There is no "time". The government has everything from 6 month T-bills to 30 year long-term treasuries. They constantly retire old debt and issue new debt.
Corporations to the same exact thing. I think the AMOUNT of debt we have is excessive, without question. Funding it with treasuries is fine though. Even with no deficit and a balanced budget the government would still use short-term debt, as all companies do.
Ahem, the Qin lasted for only a few decades, unles you count the period where it was one of many Feudal states in the Zhou dynasty Either way though, your assement is generally correct, though wouldn't Iran's terrain make it more like Afganistan than Iraq? from a geographical POV Mesopotamia have always been a rather undefendable flat area with enemies comming from every direction, where as Iran while also having some problems (mostly that they're closer to the Nomadic North) is generally more defensable. Sure modern technology change things, but terrain is still a factor.
I am aware you can, and I even said so. However, the issue of the bond can't force you to turn it in early. And that is essentially what you are saying needs to be done. And the issue we are having is not debt, as much as deficit spending. Our entitlement programs are driving this country into a massive debt that can never be paid back if it continues. But that is another topic altogether.
The problem is that if China starts selling US debt (rather than buying) on the open market interest rates will come under pressure due to lack of demand for new debt and old debt that matures and needs to be rolled over. To stop interest rates from rising the Fed will have to print money to buy up all the unwanted new debt. Dilution of the currency will then cause inflation. If the currency dilution is great enough .. hyperinflation. There is no "winning" in either an economic or military war with China.
Iran is making noises about blocking the Straight of Hormuz. Iran is bent on aggression. It's a problem that's NOT going away. I predict Iran will invade western Iraq in January and seize the oil fields. "Pweeeze give us our drone back."
This is really an economic situation, and not a military one. Don't confuse the two. But that would be foolish of China, as they would essentially be slitting their own throat. Their economy is almost totally tidal locked with that of the US. If they decide to "crash" our economy, theirs will not be far behind. This is the same situation we saw 30 years ago when Japan was buying a lot of US treasuries. They were doing this to help keep their largest trading partner solvent. And they recognized something a lot of people in the US do not seem to get. If our economy collapses, so does theirs. As for the loss of value, that is not really going to happen for quite a while yet. The US is still the richest nation on the planet. If you missed it last month, Donald Trump did a TV Special on Discovery called "Curiosity: What's America Worth?" And in it, he computes the true value of the United States. And the full value is truely staggering. Between our military equipment, land, buildings, resources, inventions, and the like, we have much more collateral then we have debts.
Please enlighten us. The area surronding a U.S. aircraft carrier is probably the BEST protected chunk of airspace in the world. I assume you believe the hype surronding China's so-called "anti-aircraft carrier missile" that has never been tested let alone shown capable of detecting, tracking, hitting, and penetrating the defenses of an aircraft carrier.
Iran would have to be crazy to invade Iraq. That would be extending an invitation to Nato to attack. Russia and China would have to keep silent because of such aggression on the part of Iran. Not even the Imam's in Iraq would do something so stupid. The whole story Iran is telling the world is that they are the victim of Nato/US aggression. For Iran to then become the aggressor would negate that story. Not likely to happen IMO.
If China tried to sell all of its debts it wouldn't get anything close to market value. It would lose billions of dollars. Also, one important thing you're forgetting is that China pegs its currency to the U.S. dollar. If the dollar began to inflate, China, which already has a serious problem with inflation, would suffer just as much, if not more. You're clearly a China fanboy. The Chinese military is of virtually no threat to the U.S. military outside of mainland Asia. China cannot project power and its economy, while growing quickly, is still less than half the size of the U.S. economy. It also relies heavily on cheap labor which can easily be exported to other countries....and in fact already is. China isn't in a position of power over the U.S.
China has a vast array of advanced cruse missiles. These "nuclear" missiles can be launched from Land, Air, or Submarine. Since when is an aircraft carrier hard to detect ? You can see it on Google earth for goodness sakes which is terrible resolution compared to what military satellites can do. The carrier would not have a chance. Even if they somehow managed to detect the stealthy missile and knock it down a couple of miles prior to impact such that the ship might not sink, all the crew would be instantly killed and it would be a floating radioactive ghost ship. There is no winning a war with China .. get it out of your mind.
This is not the first time they have done it, will likely not be the last. During the "Tanker War", Iraq was hoping that Iran would do this, and drag the US into the conflict between them. And while Iran did threaten such action, the US moved in to support the smaller nations of Qatar and Kuwait, and Iran backed down. And with the increased US presence in those and other nations, any attempt to do such today would be very foolish. http://www.presstv.ir/detail/216416.html And while the nation of Iran tries to claim the entire Strait, they ignore totally that under International Law, the Strait of Hormuz is jointly owned by them and the United Arab Emirates. And the UAE has almost completed building a pipeline across their nation, eliminating the need for the Straight at all. http://arabiangazette.com/uae-readi...sing-strait-of-hormuz-as-tensions-mar-region/ Iran simply does not realize how it is making itself obsolete.
What is your problem ? Stating reality does not make me a fan of China. I said there was no "winning" an economic war. Both sides would lose. China would lose billions/ if not a trillion, and the US would lose. From a Military perspective you are clearly clueless to China's nuclear capacity. Try google to upgrade your state of awareness. The point here is not that "China" would win, but that both sides would lose. China, at the cost of its own destruction, could "obliterate" the US and life as we know it. Let me know if the word "obliterate" is not clear enough for you and I will give you details on the numerous ways China could do this.
Notice what you have said twice there. Nucelar. Do you really think that the PRC is stupid enough to get into a nuclear war with the United States? The minute the first warhead was detonated, China would essentially cease to exist as a nation unless something radical was done fast. As in the people instantly rise up in horror and lynch the entire Politbeauro. China has around 400 warheads, most of them on missiles that can't reach the US. Of their entire ICBM stockpile, the only ones that can really reach the US is the DF-31A and DF-5A. And they have a total of 15 of the DF-31A, and around 20 of the DF-5A. Meanwhile, the US has over 5,000 nuclear warheads. 450 of them are on Minuteman missiles that can strike anywhere in the world (other then a small area in Antarctica). Of course, China does have 4 Ballistic Submarines. Each with 12 missiles. The US has 14 SSBN subs, each with 24 missiles. See the trend here? Add in the long range bombers that the US has and China does not, and the picture does not look pretty for CHina if it drops a single nuke anywhere. That would not be a good trade-off. Destroy one carrier task force, and see your country obliterated. China is not stupid.
Actually, they could not. Just look at the number of weapons they have, and their delivery systems. Only a handfull can reach the US. I will even be generous and throw in the missile subs, even though they spend almost all of their time patrolling along the Chinese coast (they lack the number of tenders needed to let them operate outside of this area for very long). Read above, and what is the total number of warheads that can strike the US? Assuming every single one worked properly, and all 4 subs were within range? I come up with 83. Yea, a lot of damage, but nowhere near "obliterate". We have almost double that number of missiles in Minuteman silos alone. We have over 4 times that number of missiles on our submarines alone. And I am not even beginning to go into other parts of our stockpiles, like the nukes on the Carriers, on our Cruise Missiles, or that can be loaded on bombers from Diego Garcia, Guam, Okinawa, and other Pacific bases. You are the one that is sadly ignoring what China is actually capable of doing. And hyperinflating their capabilities.
actually all china has to do is sell quietly.....naturally if they publish that they will be net sellers of treasuries then there would be panic in the markets....they need to do the classic pump and dump.....so as to get the best price for the treasuries!
I totally agree with you that China would not win. My point is that there would be no winner. First off, we have no idea what the status of China's nuclear capacity is. It is not like they tell us. One thing we can assume it is likely been significantly upgraded over the last decade. The have both the money and the capability. Second - have you any idea the kind of destruction a 4-5 Megaton warhead does ? I am guessing you do because of your handle and reading a number of your post but for the record. Hiroshima was the equivalent of 12-14000 tons of tnt. 4-5 Megatons is 300 times that. 83 is likely low .. the new subs can carry 24 MIRVs (smaller than 4-5 Megatons but who is counting ? 0.2 M is still 10 x Hiroshima) Estimates of number of MIRVs per missile range from 3-10 but who knows ? 24 x 5 = 120 missiles on one Sub and it is not like the Sub needs to get very close to launch 4000 Miles is close enough. List off 100 US cities and strategic sites (gone, obliterated) and tell me what kind of a US is left after that. The fallout would contaminate vast portions of the US, soil and water, and last for many many years. China can "OBLITERATE" the US... and we can obliterate them. It is not like Russia is going to stand by and watch as we contaminate parts of the Russia in our effort to obliterate China. This talk of winning a war with China is absurd. There is only lose/lose. The US as we know it would be completely destroyed.
Carriers are incredibly difficult to detect. The ocean is vast....millions of square miles. There's no way on earth you could find one reliably with google earth. Even if you were lucky (1 in 100 million) it would be outdated and of no use for targetting information. Carriers move very quickly. You not only have to find it, which as we said is extremely difficult, you also have to continuously track it. Once a ballistic missile is launched the carrier will know and will begin taking evasive actions. Also, any conventionally launched ballistic missile has the possibility of being mistaken for a nuke. As Mushroom put so well, China doesn't stand much of a chance in a nuclear conflict with the U.S. Oh yeah, and then the missile has to make it through a screen of the most advanced anti-air weapons on the planet. You're don't seem to have any idea about what you're talking about. China has a massive military, but much of its equipment is 1960s/70s era (if not earlier) and most of its military are conscripts. They would be very formidable in a ground engagement near their own borders, but their Air Force, Navy, and power projection capabilties leave them at a massive disadvantage to the United States in any kind of conflict anywhere else.
Conditions back then were not the same as now. Perhaps 20 years from now but certainly not in the immediate future. The Shia are in power in Iraq. Iran is Shia so they are good friends now. The result of a nearly decade long occupation of Iraq has been to install leadership who shares a common perspective with Iran. To me this is bizarre.
