What's new

US: If China goes to war we will make it go back 100 years

below_freezing

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Feb 26, 2010
Messages
8,253
Reaction score
0
פº«ÃÀ¾üǰ˾ÁÖйúÔÙ²ÎÕ½½«±»´ò»Ø°ÙÄêÇ° - »·Çò·çÔÆ - ÌúѪÉçÇø

translate.google.com

According to Yonhap News on December 5, Bell, former commander of U.S. forces in Korea 3, said, "measures to deal with North Korea's provocation, in addition to force, there is no other choice," and stressed that if China took part in the Peninsular War, back to the Chinese economy 100 years ago.




Bell, in Seoul the same day as "the development direction of Korea-US alliance" as the theme of speech. Turning to the issue of North Korea, stressed that Korea and the U.S. said North Korea should be "strong" and "clear" message. He said: "North Korea may be taken for a new challenge, we should immediately adopt a non-symmetrical revenge attacks. U.S. helicopters attacking team should return to the South Korean deployment, forward deployed combat brigade, and sent an aircraft carrier to conduct joint military exercises." He also said South Korea also need to have a strong missile defense system immediately to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction exercises, for North Korea's "new act of provocation, retaliation immediately." He said: "The faith of the DPRK contrary to honest and provocative act, in addition to force feedback no other options."




"In the overall war, China will war" of the question, Bell believes that no country would like to see a comprehensive war on the Korean Peninsula and China's entry into the war. Very clear is that once the war if China's economy will be back to 100 years ago. He expressed: "We should note China's provocative military action in response to the need for North Korea, and China's entry into the war will damage all relationships. The United States and China needs outside the framework of the six-party talks agreement in this regard, in the process on The South Korean government should be responsible for mediation and cooperation. "




Looking for the reunification of the Korean Peninsula, he said: "Han Meian security alliance is a defensive alliance, rather than pre-emptive alliance. But I argue that the military response to provocation by military means should be non-symmetrical way back." He added "We should remember that only a unified peninsula, the determination in the fight at the next round in order to succeed in.
 
I've heard this kind of talk against China before, in the 1950 Korean war. That didn't turn out too well for them. :azn:

Not to mention their failure in the Vietnam war and their inability to beat a couple of Taliban in Afghanistan. There is no point talking hard, if you're not willing to back it up with action.
 
Mr Bell or whoever this guy is, is probably suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, for he served in Korea, and knows very well how Chinese kicked them out.

In order to avoid defeat, US seeked an arbitration. Kinda funny.


The funny part is, US would not dare look at China. They will crumble the US house of decks in couple of days. With dollars gone, so will be the US military.


Someone show this idiot a way to the Psychological services.
 
Mr Bell or whoever this guy is, is probably suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, for he served in Korea, and knows very well how Chinese kicked them out.

In order to avoid defeat, US seeked an arbitration. Kinda funny.


The funny part is, US would not dare look at China. They will crumble the US house of decks in couple of days. With dollars gone, so will be the US military.


Someone show this idiot a way to the Psychological services.

That's right. :tup:

The Korean war occurred at one of the weakest points in Chinese history, right after the Japanese war crimes against us in the second world war, and immediately after the Chinese civil war which only ended in 1949.

Yet the PLA still pushed the US forces out of North Korea in 1950, and caused the longest military retreat in the history of the American armed forces. This was despite the obvious imbalance of power between the USA and the PRC at the time.

Today in 2010 the power balance has changed, both economically and militarily. It's America who has to worry about their economy crashing, and a double-dip recession, not us. They should worry about their own economy first.
 
Last edited:
@C-D
i respect u a lot for ur moderate posts
but u could have atleast read the article before u posted
the article quotes him saying that chinese 'economy' will go back 100 years probably due to pure economic reasons of war.
its poor media or the poster who made the title such provocative and misleading.
i hope u aknowledge that fact.
regards
 
@C-D
i respect u a lot for ur moderate posts
but u could have atleast read the article before u posted
the article quotes him saying that chinese 'economy' will go back 100 years probably due to pure economic reasons of war.
its poor media or the poster who made the title such provocative and misleading.
i hope u aknowledge that fact.
regards

I did read the article... look at my last post.

Today in 2010 the power balance has changed, both economically and militarily. It's America who has to worry about their economy crashing, and a double-dip recession, not us. They should worry about their own economy first.

In this paragraph alone I mention the word "economy" three times.
 
No i like the jurassic better:)

but seriosly lets not forget how many people china lost in the korean war.
 
Is there a link to Yonhap News?

No, probably because it's made up. Articles like that pop up all the time in Chinese message boards, citing some random foreign source(or just "a foreign source") without a link.
 
No i like the jurassic better:)

but seriosly lets not forget how many people china lost in the korean war.

But seriously lets not forget that the PLA precipitated the longest retreat in US military history.

The high casualties were the price we had to pay for not having air superiority but we still fought the world's army to a standstill. I somehow doubt that American soldiers could have done the same, if places were switched.
 
But seriously lets not forget that the PLA precipitated the longest retreat in US military history.

The high casualties were the price we had to pay for not having air superiority but we still fought the world's army to a standstill. I somehow doubt that American soldiers could have done the same, if places were switched.

It was just that they weren't commited to the Korean war. If they bothered fighting serious, China would've been a nuke pancake and the USSR wouldn't have cared.
 
Last edited:
It's just that they weren't commited to the Korean war. If they bothered fighting serious, China would've been a nuke pancake and the USSR wouldn't have cared.

They wouldn't care about China, but it would've opened the door to the Soviets nuking Europe and other American allies. In other words, it would've been a dangerous precedence.
 

Back
Top Bottom