
Are China and the United States Headed for War? - DLay
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/06/19/are-china-and-the-united-states-headed-for-war?mbid=social_twitter
======
burntrelish1273
War exists now in many more dimensions than in previous centuries including
non-conventional weapons and cyber, in addition to public sentiment, economic,
social, political and military.

Considering the CIA's loss of double-agents, I'd say China maybe winning the
HUMINT arms race at the moment.

There's too much to lose with direct military engagement (nuclear MAD), so
competition will be limited to proxy wars, "sharp-elbow" island capture and
overflights, trade wars and cyber attacks. The question becomes at what point
does hard proof of attacks in these other domains necessitate an escalation of
limited hostilities in the conventional dimensions (ie military).

------
Osiris30
See previous HN discussion on China and the 'Thucydides trap' (2015) [1]

And also - "There is no Thucydides trap' \- an essay/review of Graham
Allison's book by Chinese history scholar Arthur Waldron - "In this book
review, he argues persuasively against a concept that has become a pillar of
establishment thinking on China." [2]

[1]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10309448](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10309448)

[2] [http://supchina.com/2017/06/12/no-thucydides-
trap/](http://supchina.com/2017/06/12/no-thucydides-trap/)

------
chiefalchemist
It's a concern, but hardly in the Top 5 of Problems Facing Humankind.

War is inevitable. It's tragic that still sounds like a reasonable statement
thus far into the 21st Century.

~~~
brador
Why is war inevitable?

~~~
chiefalchemist
Because the article all but see so.

------
voidz
No.

~~~
humanrebar
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines)

------
Simulacra
No. China recognizes it has far too much to lose in a war with the United
States, and America realizes it too. There will always be saber rattling, and
tension, because each wants to dominate a sphere of influence. But war? No.
Proxy wars? Absolutely but all out, country to country combat? No.

------
insulanian
No way. Who would produce the stuff for west then? Western world will be in
big trouble if that happens.

------
cryoshon
china is growing into its mantle as world hegemon to replace the crumbling US.

there might be war, or there might not be. china isn't about to start shit
when they could be making money hand over fist with anyone and everyone.
they're not about to be bullied, either.

------
smaili
In all honesty with all of the things the US is entangled with in the Middle
East and Europe, I cannot imagine yet _another_ conflict. It just feels like
we would be stretched much too thin with our resources and at some point would
collapse.

------
youeeeeeediot
Some people are much more enlightened in this day and age but history has
taught us that war is inevitable. We are a violent species, and eventually
chance prevails and enough mistakes are made to trigger something unstoppable.

~~~
runn1ng
I don't think the tragedy is violent human nature; more the fact that some
problems just don't have peaceful solutions.

One group of people don't voluntarily give up dominance over land (and other
finite resources) to other group of people. Wars don't happen because people
get bored, wars happen because people want what someone else has.

