5 ms·

Economic Sanctions- possible, but only effective with Allies and a clear set of demands on what it takes to lift the sanctions UN Resolution- China is a veto h

Economic Sanctions- possible, but only effective with Allies and a clear set of demands on what it takes to lift the sanctions UN Resolution- China is a veto holding member of the security council, not happening Boots on the ground- not worth it, even morally. A ground war with China will kill hundreds of thousands at a minimum.

vkou 8y ago
A ground war with China will leave most of the United States a nuclear crater.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  From Google results: "China is estimated by the Federation of American Scientists to have an arsenal of about 260 total warheads as of 2015, which would make it the second smallest nuclear arsenal amongst the five nuclear weapon states acknowledged by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons." "As of 2017, the U.S. has an inventory of 6,800 nuclear warheads; of these, 2,800 are retired and awaiting dismantlement and 4,018 are part of the U.S. stockpile. Of the stockpiled warheads, the U.S. stated in its April 2017 New START declaration that 1,411 are deployed on 673 ICBMs, SLBMs, and strategic bombers." EDIT: No one wins, it's who loses the least. The whole point of having them is so the other person doesn't use theirs.
  - pizza 8y ago
    Additionally China's arsenal's cumulative megatonnage is ~294 MT (as of 2009) whereas the US's cumulative megatonnage is ~1430 MT (as of 2014). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_weapons_of_mass_dest... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_weapons_of_m...
  - excalibur 8y ago
    > No one wins, it's who loses the least. Which is also no one. Whether or not humanity is completely wiped out, this is an extinction-level event, and the entire nation-state system that spawned it becomes meaningless in the aftermath.
- topkai22 8y ago
  Obviously assuming an avoidance of nuclear escalation, which it is very much in China’s interest to avoid- best estimates say China has less than 300 weapons, not all of which have delivery systems capable of reaching the US and many are potentially targetable by for counterforce strikes. Still an absolutely horrendous toll to pay for an escalation. The US in contrast has 4000 active warheads, with at least 1300 on capable ballistic misfile delivery vehicles. If used in a countervalue attack, the Chinese would cease to exist as a relevant people. Which as a long way of saying the US can escalate more than the Chinese, but actually getting into an open and direct conflict is a morally horrific idea.
  - throwba43yt 8y ago
    That’s like saying Arnold and Carl are standing waist deep in a pool of gasoline. Arnold has 4000 matches, Carl has 300. Who’s going to survive the fire?
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]

vkou 8y ago

A ground war with China will leave most of the United States a nuclear crater.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
toomuchtodo 8y ago
From Google results: "China is estimated by the Federation of American Scientists to have an arsenal of about 260 total warheads as of 2015, which would make it the second smallest nuclear arsenal amongst the five nuclear weapon states acknowledged by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons." "As of 2017, the U.S. has an inventory of 6,800 nuclear warheads; of these, 2,800 are retired and awaiting dismantlement and 4,018 are part of the U.S. stockpile. Of the stockpiled warheads, the U.S. stated in its April 2017 New START declaration that 1,411 are deployed on 673 ICBMs, SLBMs, and strategic bombers." EDIT: No one wins, it's who loses the least. The whole point of having them is so the other person doesn't use theirs.
- pizza 8y ago
  Additionally China's arsenal's cumulative megatonnage is ~294 MT (as of 2009) whereas the US's cumulative megatonnage is ~1430 MT (as of 2014). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_and_weapons_of_mass_dest... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_weapons_of_m...
- excalibur 8y ago
  > No one wins, it's who loses the least. Which is also no one. Whether or not humanity is completely wiped out, this is an extinction-level event, and the entire nation-state system that spawned it becomes meaningless in the aftermath.
topkai22 8y ago
Obviously assuming an avoidance of nuclear escalation, which it is very much in China’s interest to avoid- best estimates say China has less than 300 weapons, not all of which have delivery systems capable of reaching the US and many are potentially targetable by for counterforce strikes. Still an absolutely horrendous toll to pay for an escalation. The US in contrast has 4000 active warheads, with at least 1300 on capable ballistic misfile delivery vehicles. If used in a countervalue attack, the Chinese would cease to exist as a relevant people. Which as a long way of saying the US can escalate more than the Chinese, but actually getting into an open and direct conflict is a morally horrific idea.
- throwba43yt 8y ago
  That’s like saying Arnold and Carl are standing waist deep in a pool of gasoline. Arnold has 4000 matches, Carl has 300. Who’s going to survive the fire?
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]