Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Are China And India On A Path To Future War?  
User currently offlineIBOAviator From Canada, joined Sep 2010, 120 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4030 times:

Just saw this. Sort of caught my attention.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/yahoocana...a_and_india_are_on_the_road_to_war
Now that China is a very strong economic power in this world and with the amount of USD currency they have flowing through their banks, if and when a war between them and India, how badly will the rest of the world be hit???


Keep Calm and Go Around!
34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8467 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4018 times:

They are both nuclear powers, so... no.


But India will check China's domination of the region. It is almost certain that the US and India will become allies vs a unilateral China as a strategic balance. In any major argument, China can hold their own, within their borders. But so can India. On the seas there will be disputes. But ultimately, it's not conceivable for China and India to hold a shooting war. In that scenario, basically the USA does not let India fall, and quite possibly, Russia does not let China fall, ensuring a long nuclear winter where they, and we, all die. That's what I mean by not conceivable.

The idea of a ground war between 2 such countries (100m soldiers per side?) is also not possible.

They can be enemies, without having a war. That's a shame for everyone, especially poor Indians and Chinese, who, first, should hold a revolution, and relieve their leaders of command (violently!) if such a thing comes to pass. JMO


User currently offlinecpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 38
Reply 2, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3942 times:

Quoting IBOAviator (Thread starter):
how badly will the rest of the world be hit???

I don't know what weapons this war will be fought with, but the next one after it will be with sticks and stones...

To paraphrase the old quote.


User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3048 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 3907 times:

Title is a bit misleading. The fact that both countries are emerging powers does not make them enemies, nor does it mean that they will go to war. If it were like that, then the US and the Soviet Union would have had an all out war long ago. They do have their disputes, but that's not something considered to be war-attitude.


"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8467 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3878 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 3):
If it were like that, then the US and the Soviet Union would have had an all out war long ago.

That's the correct example, the USA and Soviets armed themselves from here to eternity. China and India will also arm themselves with modern pentagons. But they will not share a real war. JMO. If anything, you might see a regional conflict in a neighboring country, or a skirmish on the border of Tibet. They will be too well-armed to resort to some kind of direct fight.


User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 5, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 3846 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 1):
But India will check China's domination of the region. It is almost certain that the US and India will become allies vs a unilateral China as a strategic balance. In any major argument, China can hold their own, within their borders. But so can India. On the seas there will be disputes. But ultimately, it's not conceivable for China and India to hold a shooting war. In that scenario, basically the USA does not let India fall, and quite possibly, Russia does not let China fall, ensuring a long nuclear winter where they, and we, all die. That's what I mean by not conceivable.
Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 3):
Title is a bit misleading. The fact that both countries are emerging powers does not make them enemies, nor does it mean that they will go to war. If it were like that, then the US and the Soviet Union would have had an all out war long ago. They do have their disputes, but that's not something considered to be war-attitude.

I think it's rather more likely that, as America withdraws from the Indian Ocean and the Western Pacific more and more due to its' reduced economic capability to maintain the existing force level, that India and China might look strategically to a 'division of spoils' in the entire South Asia/East Asia region. They don't have to 'like' one another but rather realise that being numero uno in their own area of ops simplifies life in many respects.

I agree a land was between the two is essentially out of the question.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4896 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3777 times:

This thread is useless without BarfBag and Shmertspionem joining in  

Gotta run but will be back once they're up in their part of the world!


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15727 posts, RR: 26
Reply 7, posted (3 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3772 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 1):
They are both nuclear powers, so... no.

With modern weapons, I don't think that we can dismiss the possibility. Not all wars would have to be nuclear, and even a nuclear war is now winnable.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 8, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3658 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 7):
Quoting Flighty (Reply 1):
They are both nuclear powers, so... no.

With modern weapons, I don't think that we can dismiss the possibility. Not all wars would have to be nuclear, and even a nuclear war is now winnable.

Winnable ? How ? Even a 'regional' nuclear war has the potential to damage the planetary atmosphere so badly that the climatic effects, and hence the death toll, would be staggering.

http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20100315_4193.php

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/12/061211090729.htm



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineQuokka From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3654 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 1):
It is almost certain that the US and India will become allies vs a unilateral China as a strategic balance.


Ironically in the past the US chose an alliances with Pakistan because it feared the potential of India as a regional power. In the past the US has supported military dictatorships in the former, rather than a closer relationship with the world's largest democracy.
Given that Pakistan is increasingly seen as unstable at worst and unreliable at best, the present appearance of cordiality by the US towards India is interesting. How far that will develop into an alliance specifically against China remains to be seen. I don't believe that either India or China consider war between the two to be in either of their interests at present. There is no evidence that India is aggressive as while there have been minor clashes over Kashmir and evidence of Pakistan-based terror attacks in India, India has been rather restrained.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15727 posts, RR: 26
Reply 10, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3631 times:

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 8):
Winnable ? How ?

You kill the other guys and they don't kill you. Same as you win any other war.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 11, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3601 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 10):
Quoting connies4ever (Reply 8):
Winnable ? How ?

You kill the other guys and they don't kill you. Same as you win any other war.

That is, going by your profile, so immature as to be laughable.

Karachi - Delhi time of flight by SRBM is less than 3 min, zero time to assess the situation,
neither side has any ABM capability. Beijing - Delhi is a little longer, China has at least a
rudimentary ABM capability, but nothing that IMHO has reached operational status.
Basically both sides kill each other simultaneously, not one before the other.

Therefore, you are going to have a significant number of air/ground bursts on both sides,
with the latter kicking up a tremendous amount of radioactive dust, which will drift with the prevailing
stratospheric winds. Time of year will have a big influence on the fallout patterms.
Notwithstanding the radiological effects, the temperature decrease across several regions
will seriously impact crop production, fuel usage, and many other indices. Widespread famine
will occur as, at least in the South/East Asia region, food reserves are not gigantic as they are in
North America and Europe.

Even a 'limited' nuclear war will have global effects. No one will win it, and, in the very unlikely event
that one side declares itself the 'winner', they might not want what they've won. The USA & USSR
learned that staring down the barrel of a nuclear rifle was a very precarious existence, so they decided
that it was very much in their mutual interest to get along by getting along, no matter that there were
friction points. I believe Pakistan & India are also learning this lesson. China is I believe astute enough
to know this as well, be it versus India or the USA. Israel & Iran, hmm....I hope they're smarter than
the rhetoric (on both sides).

The one I do worry about is North Korea.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15727 posts, RR: 26
Reply 12, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3597 times:

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 11):
Karachi - Delhi time of flight by SRBM is less than 3 min, zero time to assess the situation,
neither side has any ABM capability. Beijing - Delhi is a little longer, China has at least a
rudimentary ABM capability, but nothing that IMHO has reached operational status.
Basically both sides kill each other simultaneously, not one before the other.

You think that neither side has heard of tactical nukes and are just going to resort straight to an all out countervalue strike?

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 11):
That is, going by your profile, so immature as to be laughable.

That's funny, considering it was American policy for over a decade.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 13, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3590 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 12):
You think that neither side has heard of tactical nukes and are just going to resort straight to an all out countervalue strike?

Even tacs kick up a large amount. Think Hiroshima. That, perhaps 12kt, was largely the equivalent of a tactical,
at the high end. Think about 50-100 of them in a short time frame, with many over a very limited area.
With widely-dispersed military assets, both India and China would have to fire off a significant part of their inventory
to take out the other sides ability to strike first or counterforce. In fact, I'm not sure they could do it, which leads to
the conclusion that a large slice of the inventory are more city-sized weapons. India is currently thought to have on the order of 70-80 warheads, I believe. Pakistan somewhat more, not sure about the Chinese inventory. I believe in the last round of tests conducted by India, the scale ranged to about 250-300 kt. That's not a tactical weapon.

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 11):
That is, going by your profile, so immature as to be laughable.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 12):
That's funny, considering it was American policy for over a decade.

True, but America learned.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15727 posts, RR: 26
Reply 14, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3582 times:

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 13):
Even tacs kick up a large amount. Think Hiroshima. That, perhaps 12kt, was largely the equivalent of a tactical,
at the high end. Think about 50-100 of them in a short time frame, with many over a very limited area.

I never said it was a picnic, but it's not the end of the world.

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 13):
True, but America learned.

Actually that's the newer policy. The change was driven in large part by technical advances. The policy of mutually assured destruction faded away to NUTS, where nuclear is just another rung on the ladder of escalation and a limited nuclear war is both possible and winnable.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 15, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 3539 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 14):
I never said it was a picnic, but it's not the end of the world.

   I am simply gob-smacked by that statement. Read the articles pointed to in Reply 8.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 14):
The policy of mutually assured destruction faded away to NUTS, where nuclear is just another rung on the ladder of escalation and a limited nuclear war is both possible and winnable.

I have some land in Florida I'd like to sell to you.   



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4896 posts, RR: 16
Reply 16, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3517 times:

China and India were superpowers in the first millennium and got along famously. Indian Art and Religion made it deep into China, and Chinese technology and other products such as silk made it back there. The strongest force was Buddhism, tying in all of South East Asia and Afghanistan together, Indian expansionism reached as far as Cambodia, Malaya, Indochina and Indonesia.

I think the two countries have a lot in common and are natural allies. They also have similar goals - to get a billion poor people into a viable populace.

I don't think India and China are on their way to war. My guess is China will be a purring neighbor once she has a secure logistics chain. China is busy colonizing Africa and that should do the trick. As a superpower, she needs to project and protect her supply chain.

Unlike the wars that the US has fought, a hypothetical Indo-China war will be fought on native soil. Nuclear weapons will keep the peace, as they have between India and Pakistan. India by nature, will not the be first to fire, and China cannot afford to become the pariah of the world by starting a nuclear war.


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8467 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3488 times:

Quoting Quokka (Reply 9):
the present appearance of cordiality by the US towards India is interesting.

The India - Pakistan cold war is of no interest to the USA. We have no choice but to engage Pakistan (double meaning of "engage.") It does not imply we are taking sides against India. Certainly we are intruding in the region, but few people doubt we have our reasons for attempting to operate in Pakistan. Bin Laden is there. This does not mean we have a problem with India. I expect we should be cordial to India and they us.

Quoting comorin (Reply 16):
have a lot in common and are natural allies.

I would phrase that "have a lot in common... natural rivals," JMO.

Quoting Quokka (Reply 9):
India has been rather restrained.

Which is why they remain a natural ally of the US. Both prefer the status quo. India and China both have every right to their own defense. But one should not be so powerful as to dictate terms to the other, and become a constant arbiter of "truth," which favors China, as the Chinese side would like to do.


User currently offlinecaliatenza From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1575 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3476 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 17):

The India - Pakistan cold war is of no interest to the USA. We have no choice but to engage Pakistan (double meaning of "engage.") It does not imply we are taking sides against India. Certainly we are intruding in the region, but few people doubt we have our reasons for attempting to operate in Pakistan. Bin Laden is there. This does not mean we have a problem with India. I expect we should be cordial to India and they us.

unfortunetly we took sides during the real Cold War...the US took the side of Pakistan cuz they were pro-west..and India had its famous Soviet tilt till the end of 80s pretty much...save for a small thaw here and there.


User currently offlineHAWK21M From India, joined Jan 2001, 31667 posts, RR: 56
Reply 19, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3305 times:

Democracy is great...... 

There would be border issues between the two countries & added pressure as China hates the Dalai lama who is loved out here.
But def no war.Both countries know how important Economic success is.

The USA & Russia are friendly to India.

I guess Democracy is a great institution.



Think of the brighter side!
User currently offlinegeekydude From China, joined Apr 2004, 401 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3273 times:

Quoting HAWK21M (Reply 19):
Democracy is great......

There would be border issues between the two countries & added pressure as China hates the Dalai lama who is loved out here.
But def no war.Both countries know how important Economic success is.

The USA & Russia are friendly to India.

I guess Democracy is a great institution.

Mind you, it's only a contributing factor in improving the welfare of the people. You also need competent leaders and bureaucracy among other things.



FLIB 152 'heavy' low approach...Caution wake turbulance!
User currently offlineB2443 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 703 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 3222 times:

There are people who want to see the two countries go into wars because they can benefit from the wars, or even just conflicts. Wars between the two countries would hurt both China and India and their people.

User currently offlinegeekydude From China, joined Apr 2004, 401 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (3 years 10 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 3189 times:

There will be conflict if the Indian democratic 'free press' keeps inciting the gullible with articles like this piece from the reputable Times of India. Enjoy! The comments from the nationalistic Indians also make a good laugh. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/i...a-Net-worm/articleshow/6725747.cms


FLIB 152 'heavy' low approach...Caution wake turbulance!
User currently offlineBarfBag From India, joined Mar 2001, 2207 posts, RR: 6
Reply 23, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 3031 times:

ROTFLMAO! Is this some kind of a joke ? Both countries have too much of a stake in their continued rapid economic progress to be conned into a fight by cynical western interests. Thanks but no thanks - I'm more interested in seeing India overtake all the major western powers in size of GDP, one by one over the next couple of decades. Nice try though.

Geekydude: There's no dearth of vitriol from your side. There'll be positions that articulate both hardline perspectives and moderate ones, on our end, just as PLA and CASS present opposing views of Chinese perspectives on India. Nothing more to see there. Move along.



India, cricket junior and senior world champions
User currently offlinedeltaownsall From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 1173 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (3 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2962 times:

Quoting geekydude (Reply 22):
There will be conflict if the Indian democratic 'free press' keeps inciting the gullible with articles like this piece from the reputable Times of India. Enjoy! The comments from the nationalistic Indians also make a good laugh. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/i...7.cms

Ah yes, as compared to the wholly fair and balanced Chinese press? What an entertaining notion...

Quoting BarfBag (Reply 23):
Geekydude: There's no dearth of vitriol from your side. There'll be positions that articulate both hardline perspectives and moderate ones, on our end, just as PLA and CASS present opposing views of Chinese perspectives on India. Nothing more to see there. Move along.

The voice of reason!


25 geekydude : Whatever vitriol there is, real or imaginary, I just hope our Indian friends keep a cool head. Sensationalism sells newspapers but is not helpful sol
26 deltaownsall : You singled out the Indian press. That's pretty obvious. Oy. A predictable argument, I suppose. Ironically I have just begun a Chinese language progr
27 geekydude : Read the title of the thread. Why did not I talk about Fox News? A haphazard study of just 3 years including the language does not make you an expert
28 Post contains images Baroque : That is two threads in a day we agree BB, Armageddon must be approaching, we had best both duck - and quickly. Meanwhile in the real world, back to a
29 deltaownsall : Er, what? China is definitely part of the topic. I was simply hinting at the other (very relevant) side of the coin. Either way, Fox News is an indep
30 geekydude : Great, I am glad to hear that you take your interest seriously with a great open-minded attitude. I am sure this will amount to something great in yo
31 777way : Only outside influences may cause them to go to war if ever, but I think both are two wise to fall into that trap.
32 Post contains images B2443 : People's Daily and China Daily are not for everyone to consume for sure. Ordinary people (both in China and the west, e.g. AP) trash it as propaganda
33 kaitak : It could be argued that most large countries are on a path to war, but diplomacy - and the knowledge of consequences of war, as well as the importance
34 Flighty : Unfortunately the people in our US administration and the Bush admin don't read them. You are right, this the key venue for China's negotiations and
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Osama To Declare War On Musharraf posted Thu Sep 20 2007 16:03:47 by CALTECH
Pakistan And India Exchange Kargil War Prisoners posted Mon Aug 9 2004 17:19:25 by HAWK21M
Information On Travelling To China posted Tue May 11 2004 06:57:18 by VS340
An Idea For All On How To End The War Talk Here.. posted Tue Apr 1 2003 22:59:39 by Airlinelover
Are These Urban Legends On Yemen And Saudi True? posted Fri Feb 14 2003 20:58:16 by Sonic
Do You Plan On Upgrading To Windows 7? posted Mon Oct 19 2009 17:11:49 by 1337Delta764
The Onion On How To Commemorate 9/11 Anniversary posted Thu Sep 10 2009 18:09:32 by Yellowstone
India's New Cabinet To Take Oath Today. posted Fri May 22 2009 01:49:36 by HAWK21M
Stephen Harper On Who To Blame For This Mess posted Sat Mar 14 2009 07:18:39 by Dougloid
And The Oscar Goes To... posted Sun Feb 22 2009 12:19:03 by FatmirJusufi