U.S. Sends Second Carrier to Asia Amid Tensions with China

[Huaren]

No one is claiming that the US helped China out of pure benevolence. However, one of us seems to be claiming that the US did not help China, or that China would be the economic behemoth that it is today without the US

In this Orwellian world, where Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia, it's easy to understand why China is hostile to the US. However, in the real world, it is not easy to understand why China is hostile to the US.

The thing is that while nobody is denying the important role of US for the development of China, neither did anyone forget what your nation did before that, you had us cut off from the half of the world. (the other half was also cut off after sino-soviet split just a few years after the new founding of our nation) You refused to acknowlege our existence when we needed recognition the most, you hit us when you see fit and you "help" us when you see fit (with your interest). It is only fitting when China treat you the same way, help you or hit you according to our interest, and as long as you play against the multi polar world order you will always be against our interest.

I am also sorry to hear this, because it means that no matter what the US does, China will regard it with hostility. That is China's prerogative, of course, but it should not be surprised if this generates mistrust on our part, and consequent actions deriving from that mistrust.

You know, "consequent actions" is what China has been preparing for all those decades until today (and beyond). There was never any trust between China and USA as its between nations. just the trust of the need of making profits, that was the only thing we might have common interest in and nothing more. The bombing of chinese embassy, the collision with your spy planes, your pivot to pacific and all which is happening now are the confirmations which are consolidating the resolve of chinese. (And of course also your actions in middle east and now eastern europe) But if you stay away the least we could expect is that our relationship wont go below the "distrusted but most important buisness partner", and there wont be further risks of any conflicts. If you want to come and knock at our doorstep it would be your decision to make those risks real.

But seriously sooner or later the US has to open up its eyes and see the cost-benefits in overextension, wherether you win or lose battles at some point you would have to retreat back to your region, and the longer it takes the more distrust and costs you will get.

 

[Genesis]

Again, this seems to be a cultural difference. The US loves synergy, ie win-win. China appears to regard such scenarios with deep suspicion (eg Sahalian and your discounting of US benevolence because we also benefited from it), and sees the world through a zero-sum game (eg your conclusion that the US should allow China to abuse the system as much as it likes, to our own detriment, because China's dominance is inevitable).

Therefore, I will fall back on the "agree to disagree" line. Thanks for the informative discussion.

How do we both win, let me ask.

Cause for now, being an equal is a win for us, but how could that possibly benefit America.

If you mean remain as it is, how does that benefit us anymore. Are we to remain the world's factory and continue the destruction of our environment indefinitely?

You went to grade 1, but you moved on, not because it sucked or didn't help you, but you grown.


How do we both benefit? I seriously would like to know.

 

[sahaliyan]

No one is claiming that the US helped China out of pure benevolence. However, one of us seems to be claiming that the US did not help China, or that China would be the economic behemoth that it is today without the US.

In this Orwellian world, where Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia, it's easy to understand why China is hostile to the US. However, in the real world, it is not easy to understand why China is hostile to the US.

Let me make the points clear to you,China and US aren't natural enemies,we don't share border,Chinese have on interests in the western hemisphere,China will never invade US,the elites of US should understand this fact,we are no way threat to you guys.
But your elites view rising China as your biggest threat,evident by your government actions,why Obama want to "return to Asia-pacific""rebalance of Asia-Pacific"?And it's a well known fact your elites want to use Japan,Philipines,India and Australia contain China,however your policy seems failed,because most our neibghours have friendly relation with us,and some our best allies also in our neighbourhood,so you can't contain China
As we developed very fast,we are very careful for our energy security,no one will give it's security to other countries,so it's natural for us to seek the other roads instead of Melacca,and your elite seem don't understand this,see their dirty work in Burma,they know Burma is very important for our energy security,then they want to taken Burma away from us?What's the reason your elites do this?
As for the south China issue,I also should make it clear,the nine-dotted line was draw by the KMT government,the line already exist several decades,why this line became a problem now?You should know,we already give up the nine-dotted line in real world,you can see we have no problem with Malaysia and Brunei,so there are other reasons for the current territorial disputes in south China sea

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

The thing is that while nobody is denying the important role of US for the development of China, neither did anyone forget what your nation did before that, you had us cut off from the half of the world. (the other half was also cut off after sino-soviet split just a few years after the new founding of our nation) You refused to acknowlege our existence when we needed recognition the most, you hit us when you see fit and you "help" us when you see fit (with your interest). It is only fitting when China treat you the same way, help you or hit you according to our interest, and as long as you play against the multi polar world order you will always be against our interest.

I hear you, but I think we can both acknowledge that history was much more complicated than the way you presented it. After 1950, all we knew was that China was communist, under a leadership that had deposed our ally in WWII, and had entered a war against us (a war that was not directed at China) in order to defend a communist Soviet puppet (North Korea). I think we can agree that there was no reason for the US to trust China, which is why Nixon's move was so bold. In retrospect, it seems like the obvious choice to split the Communist bloc, but at the time, it was perceived as a move fraught with risk and not easy, by any means.

We don't expect China to worship us, or be our best friend. We expect China to recognize the value of the system that has done so much for China, and which China is doing so much to sabotage. Eventually China will learn how precious and rare stability and free trade is, how hard it is to sustain, and how hard it is to rebuild after it is destroyed. One would think that China, the largest trading nation, would value stability and the free trade that stability enables, but one would be wrong.

I periodically ask this question when I see the veneration of "a multi-polar world" appear, but I have never received a response. I don't expect a response now, but please remind me: when as the last time we had a multi-polar world that has been even close to as prosperous as Pax Americana?

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

How do we both win, let me ask.

Cause for now, being an equal is a win for us, but how could that possibly benefit America.

If you mean remain as it is, how does that benefit us anymore. Are we to remain the world's factory and continue the destruction of our environment indefinitely?

You went to grade 1, but you moved on, not because it sucked or didn't help you, but you grown.


How do we both benefit? I seriously would like to know.

I don't understand the question. You have been benefiting, and will continue to do so. The Asian Tigers made the transition from manufacturing to service without harassing our military, so the current system will continue to allow China to grow without any changes. That depends on China's internal policies, not us.

If China wants to take over military responsibility for ensuring the peace in Asia, I am actually optimistic that such a scenario can be arranged. China need only prove its good intentions by committing military resources to impose stability (eg Iraq, which will help secure energy resources), instead of committing its resources to foster instability (eg the SCS). I think we both know that is unlikely.

Allies are falling into our arms because China is pushing them to us, not because we are bribing them to hate China. In fact, Vietnam's relationship with China was warm before China blew it up with the oil rig business. Can you say with a straight face that we are encircling China, when China is doing its best to alienate its neighbors?

 

[Aepsilons]

@LeveragedBuyout , you truly are 一人の軍隊 [Hitori No Guntai] -- One Man Army. Good to see the American point of view being heralded in this section.

 

[AgentOrange]

Nationalistic rhetoric aside, at the moment, China can't hope to match the US in the air or on the sea. That's a fact. No use pissing and moaning about it and pretending China currently stands a chance when she does not. However, IMO, this turn of events is actually a good wake-up call for China. This show of force really drives home the point that the Chinese mainland is at risk and a viable target for US war planners while they believe the continental US to be untouchable.

Part of American war plans against China includes strikes on the Chinese mainland (airsea battle) to disrupt the DF-21 kill chain because the US can get away with it at the moment. If things escalate, the US believes it can "win" a nuclear exchange with China. This is due to China's foolish notion of minimal deterrence. Right now China is expanding her nuclear arsenal but not nearly fast enough. Notice that a month ago, Russia similarly conducted an aggressive intercept of a USAF RC-135 but the Americans did nothing. No carrier battle group. Nothing but weak protests. And no American planner would dare conceive of any attacks on Russian soil.

The differences between how the US responds to Russia vis a vis China are stark. If anything these overt displays of force by the US should be encouraged because they'll help disabuse China of the notion that minimal deterrence is in any way viable. China should be able to thoroughly return the favor in terms of devastation should it ever come to a nuclear exchange - only then will attacks against mainland China lose some luster. Chinese leaders aren't stupid and I'm sure they're taking notice. China is already expanding her nuclear arsenal, as I've noted, but now they may up the pace. And for that, we should thank the USN.

 

[Huaren]

I hear you, but I think we can both acknowledge that history was much more complicated than the way you presented it. After 1950, all we knew was that China was communist, under a leadership that had deposed our ally in WWII, and had entered a war against us (a war that was not directed at China) in order to defend a communist Soviet puppet (North Korea). I think we can agree that there was no reason for the US to trust China, which is why Nixon's move was so bold. In retrospect, it seems like the obvious choice to split the Communist bloc, but at the time, it was perceived as a move fraught with risk and not easy, by any means.

We don't expect China to worship us, or be our best friend. We expect China to recognize the value of the system that has done so much for China, and which China is doing so much to sabotage. Eventually China will learn how precious and rare stability and free trade is, how hard it is to sustain, and how hard it is to rebuild after it is destroyed. One would think that China, the largest trading nation, would value stability and the free trade that stability enables, but one would be wrong.

I periodically ask this question when I see the veneration of "a multi-polar world" appear, but I have never received a response. I don't expect a response now, but please remind me: when as the last time we had a multi-polar world that has been even close to as prosperous as Pax Americana?

At a point we will have to agree to disgree, and like I said previously, even my view is being considered as "traitor" in China, so you would have hard time to find much liberal opinions. It is your action which is destroying the trust of "Pax Americana" if it still even exists today, and the rise of developing nations and the third world are demanding their shares and rights in the global system which cannot be maintained by single faction, it wont be able to provide trust and justice which is nessercary to satify the "new comers" which makes up the majority of this world. And honestly do you truely believe your nation did a good job as the sole world leader? Think of how many miseries and problems which wont exist or becoming this worse if you stood where you are and kept your hands away, did you have to meddling everywhere across the globe where you are not even familiar with local situation, ever studied philosophy of Taoism?

 

[LeveragedBuyout]

Let me make the points clear to you,China and US aren't natural enemies,we don't share border,Chinese have on interests in the western hemisphere,China will never invade US,the elites of US should understand this fact,we are no way threat to you guys.
But your elites view rising China as your biggest threat,evident by your government actions,why Obama want to "return to Asia-pacific""rebalance of Asia-Pacific"?And it's a well known fact your elites want to use Japan,Philipines,India and Australia contain China,however your policy seems failed,because most our neibghours have friendly relation with us,and some our best allies also in our neighbourhood,so you can't contain China
As we developed very fast,we are very careful for our energy security,no one will give it's security to other countries,so it's natural for us to seek the other roads instead of Melacca,and your elite seem don't understand this,see their dirty work in Burma,they know Burma is very important for our energy security,then they want to taken Burma away from us?What's the reason your elites do this?
As for the south China issue,I also should make it clear,the nine-dotted line was draw by the KMT government,the line already exist several decades,why this line became a problem now?You should know,we already give up the nine-dotted line in real world,you can see we have no problem with Malaysia and Brunei,so there are other reasons for the current territorial disputes in south China sea

We are not natural enemies, which is why I am optimistic that we can have quite friendly relations, as soon as China convinces itself that it is secure (which it is, believe it or not).

But if China continues to alienate neighbors, whether through provocative oil drilling or propaganda against Japan's atrocities from 70+ years ago, those neighbors will naturally gravitate towards the US, which is not doing anything to alienate them. As I said to Genesis, it's really China that is encircling itself, not us. I know, it's a radical idea, but perhaps if China treats its neighbors with respect, that hostility will diminish. As long as China looks backwards to the time that it could expect tribute from these countries, and continues to treat them like subordinates, it can't expect to have good relations with them. If China changes, and accrues allies in the region, where would the US go? Everyone is already dependent on China economically. It is only China's determination to humiliate its neighbors politically that keeps China encircled.

 

[Aepsilons]

At a point we will have to agree to disgree, and like I said previously, even my view is being considered as "traitor" in China, so you would have hard time to find much liberal opinions. It is your action which is destroying the trust of "Pax Americana" if it still even exists today, and the rise of developing nations and the third world are demanding their shares and rights in the global system which cannot be maintained by single faction, it wont be able to provide trust and justice which is nessercary to satify the "new comers" which makes up the majority of this world. And honestly do you truely believe your nation did a good job as the sole world leader? Think of how many miseries and problems which wont exist or becoming this worse if you stood where you are and kept your hands away, did you have to meddling everywhere across the globe where you are not even familiar with local situation, ever studied philosophy of Taoism?

How are you any different from other Chinese nationalists in opinion? From your posts, you sing the very same points as they, verbatim. You, a Chinese 'Liberal' ? I don' think so. Your reference to personal anecdotes do not change your established 'points' that you have made so clear in previous posts.

 

[AgentOrange]

Trust me we have the lowest defense expenditure in the world. We spend less than 0.9% of our GDP on defense, yet it is at $60 billion. Japan's constitution allows the passing of an emergency clause wherein which the environment becomes hostile, the Diet may normalize the defense expenditure to 3% of the GDP, with a ceiling at 5%. In the event of such cases, as in War, Japan can raise our Military Defense to $300 Billion per annum. I think this is acceptable.

But currently, as it stands, our defense expenditure is small, miniscule at only 0.9% of our GDP. Yet there are neighbors who are threatened by Japanese 'remilitarization'. lol.

To quote George Takei, "Oh My!"





I think it was a bad idea in the first place to occupy Iraq, as the United States Army is a professional killing machine, not a nation building force. I am satisfied to hear that our American allies have removed themselves from the Middle East, as their objectives were relatively accomplished.

Because Abenomics is working so well and Japan's economy didn't just contract by 7% in the past 3 months. Also, as the most rapidly aging and shrinking major country in the world, Japan is a dying nation that either needs to open the immigration floodgates thereby changing the character of your country or wither and fade away (which, IMO, will be your fate no matter what). But yeah, why don't you do that - up your defense spending to 3-5% of your GDP. You can afford it and it would be the smart thing to do. Banzai!!! (means 'YOLO' in Japanese right?) LMAO!

 

[sahaliyan]

We are not natural enemies, which is why I am optimistic that we can have quite friendly relations, as soon as China convinces itself that it is secure (which it is, believe it or not).

But if China continues to alienate neighbors, whether through provocative oil drilling or propaganda against Japan's atrocities from 70+ years ago, those neighbors will naturally gravitate towards the US, which is not doing anything to alienate them. As I said to Genesis, it's really China that is encircling itself, not us. I know, it's a radical idea, but perhaps if China treats its neighbors with respect, that hostility will diminish. As long as China looks backwards to the time that it could expect tribute from these countries, and continues to treat them like subordinates, it can't expect to have good relations with them. If China changes, and accrues allies in the region, where would the US go? Everyone is already dependent on China economically. It is only China's determination to humiliate its neighbors politically that keeps China encircled.

I think your elites don't think so,what's our hostility policy in 2001?But your cowboy president Dubya still spy on us,the excuse for those actions is China is communist,however everyone with a brain know that your elites are not against communism,but against Chinese people(for political correct reason,they should have excuse,I can understand).
We don't have problem with our most neighbours,only a fews are exception,and there are reasons
Let me tell you,the Diaoyu islands dispute was started by a Hongkong-based organization,that organization is actually anti-CCP,they even burnt Chinese flag,but why they want to land in Diaoyu islands in 2012,consider DPJ government for China is better than LDJ?They know their actions will cause the dispute between the two countries,while the three east Asian countries talked about set up East Asian FTA that time,after this,all the efforts wasted,so many people suspect there were American hands behind their actions,since you Americans have strong influence in Hongkong.You Americans surely don't want to see the cooperation between east Asian countries,because this will be your end in east asia.

 

[Genesis]

I periodically ask this question when I see the veneration of "a multi-polar world" appear, but I have never received a response. I don't expect a response now, but please remind me: when as the last time we had a multi-polar world that has been even close to as prosperous as Pax Americana?

Never, that I'll admit, but a couple of reasons for this.

At no point in history has a nation been so powerful. America can destroy a militarily competent Iraq, though destroyed by years of war with Iran, with so few loses, even Rome of old or ancient Chinese empires cannot do that.

Is a concert of Europe more peaceful world? Maybe not, because the balance of power, may even be the cause of conflicts, since any one major nation can take on another if given the right circumstances. Right now as long as the US don't go crazy, peace can more or less be kept.

But in terms of trade, China, middle east has always prospered with trade, the Song fleet of trade ships dwarfs any Dutch fleet that came after it.

In a way the American system is the Chinese system with American characteristics, rather than a Euro system. Countries such as UK and Japan retain their autonomy more or less, but they would defer to America for major issues. This obviously has evolved and not exactly like our old system, but the key similarity is the unchallenged power of the host. We had it, you have it.


But thing thing right now is, just like Europeans eventually become able to break the system in Asia after centuries of trying(opium war wasn't the first, it's just that before it, it was small scale and it was our victory), so too are we more and more capable of breaking such a system. China handle it poorly, how would America handle it?

This isn't saying it's a better world, but it is a world that will happen, we face it for better or worse.

I don't understand the question. You have been benefiting, and will continue to do so. The Asian Tigers made the transition from manufacturing to service without harassing our military, so the current system will continue to allow China to grow without any changes. That depends on China's internal policies, not us.

If China wants to take over military responsibility for ensuring the peace in Asia, I am actually optimistic that such a scenario can be arranged. Chine need only prove its good intentions by committing military resources to impose stability (eg Iraq, which will help secure energy resources), instead of committing its resources to foster instability (eg the SCS). I think we both know that is unlikely.

Allies are falling into our arms because China is pushing them to us, not because we are bribing them to hate China. In fact, Vietnam's relationship with China was warm before China blew it up with the oil rig business. Can you say with a straight face that we are encircling China, when China is doing its best to alienate its neighbors?

Can any of the asian tigers challenge America? We will surpass your GDP, by 2023 at latest. that would only be about 1/4th of your per capita.

We are different than any other Asian tigers.

I don't really care about our neighbors, they will come around later, that will come with time, Canada and Mexico wasn't America's biggest fan before, but things have a way of working out once certain pieces fall into place. Besides, what neighbors? We got good enough relations with most of them, just Japan, Philippines and Vietnam. A great nation, and two nut cases.



Again, I'm not saying better world, I am saying our world. Leaving your parent's house isn't going to be smooth and won't necessarily be better, but independence is important, freedom to do what you want is important. Being America you would understand that wouldn't you.

 

[Huaren]

I think your elites don't think so,what's our hostility policy in 2001?But your cowboy president Dubya still spy on us,the excuse for those actions is China is communist,however everyone with a brain know that your elites are not against communism,but against Chinese people(for political correct reason,they should have excuse,I can understand).
We don't have problem with our most neighbours,only a fews are exception,and there are reasons
Let me tell you,the Diaoyu islands dispute was started by a Hongkong-based organization,that organization is actually anti-CCP,they even burnt Chinese flag,but why they want to land in Diaoyu islands in 2012,consider DPJ government for China is better than LDJ?They know their actions will cause the dispute between the two countries,while the three east Asian countries talked about set up East Asian FTA that time,after this,all the efforts wasted,so many people suspect there were American hands behind their actions,since you Americans have strong influence in Hongkong.You Americans surely don't want to see the cooperation between east Asian countries,because this will be your end in east asia.

About the Diaoyu islands dispute dont forget the factions in Japan, when Japan nationalised the islands, there was only one choice China could make, escalation or suicide, and everything could only go following one path (up to this day). Werether US played a hand in this is up for debate, but surely lots people will suspect this because of US history elsewhere.

 

[sahaliyan]

In reality,every country has some problem with it's neighbor,what's so blg deal here?Consider China has so many neighbours,only a few has problems,what's big deal here?
And China has non-interference in internal affairs principle,ask the Pakistan members here,even we are their closest ally,do you interference in their internal affais?If this is not respect,then what's can be called respect?

About the Diaoyu islands dispute dont forget the factions in Japan, when Japan nationalised the islands, there was only one choice China could make, escalation or suicide, and everything could only go following one path (up to this day). Werether US played a hand in this is up for debate, but surely lots people will suspect this because of US history elsewhere.

Those Hongkongers first landed the Diaoyu islands,then Japanese government nationalised the islands,so I think both should blame for the dispute