit during the US wars against Iraq.

Lion, I pray that there is no war between China and the US. There would be no winners.
 

s002wjh

Junior Member
Yes, once those fighter launch from carrier start to intervene in China conflict. It will become a free for all out war. As what many mention, is US willing to fight for Vietnam and Philippine against China for few minor territories dispute?

Remember, once you bomb Chinese target. China will target any US target with no regards(including economic measures). Before you say US will, lets look at history record for evidence..

That's why I say, sending carrier and do nothing..

lets not get to versus thread. the fact is south china sea is not only important to china and ASEAN but also important to many other countries. 1/3 of worlds shipping go through there and its resource rich. US might not fire the first shot, they might support ASEAN indirectly at first. if conflict is getting too large, US are very likely to send CVBG to that area, patrol/dissuade china from attacking ASEAN etc.(it also depend on the president at that time, and public opinon toward china) so if US CVBG is between china's fleet and its area of interest. what would china do? are they gonna fire the first shot or try to force US fire first? it could easily escalate to bigger war. Chinese navy is still no match compare to US navy, i think we can all agree on that. the logistic for chinese navy in a conflict at south china sea is a nightmare. especially if all the ASEAN countries supporting the US.
 
Last edited:

solarz

Brigadier
lets not get to versus thread. the fact is south china sea is not only important to china and ASEAN but also important to many other countries. 1/3 of worlds shipping go through there and its resource rich. US might not fire the first shot, they might support ASEAN indirectly at first. if conflict is getting too large, US are very likely to send CVBG to that area, patrol/dissuade china from attacking ASEAN etc.(it also depend on the president at that time, and public opinon toward china) so if US CVBG is between china's fleet and its area of interest. what would china do? are they gonna fire the first shot or try to force US fire first? it could easily escalate to bigger war. Chinese navy is still no match compare to US navy, i think we can all agree on that. the logistic for chinese navy in a conflict at south china sea is a nightmare. especially if all the ASEAN countries supporting the US.

How would it get too large? Do you think China is going to attack Vietnam/Philippine proper if they are thwarted in SCS? Do you honestly think that China *will* be thwarted at SCS without direct US support? This isn't the jungle of Vietnam we're talking about. This is the high seas with a few uninhabited reefs.
 

need2nomore

Just Hatched
Registered Member
all the bond can be trade via stock or other method. if its legal transaction with huge amount of t-bond(t-bond trading between nations are often large amount). IT HAS RECORDS, that records indicate how much t-bond sold to japan/europe from china for example. its same when you do a transaction through bank, there is always a record. In the event of a war. US can effectively default those debt, which make china liquify/transaction those debt to other countries impossible. transaction between small amount of t-bond through private party is not recorded as detail as those between nations due to too many transaction daily. ask some foreign finance expert on this if you don't belief it, because i ask a friend of mine who happen work in this area. anytime there is huge amount of t-bond trading between nations, its recorded. read up on ISIN,CUSIP, NSIN numbers. small amount hold by private party are difficult to track, but in the event of a war. china need to trade large amount of t-bill, bonds etc $1.3 trillion. so if china want to get rid of those 1.3 trillion, first china has to trade those bond for gold, resource, or other europe/asia bond WITH other countries. its gonna be hard to sold all those t-bill simultaneously when most country won't even buy it. its like going to a store pay your purchase with cash, but the store deny your purchase, because they don't want to make a transaction WITH YOU, not because your cash is fake. China can't sell those $1.3 trillion in an instant, some small private party might want take risk and buy some t-bill from china(but those are small amount millions, certainly not trillions) but nations such as japan/europe etc won't buy it. because large amount of t-bill transaction between nation are recorded, and its easy for US to found out. even if its not, investors/those nations won't take the chance. furthermore once nations trade t-bill, its not that often they sold it right away(private party are opposite), so when china purchase t-bond from US, most t-bill will stay in china for some time. in the end is about how china can get rid of $1.3T bonds instanly via trade with other nations. No private party can afford that much t-bonds. So which nations is dumb enough to buy US t-bill from chinese when US specifically said due to war, the debt is default. what kind of investor would risk it by buying US t-bond from china. we are talking about trillion t-bonds, not small transaction daily between private party. and as i SAID BEFORE because of WAR US can effictively default their debt to china. do you think US will still pay their debt to china WHEN there is a conflict going on between them, when hundreds US sailor is killed?? its like while i'm punching you, not only you are not getting mad, but paying me with cash. how well do you think US public will feel when US stilll paying chinese debt during a WAR due to south china sea. US still gonna pay japan/europe back because they are ally, and because US is not at war with them.

as for attack US ship in international water, sure china can do it. but do they willing to do it if US CVBG is in that area. South china sea is not a Chinese core interest. if china don't have to worry about US, taiwan and south china sea is probably already under chinese control. if US decide to put CVBG directly between china task force and phillipine/other countries or particular area chinese are interest in. what would china do? its same situation as taiwan 1996, US basically just put their CVBG there, and wait for chinese response. so would china attack US or back down or negotiate? because its very likely US will get invovle in south china sea conflict, and thats the situation china might face one day.

The government can always choose to default on its foreign debt, just like you can always decide to default on yours. But unlike personal financing, a country defaulting on its foreign debt is the equivalent of an A bomb on your economy. America's money is not backed by gold, and thus it is valued based on the "Full Faith and Credit" of the United States government. And it is especially because of this, America's credit rating is extremely important. When the congress threatened to not increase the debt ceiling several months back, the whole idea of the US POSSIBLY defaulting on loans was enough to lower our rating and send it into shock, now imagine what will happen if it actually happened. Just like in a time of war, especially in the modern era, the nuclear weapon is always a choice, the idea of defaulting on loans is also always viable, but always your LAST alternative. To do so just because there is a conflict will be like chopping off your arms because it itched, extremely unlikely.
 

kwaigonegin

Colonel
The government can always choose to default on its foreign debt, just like you can always decide to default on yours. But unlike personal financing, a country defaulting on its foreign debt is the equivalent of an A bomb on your economy. America's money is not backed by gold, and thus it is valued based on the "Full Faith and Credit" of the United States government. And it is especially because of this, America's credit rating is extremely important. When the congress threatened to not increase the debt ceiling several months back, the whole idea of the US POSSIBLY defaulting on loans was enough to lower our rating and send it into shock, now imagine what will happen if it actually happened. Just like in a time of war, especially in the modern era, the nuclear weapon is always a choice, the idea of defaulting on loans is also always viable, but always your LAST alternative. To do so just because there is a conflict will be like chopping off your arms because it itched, extremely unlikely.

Not saying it's a bad idea but to my knowledge I do not think there's single county left whose economy is based strictly on the Gold standard.
Someone feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken.
 

Red___Sword

Junior Member
I pray that there is no war between China and the US. There would be no winners.

We all do, sir.

We may do the "measuring the stick" at a public forum as we kill times, but fortunate enough, it is the cool minds sit in respective office make things happening, or make things not happening at all.

The thread got a good title, "What kind of a crazy article is this from UPI???" - It is nothing but an ARTICLE, and it is "A citing B which have a resource from C that claims D knows it, E have the following comments..." we-see-too-much sterotype works from UPI (or anyone including GLOBAL TIMES of China, that sale news for a living).


Edit:

need2nomore got a fine analogy.

the nuclear weapon is always a choice, the idea of defaulting on loans is also always viable, but always your LAST alternative. To do so just because there is a conflict will be like chopping off your arms because it itched, extremely unlikely.
 
Last edited:

jantxv

New Member
China does not need the South China Sea's resources, free trade supplies more than enough at much cheaper costs. China does not need the South China Sea as a security buffer, since China is a nuclear weapons power and this is 2011, not 1911.

Nations would be wise not to fall for bait that would embroil them into costly proxy wars with the world's great powers. A protracted proxy war in the South China Sea is guaranteed to produce no winners, only stalemate and a return to the status quo.
 

s002wjh

Junior Member
The government can always choose to default on its foreign debt, just like you can always decide to default on yours. But unlike personal financing, a country defaulting on its foreign debt is the equivalent of an A bomb on your economy. America's money is not backed by gold, and thus it is valued based on the "Full Faith and Credit" of the United States government. And it is especially because of this, America's credit rating is extremely important. When the congress threatened to not increase the debt ceiling several months back, the whole idea of the US POSSIBLY defaulting on loans was enough to lower our rating and send it into shock, now imagine what will happen if it actually happened. Just like in a time of war, especially in the modern era, the nuclear weapon is always a choice, the idea of defaulting on loans is also always viable, but always your LAST alternative. To do so just because there is a conflict will be like chopping off your arms because it itched, extremely unlikely.

you have to remember default during a war is different than default during peace time. during the peace time it will totally destroy the credibility, but in a war with china, the credibility might hurt some but not destroyed. the other countries whos holding US t-bills are Japan/europeans, both are ally of US, none will likely have any military conflict with US in the near future. because of this they trust US will pay the debt to them. as i said before no country will expect US to pay its debt to their enemies during a war.
there are examples in the past where countries debt was eliminate overnight due to wars.
 
Last edited:

s002wjh

Junior Member
How would it get too large? Do you think China is going to attack Vietnam/Philippine proper if they are thwarted in SCS? Do you honestly think that China *will* be thwarted at SCS without direct US support? This isn't the jungle of Vietnam we're talking about. This is the high seas with a few uninhabited reefs.

if there is a navy conflict in which china is winning and declare the entire south china sea as chinese territory, then US has issues with that. that area is crucial for shipping lanes. no country will want to see china control 1/3 worlds shipping routes.
 
Top