200,000,000 ???? 10 to 15 % ???

[Carey]

If you say so. Interesting that they are letting their buddies in North Korea starve, when they have so much food.

They are not buddies with North Korea they just want to sell stuff to north Korea and as long as North Korea lasts want to have the back up of North Koreas military just in Case we were to go to war with China.
Because the usa could do to China what we did to Iraq.
So they need all the help they can get if we decide to come for the too.



Do you realize how much food and equipment it would take to maintain 200 million soldiers? It's never been done. It's never come close to being done.

That is why the battle of Armaggedon is such a big deal.
It is the ultimate cataclysmic war.

 

[Carey]

200 mil is a logistical nightmare especially trying to work across borders even if it's with allies. As of right now I dont think it's possible for anyone. If it is possible in the future, it is impossible to maintain it for a long duration, especially while prosecuting a war.

It is not a war it is a single world wide battle with its main front in the valley of Mageddo.

 

[OhhJim]

You think that it's possible the USA could invade China, and that China is actually worried about that scenario?

Wow. Is there anyone who agrees with you? Sources? Links?

 

[Carey]

You think that it's possible the USA could invade China, and that China is actually worried about that scenario?

Wow. Is there anyone who agrees with you? Sources? Links?

Not invade bomb into submission.

If they tried to move masses of troops our bombs would enialate them.

Yes China is afraid of the USA that is why they are increasing their military budget so rapidly.

This will get ya started

The China SyndromeWhy the Pentagon keeps overestimating Beijing's military strength.

By Fred Kaplan
Posted Friday, May 26, 2006, at 5:08 PM ET
Every day and night, hundreds of Air Force generals and Navy admirals must thank their lucky stars for China. Without the specter of a rising Chinese military, there would be no rationale for such a large fleet of American nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers, or for a new generation of stealth combat fighters—no rationale for about a quarter of the Pentagon's budget. In Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's Quadrennial Defense Review, released this past February, the looming Chinese threat is the explicit justification for all the big-ticket weapons systems that have nothing to do with fighting terrorists or insurgents.
But is the threat real? In each of the last four years, Congress has required the Defense Department to issue a report titled Military Power of the People's Republic of China. The latest edition, issued this week, starts out ominously, but as you read through its 50 double-columned pages, you gradually realize that claims of emerging Chinese superpower are way overblown.
The Chinese are hardly sluggish when it comes to modernizing their military. According to the report, they've been boosting their military budget by double-digit percentages every year for the past decade. They've been expanding their arsenals of missiles, aircraft, air-defense weapons, surface ships, and submarines. They have expanded especially aggressively near the Taiwan Strait, to the point where the balance of forces with Taiwan is now "shifting in the mainland's favor." They're studying the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and are shifting their doctrine to focus on joint operations, "network-centric warfare," and offensive maneuvers.
placeAd2('slate.homepage/slate','midarticleflex',true)
That's what you get from the first half of the report. In the second half, you see that it adds up to diddly.
Take the budget. China officially says it's spending $35 billion on its military, a 14.7 percent increase over last year's budget, amounting to 1.5 percent of its gross national product. (The U.S. military budget is nearly 15 times as large and amounts to 4 percent of our GNP; Japan's and South Korea's defense budgets are larger than China's, too.) The report says that China's growth "sustains a trend that has persisted since the 1990s of defense budget growth rates exceeding economic growth"—but read on—"although the growth of defense expenditures has lagged behind the growth in overall government expenditures over the same period of time." (Emphasis mine.)
In other words, by the report's admission, the military is not the Chinese government's No. 1 priority. (For more on the budget figures, click here.)
More to the point, let's look at what the Chinese have bought. It's a surprise to read that the balance of power with Taiwan is now "shifting in the mainland's favor." For decades, the widespread calculation has been that China could overwhelm Taiwan if it wanted to—just as the Soviet Union could have overwhelmed West Berlin or North Korea could have captured Seoul—but that it's been deterred from doing so out of a reluctance to spark a large-scale war.
The report states: "In the near term, China's military buildup appears focused on preparing for Taiwan Strait contingencies, including the possibility of U.S. intervention." It claims that in the long term, the Chinese aim to widen their area of military control throughout Asia. But the report later makes clear that the People's Liberation Army, as China's military is formally called, is doing nothing of the sort.
It states that "Chinese military theorists" are exploring "the role of information technology as a force multiplier, enabling PLA forces to conduct relatively limited military operations with precision at greater distances from China's borders. However, in practice," the report continues, "the PLA remains untested. The lack of operational experience hampers outside assessment." Military theorists are also thinking about "devising a robust 'out of area' offensive capability to provide effective support for joint operations." However, again in reality, the PLA "faces a persistent lack of inter-service cooperation and a lack of actual experience in joint operations." The language in its official studies of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan "suggest(s) China continues to be surprised at the rapid pace of change in military warfare." In other words, Chinese officers realize they're not playing in the big leagues.
Read as far as Page 30, and you see that not just China's capabilities but also its ambitions are far from expansive. "At present," the report states, "China's concept for sea-denial appears limited to sea-control in water surrounding Taiwan and its immediate periphery. If China were to shift to a broader 'sea-control' strategy"—in other words, if it were seeking a military presence farther away from its shores—"the principal indicators would include development of an aircraft carrier, development of robust, deep-water anti-submarine-warfare capabilities, development of a true area anti-aircraft warfare capability, acquisition of large numbers of nuclear attack submarines," etc., etc. The point is: The Chinese aren't doing—they're not even close to doing—any of those things.
The report notes that Chinese naval officers began to "discuss" aircraft carriers in the late 1970s. In 1998 and 2000, they bought two Soviet carriers. However, neither was turned into a weapons platform. Instead, they were used as (these are the report's words) "floating military theme parks." The report notes that some analysts think China might have a single aircraft carrier by 2015, but others think they won't until 2020 or later.
Finally, Page 40, the next-to-last page of text, contains an eye-opening sidebar that calls into question the report's very premise:

China does not yet possess the military capability to accomplish with confidence its political objectives on the island [Taiwan], particularly when confronted with outside intervention. Beijing is also deterred by the potential political and economic repercussions of any use of force against Taiwan. China's leaders recognize that a war could severely retard economic development. Taiwan is China's single largest source of foreign direct investment. An extended campaign would wreck Taiwan's economic infrastructure.
​

Nor, this sidebar states, does China seem physically able to pull off an invasion of Taiwan, even if it wanted: "According to the Intelligence Community, China would have difficulty protecting its vital sea lanes of communication while simultaneously supporting blockade or invasion operations." This is the case, quite apart from the "virtual certainty of U.S. intervention, and Japanese interests, in any conflict in the Taiwan Strait."
If you're worried about the independence of Taiwan, this report suggests that China's buildup is worth careful monitoring and a modest response. If you're worried that the Chinese military might dominate Asia, the report suggests you should relax.
It's an old, recurring story, this business of latching on to China as a rationale for big weapons or budgets that would otherwise be baseless. Back in 1967, President Lyndon B. Johnson ordered his Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara, to build some kind of anti-ballistic-missile system. McNamara was opposed to an ABM system. He'd recently ordered a study that concluded an ABM would be futile because the Soviets could counter our defensive missiles by just slightly increasing the number of their offensive missiles. But an order was an order, so McNamara gave a speech in which he outlined all the reasons an ABM was a bad idea—then concluded that we needed to build one anyway to defend against an attack by Red China.
Paul Warnke, at the time an assistant secretary of defense, walked into McNamara's office later that day and asked, "China bomb, Bob?" Warnke told me, many years later, that McNamara looked down at his desk, shuffled some papers, and muttered, "What else am I going to blame it on?"

http://www.slate.com/id/2141966/

here is another.
think why would Bush be thinking this if we did not know we could win?
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HD20Ad01.html

 

[good4u]

Are you saying the battle with the 200,000,000
troops is another battle than armageddon??

Yep. That's right!

 

[Carey]

Yep. That's right!

Intersting.

Please tell us what the battle is ??
Does it come before or after armageddon??
Can you reference the bible in your interpretation ,please?
This is one of my favorite subjects and I love to hear new views.

Thanks and God bless,
Carey

 

[good4u]

I suggest you do more studying. I just don't have time to go into great detail. But I will tell you this, the 200M armed troops is not of this world and is not an earthly army. You will have to study more to solve the riddle.

My prayers are with you.

 

[OhhJim]

China alone has almost 3,000,000 miltary personel and could easily make it ten times that size if they wanted to.

You know that 3,000,000 times ten isn't 200 million, right? As a matter of fact, it's nowhere near 200 million.

 

[Carey]

You know that 3,000,000 times ten isn't 200 million, right? As a matter of fact, it's nowhere near 200 million.

And China is only 1 nation.

Many Islamic countries have more wealth than China.

There are 1.2 Billion Muslims. There are over a Billion Chinese.

That is over 2 billion combined leaving out other non muslim evil Nations like Russia for instance.

With about 3 billion people between Islam, China and Russia less than 10 % of there populations could with ease man a 200,000,000 man miltary

 

[interpreter]

You think that it's possible the USA could invade China, and that China is actually worried about that scenario?

Wow. Is there anyone who agrees with you? Sources? Links?

The great Battle of Ar Mageddon is fought against demon-possessed kings of the East who start it. (See Rev. 16:12-16)

But I still think the 200 million is a reverence to the horsepower unloaded on D-Day accross the English Channel on the beaches of Normandy. (To John, the English Channel loked like the Euphrates).

 

[OhhJim]

With about 3 billion people between Islam, China and Russia less than 10 % of there populations could with ease man a 200,000,000 man miltary

You keep talking about how easily it could be done. I find that a bit detached from reality. Even if it could be done, it wouldn't be easily done. It's never come close to being done, before.


"Professionals study logistics, amateurs study strategy."