Quote: Originally Posted by shortmanx5
cortez"chinas navy has overtaken the uks in capability but more importantly is GROWING at such a pace that it may overtake the USs in 10-20 years." HAHAHA where did you get that from the reason china hasnt invades tawain is because they dont have enough transport ships to get enough troops over and also because the US ships stationed in Japan could take on their whole Navy. I am pretty sure tawain has better ships than china. Also china doesnt have any aircraft carriers the uk does. only the us the uk can project globally not the us and china or russia the us and the uk. thats why there # 1 and # 2.
not for long
its the dynamic of an ascending power, organized intelligent and with unlimited man power
it is inevitable that the current hegemony wiil fall it always does-- i dont make the rules
the uk --by the admission of many of the posters here cannot even prevent its fellow eu members from ripping it off
its influence is waning
chineese generals have already suggested that if the us navy were to attempt to advance against any move they made for taiwan they would nuke them in the water
a similar threat they made to the us during the vietnam war -- ie if the us were to use nuclear weopns on north vietnam -- china would retaliate--- vietnam marked the limit of the westward expansion of the anglosaxons----or the west or whatever else you may want to call it--thanks in part to china.
when the treaty for the repatriation of hong kong was signed the british had no idea that in 1997 they would be dealing with a china that could defend itself----had china not reached that point by 1997 the british would have held a referendum asking whether the people of hong kong wished to remain under british rule--they would said yes no doubt-- and britain would then have maintained control of hong kong using a moral argument to overide the terms of the repatriation agreement
when the uk handed hong kong back they did so because they had to they were no match for china --navy or not ---
to an objective observer that transfer was a sign of weakness on the part of the british ---if we use the logic of realpolitc
the zero possiblity of the us and uk preventing the chineese annexation or conquest of tibet is another example
lets distinguish what is likely to happen from what we may want to happen---- believe me i would personally prefer a status quo if the alternative is another blood bath-- but you and i dont make the rules that govern the ascension and decline of nation states
your hahahing suggests to me that you personalize these arguments-- your sense of personal self esteem seem to be ridiculously dependant on this imperial fantasy--- but that too is a symptom of decline................