Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    22 Apr '10 22:20
    Is there any US military tech we could sell to the PRC that is strictly defensive in return for a decrease in our massive debt to them? Or is that suicide? Isn't there anything innocuous but useful enough?
  2. 22 Apr '10 23:42
    why would we want to sell them defensive technology? so they can use it to defend against us?
  3. 22 Apr '10 23:43
    a significant decrease in our debt to them would entail giving them a significant increase in their defensive technology.
  4. Standard member joneschr
    Some guy
    23 Apr '10 14:00 / 4 edits
    They already took much of our defence tech, for free. Why would they pay for it?

    One of many examples:
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/04/02/ST2008040204050.html

    So far, they're military spending is a fifth of the US's, - I don't think tech is a big issue for them.
  5. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    23 Apr '10 14:32
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Is there any US military tech we could sell to the PRC that is strictly defensive in return for a decrease in our massive debt to them? Or is that suicide? Isn't there anything innocuous but useful enough?
    Selling them technology would be a drop in the bucket compared to the deficit. The only solution in the long run is to balance the budget or even generate a budget surplus and to at least start paying down the debt.
  6. 23 Apr '10 16:26
    Originally posted by sh76
    Selling them technology would be a drop in the bucket compared to the deficit. The only solution in the long run is to balance the budget or even generate a budget surplus and to at least start paying down the debt.
    or write it off.
  7. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    23 Apr '10 19:49
    Originally posted by zeeblebot
    why would we want to sell them defensive technology? so they can use it to defend against us?
    You sound like you plan to attack the PRC...
  8. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    23 Apr '10 19:57
    Originally posted by sh76
    Selling them technology would be a drop in the bucket compared to the deficit. The only solution in the long run is to balance the budget or even generate a budget surplus and to at least start paying down the debt.
    Our military tech is a monopoly. Doesn't that count for something?
  9. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    23 Apr '10 20:09
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Our military tech is a monopoly. Doesn't that count for something?
    Sure; it counts for something. It helps maintain military superiority and gives out military-industrial complex an edge over those of other countries.

    I don't think it's worth selling for a little cash.
  10. 24 Apr '10 00:25
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    You sound like you plan to attack the PRC...
    the US plans to be able to wage two wars simultaenously, or something like that.

    why do you think that is?

    Russia and Venezuela?

    Russia and Iran?

    Russia and Luxembourg?
  11. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    24 Apr '10 02:42
    You seriously believe the United States military seriously thinks it can invade the mainlands of both Russia and China at the same time?

    The two wars in question are Afghanistan and Iraq.
  12. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    24 Apr '10 02:44
    http://www.myantiwar.org/view/196133.html
  13. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    24 Apr '10 02:51
    Here's some post by a dude who claims he has quotes. Unsourced.

    The Pentagon adopted the two-war requirement after the Gulf War. It was designed in part to discourage a potential aggressor, such as North Korea, from making trouble for U.S. forces in the region when this country is caught up in a major war elsewhere, such as the Middle East.

    Indeed, some speculate that China may try to invade Taiwan if the US is busy in Iraq. Similarly, some published reports have supported fears that Ariel Sharon might spend the last days of his administration pushing Palestinians out of the Territories while the US messes around in Iraq; at least one report claims he would order such an action the day a large-scale invasion takes place. Chances are, we could name a few other countries that might try to use the "preemptive defense" doctrine that Bush has been trying to use on Iraq for months now.

    On another note...

    "Iraq is a part of the war on terrorism," Rice said

    Separately, homeland security adviser Tom Ridge contended: "Clearly the president and everyone is confident that we can deal with the terrorist threat and, if we have to, deal with Iraq as well."

    So... ummmm... is Iraq part of the terrorist threat, or a separate issue? Depends who you ask on what day, it seems.

    Meanwhile, everyone continues to make decisions for Iraqis and Kurds, while not asking what they'd like to see in a post-Saddam Iraq.

    http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=364040&hl=Two-war-doctrine-may-be-tested
  14. 24 Apr '10 02:53
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    You seriously believe the United States military seriously thinks it can invade the mainlands of both Russia and China at the same time?

    The two wars in question are Afghanistan and Iraq.
    invasion is not an automatic consequence of war.
  15. 24 Apr '10 02:53
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Here's some post by a dude who claims he has quotes. Unsourced.

    The Pentagon adopted the two-war requirement after the Gulf War. It was designed in part to discourage a potential aggressor, such as North Korea, from making trouble for U.S. forces in the region when this country is caught up in a major war elsewhere, such as the Middle East.

    ...[text shortened]...
    http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=364040&hl=Two-war-doctrine-may-be-tested
    yeah. as i said. " ... China ... "