# so whats the liklihood china will go to war with the west?



## Niggaplease (Aug 8, 2020)

as the title goes, what with the recent actions taken against china by the USA what is the likelihood that we will end up in an actual conflict with China? would we nuke each other or would the USA just put a naval blockade? like also would we cut off China's access to the resources they bought in Africa?


----------



## DumbDude42 (Aug 8, 2020)

open war? 0% likely


----------



## Niggaplease (Aug 8, 2020)

DumbDude42 said:


> open war? 0% likely


but what if China said fuck it lets go to war?


----------



## DumbDude42 (Aug 8, 2020)

Niggaplease said:


> but what if China said fuck it lets go to war?


they'd get blown up because america outguns them hard on the sea and in the air


----------



## Astro Galactic Megalul (Aug 8, 2020)

Very unlikely, there's very little benefit to open war in modern world.


----------



## Some JERK (Aug 8, 2020)

https://armedforces.eu/compare/country_USA_vs_China


----------



## LullerDerbyRollin (Aug 8, 2020)

Well if they did, besides everyone here mentioning that the USA out guns them, there's another problem. The USA is how China makes money, they export a lot to the USA and also import a lot. They'd be locked out of doing either of those and the USA would have no reason to honor any debts or agreements. China likes money more than any pride or ego, the USA can in every way fuck them.


----------



## Bob's Fries (Aug 8, 2020)

There is also a huge reliance on food from China to the US. If they try to fuck us, we can always starve them out. After all, the floods killed their farmland and necessary infrastructure to deliver supplies with a healthy dose of locusts as of late.


----------



## Tetra (Aug 8, 2020)

Niggaplease said:


> but what if China said fuck it lets go to war?



there is a 0% chance china will go to war with the united states.
however if china said fuck it lets go to war there would be a 100% chance they'd go to war

glad I could help


----------



## Niggaplease (Aug 8, 2020)

Tetra said:


> there is a 0% chance china will go to war with the united states.
> however if china said fuck it lets go to war there would be a 100% chance they'd go to war
> 
> glad I could help


what I'm saying is what would happen if China went to war? would farmers rise up as a sign emporer Winnie xi pooh lost the mandate of heaven? would they just nuke the USA and in turn the USA would nuke them off the map? would daddy Russia bail them out?


----------



## Gravityqueen4life (Aug 8, 2020)

wont happen. there is no profit in it for both sides.


----------



## Bland Crumbs (Aug 8, 2020)

Bob's Fries said:


> There is also a huge reliance on food from China to the US. If they try to fuck us, we can always starve them out. After all, the floods killed their farmland and necessary infrastructure to deliver supplies with a healthy dose of locusts as of late.



Even were it not for floods and locusts China has little land to farm and they made a lot of it toxic. Well technically the world enabled to them to do that...ha.


----------



## Bad Take Crucifier (Aug 8, 2020)

People have been saying this since Bush but it will never happen. It's paleo GOP shit thinking.

China thinks it makes them _look cool_ to publicly dunk on the USA, but in reality they're bankrolling the US military.

If you haven't noticed, China has been throwing Muslims in concentration camps for years, and by funding the USA, they're allowing America's massive military force to sit all over the Middle East. They love it, Arabs and Asians historically have bad blood. And it really takes the heat off of them to focus their own military on their own nation and enforcing their internal dictatorship.

Not to mention, the sweatshop situation, for iPhone manufacturing and such? It allows Chinese companies to essentially get free access to high-tech blueprints and research _while having done none of the research work. _They have a very beneficial relationship being parasitic, and they will never mess that up no matter how much they pretend to shit on America. They'll keep this up for decades until they get their collective shit together, which won't be for a while because their culture is a mess and they have already fucked up badly with the aftermath of the One Child Policy, Mao's genocides, decades of civil war and famine in recent history, so on and so forth. Going to war with America would be the worst thing for them because they fear getting flooded with "diversity" as is happening to Europe right now. They're too weak to fight that without the USA blocking the Middle East.

BUT HEY hypothetically, if they tried, let's just say they did try to invade the USA... Their military is garbage compared to the USA. The USA has the most advanced, strong, fast, efficient military of any country, and without sperging over details, America has the most state-of-the-art military research and technology, period.

The economic reality also paints a clear picture, a full third of all military spending on the PLANET is just the USA. China is a close second, but if you break down their spending per capita (America with a 330 million pop vs China with 1.4 billion pop), it's obvious that they actually cannot afford to spend _nearly as much per soldier_, and they also would have to rely on a brutal war of attrition, just throwing Chinese bodies on top of bodies because America would be able to kill at an unmatched rate.


----------



## MarineTrainedTard (Aug 8, 2020)

An actual shooting war? 0%. Even with things as they are now, China gets too much money from us and we get too much cheap labor from China to get into an actual, troops-and-tanks war.


----------



## Jewthulhu (Aug 8, 2020)

All out war between two nuclear superpowers? Very unlikely. If the past 75 years has taught us anything, it's that the new normal is proxy wars fought in 3rd world/non-nuclear nations.


----------



## Marissa Moira (Aug 8, 2020)

Niggaplease said:


> but what if China said fuck it lets go to war?


They can't mobilize their troops. They would be effectively sitting ducks, especially since Japan and Korea would insist on being involved.


----------



## MarineTrainedTard (Aug 8, 2020)

Yeah the US has complete naval dominance to such an overwhelming degree that US soil is effectively untouchable by conventional means whereas we can get sufficient force anywhere in the world relatively quickly.

Which circles back to China would have to nuke us which, frankly, they won't ever do because of the principle of mutually assured destruction


----------



## Bad Take Crucifier (Aug 8, 2020)

MarineTrainedTard said:


> Yeah the US has complete naval dominance to such an overwhelming degree that US soil is effectively untouchable by conventional means whereas we can get sufficient force anywhere in the world relatively quickly.
> 
> Which circles back to China would have to nuke us which, frankly, they won't ever do because of the principle of mutually assured destruction


Best they could hope for is literally a stalemate. Also, the USA has troops stationed in every single country on the planet. The amount of strategic and intelligence power from that alone is superior. America is everywhere, we're not called "The police of the world" for no reason.


----------



## The Bovinian Derivative (Aug 8, 2020)

Even with all the current day fuckery China's #1 exporter is still the USA (at least it was last year), it would not be beneficial to them to cut that off completely. And the USA is on a different continent and with all those carriers China could not bring the war to America's doorstep.


----------



## whatever I feel like (Aug 8, 2020)

In the next year? 0%
In the next 5000 years? 99.5% (and the rest is everyone dying due to some other war or event)

In that sense its not really an answerable question.


----------



## Johan Schmidt (Aug 8, 2020)

I'd put money on Chang going to war with the Pajeets before they throw down with Uncle Same; if only because of sheer proximity and a border if nothing else.


----------



## muh_moobs (Aug 8, 2020)

Believing that the only trigger for an armed conflict between the US and PRC would be a PRC invasion of mainland the US is foolish. 

People talk about economics, but what was the economic reason for the USA to go to war with Nazi Germany in 1941? None. US involvement in the war was inevitable, but the US could have focused simply on fighting Imperial Japan for territory in the Pacific theater. There was no economic impetus for armed conflict in Europe.

However, plague and famine have significantly weakened the position of the PRC and they need immediate (as in less than five years) relief in order to reverse their position. This is why they are pushing into Napal, Bhutan, India, Russia, and other countries, as well as being belligerent in Hong Kong. Their farmland has been devastated, their meat production has been reduced, and in the aftermath of the Coronavirus they are faced with countries exporting less goods. 

The PRC has in very recent years purchased a large number of modernized tanks and has actually purchased armor for their soldiers. It isn't much talked about, but the PLA is active in Africa, as remarked on in another thread discussing China. The only reason to engage in combat activities in Africa for the PLA would be to gain real combat experience and test battle doctrine. The PRC has also built naval bases in Africa in order to project force as the USA does. 

An invasion of Taiwan, Indonesia, the Philippines, an act of aggression towards Australia, or further military action in Hong Kong could all start a war with the west. Continued aggression towards India could also lead to an alliance between India and the west. 

An invasion of western nations is unlikely, but that does not preclude something happening that is a flashpoint for a western invasion of mainland China. 

The reality is that China can absolutely compete on the modern battlefield. The Type 15 MBT is an equal competitor with the current generation of Abrams and Leopard tanks. Their infantry soldiers are comparably equipped. The PRC also doesn't value human life like the west. The would not hesitate to zerg-rush western armies with a million peasants. 

Also, neither of these countries would be fighting alone. "The US" is more like "Team NATO". China would likely be joined by North Korea, Pakistan, and Iran. Yes, none of these nations are really a force multiplier, but my point is that China wouldn't stand alone. 

To answer OPs question, I'd say that at present the odds are probably around 55%.

China is desperate, has recently modernized their land forces and is aggressively trying to expand their territory while also being belligerent towards the global community. To continue to push would be foolish for the PRC to do, but to preserve the CCP they're running out of options. Their infrastructure is collapsing, their farmland is devastated, their meat is diseased, and their cities and people are plagued. None of those problems will be solved any time soon.


----------



## wtfNeedSignUp (Aug 8, 2020)

Only by way of escalation. China attacks some other country, the country gets USA/EU (fat chance) backing and it escalates from there into full on war.
However, China will be lacking allies since no one likes them besides journos and billionaires so it will probably relent if faced with overwhelming odds, though it's more likely that the other country will cuck out of stopping China due to fear of damage and journos and billionaires making a media hysteria why it's entirely justified to commit genocide.


----------



## Jonah Hill poster (Aug 8, 2020)

China has a bigger population that the U.S., but the U.S. has a better stock of nuclear and military like weapons. If anything, you should be asking when will there be another China vs. India war.


----------



## Orion Balls (Aug 8, 2020)

Niggaplease said:


> what I'm saying is what would happen if China went to war? would farmers rise up as a sign emporer Winnie xi pooh lost the mandate of heaven? would they just nuke the USA and in turn the USA would nuke them off the map? would daddy Russia bail them out?


You should read The Good Earth, by Pearl S Buck. While it is fictional, most of the sentiments held by the farmer in the story are still accurate in this day and age. The further you are from the centralized government stronghold, the less it influences you, and the less you care.


----------



## usernames can change now! (Aug 8, 2020)

Is it morally wrong to play as communist China in a video game


----------



## MarineTrainedTard (Aug 8, 2020)

I do think that there will 100% be a proxy war, though, something like China backing a Pakistani invasion of India and the US helping defend the Pajeets (or something, not necessarily that specifically)


----------



## Tetra (Aug 8, 2020)

Kiwi FBI Liason said:


> Is it morally wrong to play as communist China in a video game



there you are playing the PvP in your futuristic shooter and all of the sudden you're a chink commie you didn't ask for this you didn't choose this yet there it is and it's treated no differently than playing a normal soldier.


----------



## DeadFish (Aug 8, 2020)

I bet it going involve north Korea


----------



## Getting tard comed (Aug 9, 2020)

As pretty much everyone has said, highly unlikely China goes to war with the West anytime soon, and tbh probably not ever if you're talking open warfare. For several reasons. 

Main one being nukes. You know that conflict China had with India everyone was talking about starting WW3? They fought with clubs and rocks. Nobody is escalating into all out war when nukes are involved. 

Another being world domination doesn't appear to be in China's historical make up. They pretty much want to be left alone historically and while anything is subject to change all of their actions appear to be them securing their own space where they can do what they want. 

Thirdly, there has yet to be a war game played out(that I'm aware of) where the US(and let's face it, that's the only military power that matters in the West) beats China in open war. Everyone I've read is like this one where the US gets its ass handed to it and loses even if they manage to win. Granted that's the US attacking so maybe on the defense things are different but see above for how I feel on China attacking the US much less.


----------



## John Titor (Aug 10, 2020)

If they're smart, they wouldn't try anything.


----------



## Made In China (Aug 10, 2020)

0%, no one is going to start a thermonuclear war just because some alt-right faggots want it.


----------



## Reverend (Aug 10, 2020)

#DIV/0

That much


----------



## Obi Wan Kenobi (Aug 10, 2020)

The economic ties of China to the west are too precious for them & the west to lose, both sides would come out with a loss, so I’d say anything further than cold-war type power moves & proxy wars is off the table, for now


----------



## Optimism (Aug 11, 2020)

it doesn't seem very likely to me at all. all other things considered, China is surrounded by many powerful (and U.S.-aligned) potential enemies while at least a sizeable portion of its internationally relevant infrastructure is heavily focused along the eastern coast and relatively vulnerable. any True and Honest armed conflict with the U.S. would result in some seriously disproportionate evisceration, if the Chinese could even cross the Pacific to retaliate at all.


----------



## Merried Senior Comic (Aug 12, 2020)

Zero. Mutually Assured Destruction ensures there will never be another large-scale conflict.


----------



## FunPosting101 (Aug 15, 2020)

Getting tard comed said:


> Thirdly, there has yet to be a war game played out(that I'm aware of) where the US(and let's face it, that's the only military power that matters in the West) beats China in open war. Everyone I've read is like this one where the US gets its ass handed to it and loses even if they manage to win. Granted that's the US attacking so maybe on the defense things are different but see above for how I feel on China attacking the US much less.


China has supposedly conducted their own wargames over a air and naval conflict with the USA and they were apparently capable of damaging or sinking a few ships, and cratering a few airfields, but the US response completely destroyed their own air and naval forces. I don't have the link for that handy right now though, I'm sorry to say.

That aside, though, I would take any of these wargames with a grain or two of salt, that wargame in the run-up to the Iraq War where magical bike couriers and speed boats carrying anti-ship missiles that were apparently too heavy for the boats in question were somehow capable of defeating the USN is highly telling about how little these wargames have to do with reality sometimes.


----------



## bot_for_hire (Dec 30, 2020)

Australian Lawmaker Predicts War Between US & China In "Three To Five Years"​


> With US-China relations at their lowest point in decades, one of Washington’s closest allies in the Pacific is gearing up for a potential war between the two superpowers. In an interview with Australia’s _Seven News_, Australian Senator Jim Molan said he expects a conflict to break out soon.
> 
> *"We are likely in the next three to five years or in the next five to ten years to be involved in a war between China and the United States,"* Molan said. The senator made the comments while discussing the budget and capabilities of Australia’s military. "The ADF (Australian Defense Forces) has never been better than it is now," he said.
> 
> ...


----------



## Secret Asshole (Dec 30, 2020)

This is called the 'Thucydides Trap' (https://www.theatlantic.com/interna...ited-states-china-war-thucydides-trap/406756/) in which a declining power and a rising power will go to war. 12 of the 16 times this happened there was war, but of course since you're the one picking you can make it look that way. I doubt there will be open war. The rise of globalization by the ruling class was specifically designed to frown upon open war. After all, you can't make a profit if everything is in ashes. Countries rely on each other way too much to do this nowadays. And with nukes, everyone is leery about it. Nobody wants to test out the first major war between nuclear powers because "Well, we'll just launch a sub-tactical nuke at their aircraft carriers in a remote part of the ocean" is REALLY REALLY tempting, and then that escalates all the way up to "ARM THE TRIDENTS OFF THE COAST AND LAUCH EVERYTHING AT THEIR MAJOR POPULATION CENTERS". 

So unless this is the most diplomatic war ever "We promise to wage war in this area and won't use nukes or target cities, pinky swear" (and when shit hits the fan, lol if anyone thinks the Chinese will stick to THAT. Well maybe the nukes part, anyway) then all bets are off. Its hard to say, I don't picture a shooting war unless we want to cripple each other's economy completely. As others have said, we could starve them out and there'd be little recourse they'd have. Its not really something either side wants because it has little benefit. Now proxy wars? Ehh...there's really no one in the region to proxy for China. Everyone there fucking HATES China. Vietnam isn't going to go to bat for China, its just starting to get cash money. The other countries are pissed that China is basically saying the South China sea is theirs all the way up to the middle of the pacific ocean and hiking up mounds of dirt going "SEE THIS MINE NOW". So there's not even proxy wars that could go on in the area. Maybe in the ME, the proxy war capital of the world. Most wars are settled their because there's fuck all infrastructure to destroy. 

So war by China, with China? HIGHLY Unlikely. Rate this as 99% no, 1% yes where winnie the poo gets dementia and goes fucking nuts, but even then he's getting two in the back of the head and dumped off a boat somewhere. Proxy war by China? 100% no. There's simply no proxy for them. Proxy war in the ME? Highly likely. 

The thing is the Thucydides trap was before globalization and the heavy intertwining of other nation's economies with each other. As time goes on, this becomes worse and worse. Its the reason war has shifted from massive ground based battles to special operations and spycraft. Because you WANT the enemy infrastructure in a rich country. You don't want to destroy it. And if you're not destroying it, warfare becomes a thousand times harder. So its easier to economically and culturally dominate than dominate militarily. China wages war these days by spying, economics and culture. It dominates economically, which allows it to get into places it normally wouldn't, and then implants its culture and spies, stealing resources from the host and converting host resources to its own. In this way, China is much like a virus.  We're already in a war with China. Will it turn into an outright shooting war? Probably not. Not even neo-cons want that scenario.


usernames can change now! said:


> Is it morally wrong to play as communist China in a video game ?


As long as you shout "TAIWAN NUMBAH 1!" to make all the Chinese players burst a blood vessel.


----------



## FunPosting101 (Dec 30, 2020)

Let me put it like this: China going to war with the United States of America is not going to happen anytime within the next 50 years barring a completely unknown and unknowable event occurring. The USA has a tremendous conventional force advantage in terms of power and mobility, whereas all the PRC has going for it is sheer numbers. Combine that with the fact that both countries have nuclear arsenals which means MAD is in play and actual conventional war just plain isn't going to happen. 

Proxy wars? Trade wars? Those can happen, the former did happen in the cold war, and the latter may have already happened depending on how you define the term.


----------



## Drag-on Knight 91873 (Dec 30, 2020)

usernames can change now! said:


> Is it morally wrong to play as communist China in a video game


"All of sudden, you're Chinese."
-Extra Credits probably

Seriously, the US and China wouldn't wage a war with each other. The question is would China wage a war against an American ally? Under Trump, no because he was always a "fuck me?! Fuck you!" kind of leader. We saw that in deed when he raised tariffs on their exports when he accused them of currency manipulation. Under Biden or any president that wants to strengthen relations with China? That is up for debate. As pointed out by everyone else in this thread, the two countries are too linked to each other economically and educationally due entirely to corporate entities like Hollywood and Silicon Valley. However, what complicates it is all the nations that rely on the US for protection. For nations like Japan, South Korea, and the Philiphines, they have to rely on the US navy to defend their interests. For example, say the Chinese outright seizes the Daiyou/Senkaku islands. If Japan wanted to oppose it, they have to petition the US to stop the Chinese navy. What if the US doesn't do it? Japan has to legally pout.

That, and China can literally sneeze in our direction and we become too afraid to go outside. They don't have to fight us when the flu completely subdues the US.

This is why I think China plans to annex Taiwan in the next four to eight years. The One China policy the US has recognized for decades plus the US looking the other way during the annexation of Crimea plus a desire to improve relations with the CCP leads me to think that the US will not engage with war with China for ANY reason, even if a pre-existing alliance or bi-lateral agreement with a nation exists.


----------



## bot_for_hire (Jan 5, 2021)

> *Horrible experience during watching an online speech by JianXiongGe today*
> Today I heard a speech in an online stream live. It’s a speech about the regimes of ancient China and the ‘unification’ of China. I was so horrified by the professor's idea. What's more, the most terrible thing is that the audience feel so excited about the professors idea. I cannot believe chinese people can be such crude and dangerous like this.
> 
> In general, this professor, whose name is Jian Xiong Ge(葛剑雄), advocated for three core value. I think China is becoming Nazi empire from bottom to the head.This speech was very popular. There were about a thousand audience in the stream.
> ...


----------

