When you start from zero it isn't surprising when that level of growth isn't sustainable; the graph almost goes vertical until you approach the level everyone else is at. I think China's stability is more a threat than the rate at which they grow in a global economy that doesn't have much confidence in most nations' stability. I think China is a threat to the US, probably one of the biggest threats to our status as sole/leading superpower. They have their problems (communism isn't as effective a form of government as a democratic republic), but if we continue straying away from what made us great, they'll overtake us.
So what? Their economy may just get bigger than ours at some point, but their problems are huge in many important areas. As you mention, communist governments are not known for their stability, but rather for the discontent of their citizens. Their dissident movement went underground after Tianenmen, but it is huge and well-organized. A revolution is coming somewhere down the road and it may come a fast and effectively as the last Russian revolution. They cannot even hope to aspire to be a Superpower with a military that has no global reach. They can't even control the South China Sea. Geographically they are constrained by the Himalayas and Russia from threatening continental invasion of anybody except Tibet (Dalai Lama says don't fight) and Vietnam (They tried to invade Vietnam after the US war and Vietnam kicked their ass.) They have few allies on the international stage and most of those are Chinese dependents, mostly dictators and despots like North Korea, Sudan, Iran, Pakistan, Cuba, Venezuela, etc. Their economy is totally dependent on international trade. They literally cannot afford to get into a war with Russia, who controls their land access or the United States, which controls the sea lanes. An embargo and blockade would ruin them within a year. China has a ton of people who will work cheap. Markets have flocked to them and they are making money on a steep curve. But that curve will flatten and drop at some point as consumer demand and salaries in china grow along with it. It can't help but become large but this will not continue forever. The United States will be the lone superpower for a long, long time. We are in better shape than any country in the world.
And if we didn't have them we wouldn't be able to trade in the global market or our ability would be hampered? S Korea supplements their defense with US military forces and pays a portion of that cost to us (mercenaries?). I suppose we are so entrenched in S Korea & Japan to keep China in check? If we pulled out would S Korea & Japan eventually be overwhelmed by China or forget about the value of a relationship with the US? Why? Are we only a superpower because we impose our will around the globe? We'd be more fundamentally sound if we traded with those who want to trade fairly with us. Those who don't want to trade fairly, we could produce what they offer and make them irrelevant. If we really wanted what they make, offer more or make it ourselves. Free market. The benefit of stability outweighs disadvantages, unless we aren't sustainable. If we provide military support and are reimbursed, that is mercenary. If Iraq threatens to disrupt a desired resource by not respecting the sovereignty of a nation and our congress votes to go to war, that's different. Are our national interests in SE Asia and Germany global stability?
What does our huge national debt mean, there is some point where it must become crippling, and what will happen at that time? Depression (maybe our quality of life isn't sustainable), chaos (costs of fuel sky rocket, effecting the cost of everything; we all have stock in the US dollar and if we lose our butts on it what do we turn to?), isolation from the rest of the world (I guess geographic isolation kinda hurts in this case) while other nations weather the collapse better because their nations don't have historic debt in their currency. Historic debt, manipulation of interest rates, continued deficit spending. China has stock in the US and would take a hit, but no one would take a bigger hit than the US. If China or Russia felt they could get away with it, think they'd miss the advantage of taking cheap shots at us?
What is your point? Once again you don't know what a mercenary is. A Mercenary, also known as a professional soldier, soldier of fortune, private military contractor, or freelancer, is a person who takes part in an armed conflict who is not a national or a party to the conflict and is "motivated to take part in the hostilities essentially by the desire for private gain and, in fact, is promised, by or on behalf of a party to the conflict, material compensation substantially in excess of that promised or paid to combatants of similar ranks and functions in the armed forces of that Party". No, its to defend Japan from North Korea. What is your point? That is what a superpower is, chief. What is your point? No, it isn't. We have a treaty agreement with an ally that includes cost-sharing. What is your point?
China seems to be playing things pretty smart, embracing capitalism. There are quite a lot of content Chinese, I believe. I wouldn't think blowing them off is wise. China spends a lot of money on military. France is third in military spending, spending about half of what China spends. I don't think blowing off their military is wise, either. Their money is buying them influence around the world. I think they've been giving aid to lots of African nations. An overt war with the US may not be wise (though, if we can't afford fuel, how much reach do we really have?), but a covert war with a dazed US could make matters worse for us and better for them. I imagine China and Russia could live with each other enough to stick it to the US a bit. I don't see this as a forgone conclusion. A collapse of the dollar would be pretty catastrophic.
The sky is not falling. The huge debt neeeds to be reduced but of itself does not portend the collapse of America. That's just it, they can't get away with anything and they know it. So should you.
We don't need outposts in foreign nations to succeed in the global market. A soldier or group of soldiers paid to provide military services to a nation not their own. Aren't we providing military services to a nation not our own and being reimbursed for it? I'm being a little flippant, but what are the national interests we're protecting in South Korea? US East? Global stability? Are you concerned that China would overtly or covertly through N Korea cause trouble with Japan and/or S Korea? Or are you afraid that Japan and/or S Korea will forget about the US once they realize how fruitful their relationship with China is? If not, why are we there? If so, is it worth it? Do we need a continued presence? I feel like we could simply act if need be. But you don't fear China much, so what's the problem? I feel like we'd be more super if we paid more attention to stabilizing our economy rather than intervening around the world. There is no need to maintain bases around the world to participate in the global economy.
