US economic decline and impact on force projection capabilities

Same thing has happened to myriad empire's in history...look at the USSR..it's collapse had a devastating effect on it's satellite countries however they have by and large adapted. The same thing will happen again

Click to expand...

True and people never learn from history. It a fact that all these great empire and country collapse fail to acknowledge a econmic decline, work with and accept another superpower or a new growing one, or it fight to many war.

Econmic decline is a usual thing during the economic cycle, every nation need to curtail economic grow and/or slow down it economic. So that is can fix some of it fundamental problem so it can healty grow in the healty in the future. In US case it choose borrow to fund it growth.

2nd case is China once again. Challageing China isn't going to do much good for the US. Working with on equal term would be much better approch.

Moved to world armed forces forum...people, If forum is entitled as GENERAL CHINESE MILITARY FORUM FOR GENERAL CHINA RELATED MILITARY DISCUSSION, one migth thing, what does political thread about US economy do in here? This isent forum for general discussion, spite the name 'general' appears top of it...ff

FreeAsia2000 said:

regarding consumption of goods , i watched an interview on CCTV9 recently where a chinese government advisor was saying that at some point they would have to put a stop to supplying goods to america on the basis of its printing of dollars.

the rest of the world would suffer in the short term but in the long term it would be more healthy...i believe trade relations in a multi-polar world would benefit resource suppliers as well as domestic consumers in china and other countries besides making the world a more culturally friendly place.

Click to expand...

i doubt that "chinese government advisor" is making any policy decisions. he is just giving his opinions on what will be good for china. beside, it isn't up to chinese government to dictate who is buying what (the capitalist decide that and china speedy development depends on them), what they can do is to make their currency more expensive to decrease export, but they can't choose who is buying (unless they want out of WTO and affect their FTAs). in fact only yesterday did china's president again stress he will not revalue the peg.

yes, it the long term it benefit the public. but it doesn't benefit the capitalist because they rather a world where countries have less power to challenge eachother. US while as 'solo' as they act in politic, they still wouldn't attack areas of capitalist interest. in fact by taking out countries that are less integrated with the global economy, they are expanding the reach to global companies into those nations.

yes it is less culturally friendly, but we are discussing reality not idealogy. and the world works differently in life than on paper. human race are well-known of their "not so benefiting acts".

2nd case is China once again. Challageing China isn't going to do much good for the US. Working with on equal term would be much better approch.

Click to expand...

the superpower fight for influence of lesser state. if US doesn't challenge china, it will lose it's ability to influence lesser state WITHOUT offering a better deal. to protect it's monopoly, it will fight ALL challengers. while fighting isn't good, not fighting will be even worst. this was actually debated in US senate many years ago, it is by no means a quick decision made by US, nor is it antichinese, it is just protecting it's interest; even if it means they are unequal ones! neo-cons...

---

i don't support US supremacy, i prefer to see china in equal standing. but china must becareful not to think that it's rise will be a smooth one, or that it's enemy is weakening by the day. or it will lose all that it has gain in a single mistake of underestimating the enemy and overestimating itself.

while china and us is not enemy in the traditional sense, they are opposing players in the game of influence. and if 1 of them turn out to be a bad loser, hell might break lose...

akinkhoo the program was in response to the controversy at the moment
over the dollars for oil economic issue which is said to be one of the major
reasons for american opposition to Iran.

secondly the point you made about opening up countries by capitalist states
is usually made by certain pro-globalisation marxists who believe that this
will help speed up the end of capitalism. which depends entirely upon
whether you believe that capitalism will decline and whether that's a good thing

I'm not making either of those points because I don't believe that
market forces somehow are acting in some unseen way to decide the
future of the human race...i believe that individuals and states act in
what they perceive to be their best interests...unfortunately sometimes
certain groups or individuals assume power in states and believe that
their interest is above and beyond that of their nations...and this always
leads in the long term to the decline of that state. nepotism is one
word for it.

In this case certain interest groups have assumed power of the american
administration and have forced it to wage too many wars against too
many enemies... in this context no amount of military power on earth is
sufficient to help you if you are waging war against the whole earth
because your own economy depends upon the rest of the earth..
so in a way you are fighting against yourself.

it's interesting though to see how the diplomatic gaffes will be viewed
in China ...no doubt american strategists are familiar with chinese history
and thus the chinese government may conclude that this was a
deliberate attempt to intimidate the chinese government

no doubt american strategists are familiar with chinese history
and thus the chinese government may conclude that this was a
deliberate attempt to intimidate the chinese government

Click to expand...

IMO and I believe same with a lot chinese too. That the US is more then deliberate trying to intimidate the chinese government.

- Any of you hear about the news. How the hell can a White-House announcer referred to China as the ``Republic of China,'' the official name of rival Taiwan, instead of the People's Republic of China. This is a total disgrace and lack of respect from the US. Yeah I know you can argue that is was a mistake, but I can insure you White-House announcer or any announcer to a national leaders doesn't make mistake, cos most the time they can't afford too.

- Remember 1999, The U.S Air Force bombs China's embassy in Balgrade, I know it been said a billion time that is was a mistake. But how many Chinese do u think believe that. I certainly don't, anyone who been in the military know all the procedure it need to go thought to plan a stirke. You just don't make mistake like that especially when the postion of one's country embassy is not hidden infomation. You don't need to be a intelligence operation to find out where it's, you can find it in any map.

Anyway back to topic (economic). hmmm

i doubt that "chinese government advisor" is making any policy decisions. he is just giving his opinions on what will be good for china.

Click to expand...

Well these Advisor are some of the most important people in China, you don't get into the monetary policy advisory committee if they don't listen to you. Anyway, it true that capitalist decide what they buy, nevertheless, this could effected in many economic environment, technology but in a goverment point of view it going be policy.

what they can do is to make their currency more expensive to decrease export, but they can't choose who is buying

Click to expand...

Well most people would still buy from china even if they make their currency flexible, cos of low labor cost, big market etc.

the superpower fight for influence of lesser state. if US doesn't challenge china, it will lose it's ability to influence lesser state WITHOUT offering a better deal. to protect it's monopoly, it will fight ALL challengers. while fighting isn't good, not fighting will be even worst. this was actually debated in US senate many years ago, it is by no means a quick decision made by US, nor is it antichinese, it is just protecting it's interest; even if it means they are unequal ones! neo-cons...

Click to expand...

Well US is still losing it's ability to influence lesser state because of it own conduct and in the currently case it's more bad then good with it challage to the Chinese. The world economic is depend on the Chinese (it been the world economic engine for the past 10-15 years) as it depend on the US, their fore the US challage to the Chinese is like a hit to it own face.