US military banned from HK

[Machismo]

Little China. Their military is old and out of date with a small budget, their economy is only at 11.7 Trillion GDP, they have no military bases anywhere, they don't control the financial system and their currency isn't a worlds reserve currency.

China is a completely useless country. Then again communists on this website love them.

How would you know, you are brand new here?

[kaid]

Little China. Their military is old and out of date with a small budget, their economy is only at 11.7 Trillion GDP, they have no military bases anywhere, they don't control the financial system and their currency isn't a worlds reserve currency.

China is a completely useless country. Then again communists on this website love them.

China does not want military bases everywhere they just want to reclaim tiawan and then make themself so thorny that nobody would dare to try to push back on them. This is basically why they are doing the airstrip islands in the south china sea those are basically their "aircraft carriers" for the area they want to influence.

Their main objective is get a strong enough military so that they can take taiwan and make it costly enough for the US that we won't try to intercede. If you look at their military balance they have mostly been focusing on midrange missiles the reason for this is their intent is if there is a shooting conflict with the US to swamp our carrier groups with missiles from outside the carriers range to respond. How well this will work out in practice is hard to say but there is a good chance all our fancy carriers are sitting ducks in modern warfare situations.

[PC2]

Ah yes, the US military.. Famous for bringing human rights, free speech and democracy...

We can talk about our policy ideas and criticisms without being silenced and jailed. That's the important distinction between China and the West. I'm not saying we're perfect, but being able to freely talk about the issues is a right everyone should have.

It's a good thing they are banned.
China has been too passive, they need to go on the offensive against the US.

Peacefully or violently?

[NED funded]

Uummh ok.

This is basically a propaganda move so whatever

[breadisfunny]

You think you are going to deploy troops to Chinese territory?

whose going to stop us exactly?

[Molis]

Ah yes, the US military.. Famous for bringing human rights, free speech and democracy...

It's a good thing they are banned.
China has been too passive, they need to go on the offensive against the US.

What exactly does destabilizing the US and moving China into the indisputable world power do for you except satisfying your huge hate boner for America?

I can assure you nothing good will happen where ever you are from. Because China will come for you sooner or later.

[Kallisto]

Trump makes token gesture by signing something he was forced to sign (while praising Xi)

China responds by saying US military is banned from area it really technically was banned from anyway.

There we have it. The token tit for tat by leaders trying to look strong for their home base.

[Calfredd]

whose going to stop us exactly?

Sane people hopefully. You are coming off as bad as Kangodo so... congratulations, I guess?

[Katie N]

whose going to stop us exactly?

Do you suffer hubris? There is no possibility you'll ever win that.

[Easo]

You couldn't beat North Vietnam, what makes you think beating China is even remotely possible?

Another one who doesnt understand how war works or how that specific war was even fought.

I will Ooh, and the two million soldiers they have.

And another one. Best one was one of your kind saying that China could get 100 million soldiers and have them invade USA. Because logistics and actual capability is not a thing.

[Puupi]

Another one who doesnt understand how war works or how that specific war was even fought.



And another one. Best one was one of your kind saying that China could get 100 million soldiers and have them invade USA. Because logistics and actual capability is not a thing.

Good luck projecting your power further than 100 miles inland in China - especially with 500 million Chinese you need to control inside that area and another billion facing you in the area outside that 100 mile radius. Just like the vastness of Russia devoured Germany (and Napoleonic France), the vastness of China devours USA (and like it did for Japan).

[Lynarii]

Do you suffer hubris? There is no possibility you'll ever win that.

It's flag-waving over something that isn't even the topic at hand.

If the US was actually trying to invade China with a military force, it's hard to predict exactly what would happen. But a full scale invasion of China is so far from being on the table that discussing it is absurd, and it has nothing to do with what is going on. This is about US military ships using the port, shore leave, and private citizen visitors from the military. Not an actual military deployment. And China absolutely CAN stop that kind of thing, rather easily as a matter of fact. It's not like the US is going to come in, full guns blazing, because some army private got turned away at the airport customs check.

[Calfredd]

Do you suffer hubris? There is no possibility you'll ever win that.

It's flag-waving over something that isn't even the topic at hand.

If the US was actually trying to invade China with a military force, it's hard to predict exactly what would happen. But a full scale invasion of China is so far from being on the table that discussing it is absurd, and it has nothing to do with what is going on. This is about US military ships using the port, shore leave, and private citizen visitors from the military. Not an actual military deployment. And China absolutely CAN stop that kind of thing, rather easily as a matter of fact. It's not like the US is going to come in, full guns blazing, because some army private got turned away at the airport customs check.

Its not really about whether we'd win or not but about how much is lost from fighting. Do you know what a Pyrrhic victory is (slightly rhetorical)?

[Lynarii]

Its not really about whether we'd win or not but about how much is lost from fighting. Do you know what a Pyrrhic victory is?

For me to consider something a win requires achieving a goal. If the goal is to save Hong Kong, having a war in the streets that destroys the city and kills the people living there isn't a victory, even if the battle itself goes in our favor. Even in a pyrrhic victory, the goal of the battle is generally achieved, it's just that the cost of doing so is greater than the value of the goal. A war in Hong Kong wouldn't even be a pyrrhic victory, it'd be a clear loss for everyone involved.

[Puupi]

Stick to cutting down wood. You Fins are known for nothing else. Communist faggots.

lol

/10chars

[JohnBrown1917]

Another one who doesnt understand how war works or how that specific war was even fought.



And another one. Best one was one of your kind saying that China could get 100 million soldiers and have them invade USA. Because logistics and actual capability is not a thing.

China has plenty of villages to massacre for the Americans soldiers to get distracted and forget about winning the war.
But will you be joining the military when the US invades?

[october breeze]

Good move. US army should be banned from everywhere. They are literally modern day pirates in uniforms.

[caervek]

Another one who doesnt understand how war works or how that specific war was even fought.

In fairness he's not wrong. If you invaded China you would lose, for the exact same reason you lost in Vietnam and are currently losing in Afghanistan (and, before anyone claims I'm anti-US, also the same reason you beat us to win your independence despite being completely outmatched).

[Easo]

Good luck projecting your power further than 100 miles inland in China - especially with 500 million Chinese you need to control inside that area and another billion facing you in the area outside that 100 mile radius. Just like the vastness of Russia devoured Germany (and Napoleonic France), the vastness of China devours USA (and like it did for Japan).

Once more, logistics and the thing that almost all of those millions are civilians. Also, once the actual military is gone, then what? War is won, USA can go home, China can spend another century trying to get itself together. It all really depends on the goalposts set for that war.

China has plenty of villages to massacre for the Americans soldiers to get distracted and forget about winning the war.
But will you be joining the military when the US invades?

Relatively hard and a bit late for me to join American army from Baltics...

In fairness he's not wrong. If you invaded China you would lose, for the exact same reason you lost in Vietnam and are currently losing in Afghanistan (and, before anyone claims I'm anti-US, also the same reason you beat us to win your independence despite being completely outmatched).

I did not lose anywhere, not an American (it really is funny to see how a fat Americaball makes people think you are an American).
Also, you really do not have to invade whole China, they (and others, including USA in similar situation) would surrender before that. Once the armed forces are defeated (and no, I do not think that China can win that one..., at least not while there is a disparity in armed and naval forces), it is just a matter of time.
P.S.
Why people tend to forget that Vietnam war was war without actually invading anywhere? Well, then again most people go wide eyed when told that there were two Vietnams at that time... And that USA forces never invaded the North one.

[JohnBrown1917]

Relatively hard and a bit late for me to join American army from Baltics...
.

It never hurts to try. How else are you going to fight the Chinese?