"Trade War Turning into Cold War / Real War?" Topic
25 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Remember that you can Stifle members so that you don't have to read their posts.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Modern What-If Message Board
Areas of InterestModern
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Profile ArticlePart II of the Gates of Old Jerusalem.
Featured Book Review
|
Thresher01 | 01 Oct 2018 5:56 a.m. PST |
As relations with China appear to be in a death spiral, it does make one ponder at what point the Trade War, and other events become a Real War? As we saw in WWII, when nations get squeezed economically, they sometimes lash out at those trying to restrain them, which can result in full blown conflicts, if the right circumstances present themselves – Japan, and the US oil embargo on them, due to their actions in Indo-China. link Of course, the US was correct in instituting those embargoes, due to Japan's invasion of China, but I suspect that aid will be lost on the younger Chinese now, who may have little to no knowledge of US actions on their behalf, or a twisted view of it. I imagine this may be much like many Russians seem to of the West's aid to their country in WWII, since the current leadership, and older leadership tended to play down, if not completely ignore the aid that was provided to them, and the importance of it in helping to defeat the Germans in WWII. Tariffs on Chinese products are at a low of about 10% now, on many items, but on January 1st, they're slated to increase to 25%, which, when enacted, could put millions of Chinese workers out of work. There are a number of other internal and external tensions ongoing in China currently too, e.g. Trade War with the USA, Falling Economic Prosperity at Home, Muslim problem in Western China, Hong Kong's desire for true democratic freedom and tensions over the new rail line to the mainland as well as a tighter grip on power by the Chinese leadership, the ongoing saga of Taiwan and their desire for independence as well as US sales of military equipment to them, the South China Sea debacle (the one bright spot for China, really), etc., etc.. All of the above makes me wonder, at what point President Xi will be forced to lash out, in order to distract the dissatisfied masses at home, and where he will choose to do so, if/when unemployment, and falling economic prosperity, in order to maintain his grip on power? Jack Ma seems to think XI and China will not surrender in the Trade War, and that we could be in for a 20 year period of increasing economic tensions. link link So, at what point will the Chinese lash out, and where, if tensions continue to escalate with the US and others, in order to distract the masses back home? My money's on: - the East China Sea – Senkakus - South China Sea – Scarborough Shoal is the next domino to fall in the SCS - and, possibly Taiwan, if things get really bad, and they want to bring this "rogue province" to heel, as a demonstration to others (Hong Kong) of their new-found power, and conviction to crush dissenters. With the Philippines unwilling, and quite frankly unable on their own to confront China, it appears the second item on the list above is virtually another fait accompli. link link While I hope my predictions of events above are wrong, it certainly does provide the wargamer with ample opportunities for wargames in various regions in Asia, and with varying levels of forces and confrontation types – coast guard vessel bumper boats to minor air/sea skirmishes, and even a full blown war, if you think at some point an economic embargo and naval/air blockade, attack on, or full-blown invasion of Taiwan is/are inevitable. |
Col Durnford | 01 Oct 2018 6:40 a.m. PST |
So begins the first Consumer War – Buy or Die!!!!!! |
Banana Man | 01 Oct 2018 7:46 a.m. PST |
We need a new World War to curb the bloated human population, so bring it on. |
Pan Marek | 01 Oct 2018 9:05 a.m. PST |
Muppet- You and your family can be the first to thin the herd. |
aegiscg47 | 01 Oct 2018 9:12 a.m. PST |
It would have to get really, really, really bad before open hostilities break out. Modern forces are not only exorbitantly expensive, they're also fairly small compared to their WW2 counterparts. Even a brief two week war where each side sinks 3-4 ships and shoots down 20 aircraft would be catastrophic and take years to rebuild from. Most nations would rather work something out than go down that path. Yes, it is an affront to wargamers everywhere, but a high tech shooting war breaking out currently has very low odds. |
bsrlee | 01 Oct 2018 9:14 a.m. PST |
Any escalating Trade War will have adverse effects on employment outside China too. So many industries rely on cheap parts from China for what they manufacture in the US as well as the rest of the world. China has also been supplying exotic metals cheaply to industry which has had the side effect of stopping other countries from exploiting their own reserves – Australia is one, plus several countries in Africa. |
Wackmole9 | 01 Oct 2018 9:28 a.m. PST |
But the main question would be where would China get it rice if it started a war with the US. Last year, China imported about 5 million tons, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The U.S. alone couldn't satisfy that demand. America exports between 3 million and 4 million tons a year, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization |
Thresher01 | 01 Oct 2018 9:37 a.m. PST |
Another Bug rears its ugly head. I did not post this in the 15mm Sci-Fi board, only on the Modern What-If board. |
Thresher01 | 01 Oct 2018 10:51 a.m. PST |
I think they're moving in a good direction now, to help ensure "fair trade", though the Chinese do not appear to like that. Deals with Mexico and Canada have been reached. |
Stryderg | 01 Oct 2018 11:08 a.m. PST |
+1 Thresher01 I think a deal with China will be coming in the future (10 weeks to 10 years from now) to 'stabilize' trade between China and the US. I won't even hazard a guess as to the details. I'm pretty sure the US doesn't want to "go hot" with China, and I don't think China will try to invade the US. A little sniping, 'minor' clashes in Africa or South America or 'accidental' bumper ship games on the oceans would be the most saber rattling we should see. But game wise: pretty much anything goes. A case can be made for anything from a full on invasion by either side to battle in Antartica to the moon. |
John Leahy | 01 Oct 2018 11:16 a.m. PST |
China has to understand that stealing industrial secrets and violating trademarks amongst other things will not be allowed. The steal an unbelievable amount from the West. |
Thresher01 | 01 Oct 2018 11:49 a.m. PST |
I think a deal with them may be coming too, and certainly hope so. Probably before the end of the year, and the 25% rates go into effect. Yea, getting them to stop the intellectual property and military secrets is important, but I doubt we'll ever be able to do that without a full on, total embargo of their products. I doubt others will help us with that, either, even though they should, since no doubt their IP is being stolen too. I do see where the Chinese might make moves on Scarborough, given the lack of response from us and others on the other SCS reefs. Basically, they're already controlling/keeping the Filipino fishermen from those waters, at whatever whim suits them for the day. I imagine too, an escalation in the SCS against naval vessels and aircraft in the region is coming too. We just had another Destroyer sail within 12 miles of a couple of their "islands" recently, and they weren't very happy about that, nor the B-52 flights. Both are good fodder for some air and naval skirmish gaming on a budget, as opposed to full-on, fleet and squadron-level actions. |
Bill Rosser | 01 Oct 2018 12:44 p.m. PST |
Tell the Japanese that we do not care if they start building real aircraft carriers again. |
Oberlindes Sol LIC | 01 Oct 2018 1:01 p.m. PST |
aegiscg47 wrote, in part: It would have to get really, really, really bad before open hostilities break out. Modern forces are not only exorbitantly expensive, they're also fairly small compared to their WW2 counterparts. Even a brief two week war where each side sinks 3-4 ships and shoots down 20 aircraft would be catastrophic and take years to rebuild from. Most nations would rather work something out than go down that path. Yes, it is an affront to wargamers everywhere, but a high tech shooting war breaking out currently has very low odds. That's part of the reason that major powers are unlikely to go to full-scale war, but the other reason is that enough of the combatants have nuclear weapons, and those that don't are mostly in mutual defense treaties with nations that do. A nuclear war would be beyond catastrophic, and would take far more than years to recover from. Mister Muppet wrote: We need a new World War to curb the bloated human population, so bring it on. Take your meds, Mr. Muppet. |
Legion 4 | 01 Oct 2018 3:32 p.m. PST |
The 3 Big "Powers" in the world[and most other 1st World nations] know it is not worth going into a "shoot'n" war with one another. The cost in "treasure" and "blood" would by very, very high. Now going into an economic "trade" war in the long or even short run is much less costly. The 1st World has much too much to lose trying to kill each other off, etc.
Now as we see in the 3rd World/failed and failing states, etc., e.g A'stan, some places in the Mid East or Africa … Well … in many cases they don't have that much to lose anyway. It appears … |
Martin Rapier | 01 Oct 2018 3:46 p.m. PST |
The "big powers" are already at war, it is being fought in cyberspace on a daily basis. Sadly, the figures for that are really, really boring to paint. |
Oberlindes Sol LIC | 01 Oct 2018 3:55 p.m. PST |
There will, however, be plenty of opportunities for small unit actions, especially ones that can be plausibly denied, so we wargamers should be kept happy. |
Thresher01 | 01 Oct 2018 4:35 p.m. PST |
The "USS Decatur (an Arleigh Burke class vessel) had sailed within 12 nautical miles of Gaven and Johnson Reefs in the Spratly Islands when it was approached by the Chinese destroyer. The Chinese Navy "destroyer conducted a series of increasingly aggressive maneuvers accompanied by warnings for DECATUR to depart the area," Brown added. "The PRC destroyer approached within 45 yards of DECATUR's bow, after which DECATUR maneuvered to prevent a collision," said Brown". On another station, 25 yards is mentioned, so we are getting close to my "bumper boats" prediction, now. So, it appears that the Chinese can use their "Coast Guard Cutters", and naval vessels for these scenarios now. I suspect it won't be long before they start deploying their "auxiliary navy's fishing boat fleet" as well, for swarm formations, which would make evading them very difficult indeed, and upping the ante in the region. They've done this a lot in the East China Sea against Japan already, and those vessels have fired lasers at our pilots flying sorties in the area. For the air side of things, the olde Buffs get the nod. ""U.S. Navy ships and aircraft operate throughout the Indo-Pacific routinely, including in the South China Sea," said Brown. "As we have for decades, our forces will continue to fly, sail and operate anywhere international law allows." There was no immediate comments from China. Over the last week, the U.S. and Chinese military relationship has deteriorated as both countries are engaged in a bitter trade dispute. Last week, a U.S. Air Force B-52 flew a mission through the East China Sea and two other B-52 flights were carried out through the South China Sea". For Japan, it will be interesting to see when they first deploy some of those F-35Bs on their "helicopter destroyers" and amphibious assault ships: link link |
robert piepenbrink | 01 Oct 2018 6:09 p.m. PST |
I agree that no one will cold-bloodedly start a war over tariffs. But I point out that some of our more spectacular and long-lasting wars began with the conviction that this or that action would NOT bring about a major war, and that "those people" were bluffing. Or that it was going to be quick and cheap, and the troops would be home before the leaves fell. But surely the present world leadership is so much cleverer? |
Thresher01 | 01 Oct 2018 6:44 p.m. PST |
Agreed on the tariffs issue, though if one's economy tanks, and millions are unemployed…….. I think they might just do so, like many others before them, to appease the masses and rampant nationalism, due to some event(s), especially when you get "dictators/presidents for life" who have so much more to lose than someone in the position temporarily. Apparently, the Chinese vessel was a "Type 052B or Guangzhou class destroyer (NATO reporting name: Luyang I class)….". It is a class of multi-role missile destroyers. |
goragrad | 01 Oct 2018 9:19 p.m. PST |
Nothing like having a war of bluster to escalate a situation. |
Legion 4 | 02 Oct 2018 7:41 a.m. PST |
The "big powers" are already at war, it is being fought in cyberspace on a daily basis. Sadly, the figures for that are really, really boring to paint. Good points ! Plus the US ARMY just over the passed few years added a new branch – Cyberwarfare. Their insignia being crossed lighting bolts with a sword in the middle … |
NavyVet | 02 Oct 2018 8:29 a.m. PST |
China has more to loose than the USA. That and USA has the food,resources and a population base to outlast the PRC. |
Legion 4 | 02 Oct 2018 7:32 p.m. PST |
20% of the world's population is Chinese and another 20% Indian … The USA only makes up, IIRC @ 5% of the world … We have less mouths to feed and some high tech advantages as well. But if nothing else the PRC can lose a lot of bodies before it can make any real difference.
So … |
Legion 4 | 05 Oct 2018 7:21 a.m. PST |
Update … I heard today the USA only makes up @ 4% of the world. And China & India are both reaching beyond 20% … |
|