It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

China and Russia, who would win?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Okay, so this board seems to be full of people who are certain that both of these countries are superior to the US military - so the logical next question is, which would prevail?

They share a massive border, so extensive ground combat is likely - as well as some sort of nuclear exchange.

Do you think other countries would intervene on one side or another?

Who (given the ever deteriorating state of Russia's convential forces) has the best ground/air forces?

Please, share your thoughts....




posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starwars51
Okay, so this board seems to be full of people who are certain that both of these countries are superior to the US military - so the logical next question is, which would prevail?

They share a massive border, so extensive ground combat is likely - as well as some sort of nuclear exchange.

Do you think other countries would intervene on one side or another?

Who (given the ever deteriorating state of Russia's convential forces) has the best ground/air forces?

Please, share your thoughts....



Okay, first of all, I'm going to disagree with your first statement that you have made. Yeah, people believe that these two countries are superior to the United States Military, but they are not! The United States has the best military, technology, and weaponry than any other country on this Earth as far as our intelligence can view. The only reason China may be in one's head is because of the massive number of citizens China has. Today, China has approximately 380,000,000 available military manpower. That is approximately 100,000,000 more than the United States' overall population and about 306,000,000 more than the United States' military manpower. However, the United States will not risk the lives of millions of troops in such of a massive army war with China if we do have war with them. Most of all, we will be using missiles and top secret weaponry to fight the Chinese. You are talking about nuclear missiles, rockets, sub-launched cruise missiles, air-launched cruise missiles, possibly biological weapons, and our top secret weaponry will come to use duirng this time.

According to Russia, if you have forgotten, the Soviet Union has broken up in the early 90's and it's been over 10 years that Russia has been a sitting-duck. They still remain with a minute number of power, but they aren't as much as a superpower as they were before the Soviet Union crumbled. Today, Russia has approximately 40,000,000 available military manpower. And knowing Russia, they may have a different tactic in pursuing the Chinese. Since they are close in border, the Chinese will end up storming onto the Russian territory and fighting. So they would have no choice, but fight using troops. In regards to the Russian troops, they will get completely whiped out if they decided to enter the Chinese territory of vice versa. But more than likely, there will be troops fighting a war between Russia and China. As I have said early in this post, the United States will take a different approach in a war like that. Again, they the U.S. will use missiles and firepower more than they would be risking the lives of military troops.

In this case, there would be several of countries to intervene and support the the Russians. But again, you are talking about competing against a massive amount of soldiers if you have a ground war with the Chinese.

According to the two nations Russia and China, in regards to ground forces, I have already mentioned that China is approsimately 380 million strong in ground forces. That includes their Army, Navy, and airpower. In regards to airpower, the Russians have a fairly strong airforce, but again, the Soviet Union broke up over ten years ago and it caused Russia to get weak and not as strong as they used to be in the past. But, knowing the size of the Chinese military, they may also out-number Russia's airforce as well. But again, Russia cannot stand a chance against China's army since they share a massive border. But in regards to the United States who is the strongest superpower on Earth will take a different approach to fighting China and that will be using weapons of mass destruction.



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 06:26 PM
link   
Quotes from the article.
only human nature to have illusions. These include the belief that identification categories, such as people/nation, faith/ideology, state, and civilization are eternal. Meanwhile, these entities, having existed for some time (often a rather long time), disappear, becoming a thing of the past.

A large-scale industrial catastrophe (of the Chernobyl dimension) would make inevitable the interference of international organizations and would provoke a powerful disintegration movement in the regions. Furthermore, such a catastrophe may produce a domino effect. All available manpower and material resources would be used to contain the aftermath of the catastrophe; this may bring about ruptures in other weak links of Russias overstrained technological chains.


Another disintegration scenario may be provoked by attempts, especially if they are made by force, to restore a single state by re-integrating its former constituent parts. Such attempts would be in harsh contrast with objective tendencies and would lead to Russias collapse.

full story

Quote from article.
Russia's inability to impede the eastward expansion of NATO and its frustration over NATO's unilateral military action in Kosovo have forced Moscow to seek closer strategic understanding with China and India. While Yevgeny Primakov's controversial reference to a "strategic triangle" among Russia, China, and India might not materialize, it is a fact that each of these states is involved in a somewhat similar dynamic. Each is consolidating its relationship with the others, while also expanding its relations with the United States. In terms of strategic payoffs, this partnership will yield them, at a minimum, enhanced benefits of bilateral cooperation with each other and, at a maximum, it can serve to circumscribe US influence. This potential partnership is a blueprint for the next Cold War and poses a threat that could affect the lives of everyone in the United States in a significant way. This article discusses the motivation for a triangular strategic partnership among Russia, China, and India, the challenges to US international strategy resulting from such a partnership, and suggestions for avoiding a return to the days of Cold War tensions.
A strategic partnership among China, Russia, and India is a blueprint for the next Cold War. What can we in the United States do to avert a return to the days of superpower tensions? This is a difficult question to answer, but the following concepts would seem to have promise:

* Build a multinational missile defense network that would protect everyone involved against attacks or accidental launches.

* Ensure that the US military is strong and that we have an effective national security posture in the Pacific.

* Explicitly and clearly support our friends who are engaged in fostering democracy and free markets in foreign countries.

* Give depth to our relationships with other countries through diplomacy, foreign aid, and exchange programs, which in turn provides us early warning about developing situations.

* Use our university system to continue educating foreign students.

* Increase intelligence gathering with regard to China, Russia, and India.

* Continue to help Russia democratize, using US benefits as leverage to prevent a Russian alliance with Beijing.

full story
Perhaps a seccond civil war in Russia could breake out with China trying to influnce the outcome in other words supplying arms and troops to fight on the side that supports china. I think what we have seen in the Ukaine recently is what could start a Civil War in Russia.


The second artircle is a bit old now but makes some points that are worth noting. Assuming Russia was to continue Reforms ,take aid money from the USA and seek a closer ties with China there could cause problems would it lead to war?

Russia and China to hold joint military exercise
full story



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starwars51
Okay, so this board seems to be full of people who are certain that both of these countries are superior to the US military - so the logical next question is, which would prevail?

They share a massive border, so extensive ground combat is likely - as well as some sort of nuclear exchange.

Do you think other countries would intervene on one side or another?

Who (given the ever deteriorating state of Russia's convential forces) has the best ground/air forces?

Please, share your thoughts....



Okay, first of all, I'm going to disagree with your first statement that you have made. Yeah, people believe that these two countries are superior to the United States Military, but they are not! The United States has the best military, technology, and weaponry than any other country on this Earth as far as our intelligence can view. The only reason China may be in one's head is because of the massive number of citizens China has. Today, China has approximately 380,000,000 available military manpower. That is approximately 100,000,000 more than the United States' overall population and about 306,000,000 more than the United States' military manpower. However, the United States will not risk the lives of millions of troops in such of a massive army war with China if we do have war with them. Most of all, we will be using missiles and top secret weaponry to fight the Chinese. You are talking about nuclear missiles, rockets, sub-launched cruise missiles, air-launched cruise missiles, possibly biological weapons, and our top secret weaponry will come to use duirng this time.

According to Russia, if you have forgotten, the Soviet Union has broken up in the early 90's and it's been over 10 years that Russia has been a sitting-duck. They still remain with a minute number of power, but they aren't as much as a superpower as they were before the Soviet Union crumbled. Today, Russia has approximately 40,000,000 available military manpower. And knowing Russia, they may have a different tactic in pursuing the Chinese. Since they are close in border, the Chinese will end up storming onto the Russian territory and fighting. So they would have no choice, but fight using troops. In regards to the Russian troops, they will get completely whiped out if they decided to enter the Chinese territory of vice versa. But more than likely, there will be troops fighting a war between Russia and China. As I have said early in this post, the United States will take a different approach in a war like that. Again, they the U.S. will use missiles and firepower more than they would be risking the lives of military troops.

In this case, there would be several of countries to intervene and support the the Russians. But again, you are talking about competing against a massive amount of soldiers if you have a ground war with the Chinese.

According to the two nations Russia and China, in regards to ground forces, I have already mentioned that China is approsimately 380 million strong in ground forces. That includes their Army, Navy, and airpower. In regards to airpower, the Russians have a fairly strong airforce, but again, the Soviet Union broke up over ten years ago and it caused Russia to get weak and not as strong as they used to be in the past. But, knowing the size of the Chinese military, they may also out-number Russia's airforce as well. But again, Russia cannot stand a chance against China's army since they share a massive border. But in regards to the United States who is the strongest superpower on Earth will take a different approach to fighting China and that will be using weapons of mass destruction.



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 07:28 PM
link   
Can i ask do you have the best trained army?
Best trained navy?
Best trained marines?
Best trained airforce?

Best operational units?
Best weapons?



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Ok well I'm going to put my money on Russia.

I'm pretty sure that China doesn't have very many fighters if any that can counter the Flanker in the air. Also Russia has the Tu-160 Blackjack, which is an incredible bomber, much like the American B-1 that it was copied from. Then of course Russia has a new AAA/SAM system that I believe is called the SA-19 Grison. Either way it's one of the worlds best anti aircraft systems as it combines AAA with four SAMs. So I'm going to say that Russia owns the skies.

In the sea I'm going to bet on China with the exception of submarines. In that case Russia has the Akula classes which are pretty damn nice. Plus Russia's sub fleet would be incredibly powerful if they brought back the Typhoon classes. Unless of course either country starts building aircraft carriers. Then Russia would probably have the upper hand thanks to their superior aircraft.

On the land I would think it would be close but China would win. China would win with infantry. However Russia would last longer than most people think thanks to their massive reserves (which is actually greater than China's reserve, not active however). Russia would probably be able to hold up due to the fact that they have around 40,000 MBT's while China has about 7,000-8,000. But over all China would practically drown Russia in troops.

In the long term China's economy is stronger and is growing much faster so Russia can't afford to draw out a war with China without returning to communism for the duration of the war. However China would begin to suffer economic problems as soon as the American corporations pull out (who wants to operate factories that are under attack by Russian bombers).

Logistically the Russians would initially have upper hand if China went on the offensive seing as they would have to go through Siberia, which is basically a cold version of Hell. Also with the Russian airforce annilating convoys, and disrupting supply lines China's troops would be under equiped in the long term. Also with the awesome skill of Spetsnaz, Russia would be able to carry out assassianations and other spec. op missions that China would have a much harder time doing.

Over all it could turn either way. But I think that most likely Russia would win. It wouldn't be easy but this is one war that would be a victory for Russia.



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 08:04 PM
link   
My money is on Russia too, many aspects are superior to the Chinese. Yet China's ground will be hard to control, massive bombinds will be able to wipe out the area.

Spetnaz will take out high commanders. The only problem would be guarding such a huge country from almost all angles.

This brings me to thinking, imagine USA and Russia and British alliance? That would be sickning.

USA and Russian aviation scientists along with British.... Holy



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Laxpla
My money is on Russia too, many aspects are superior to the Chinese. Yet China's ground will be hard to control, massive bombinds will be able to wipe out the area.

Spetnaz will take out high commanders. The only problem would be guarding such a huge country from almost all angles.

This brings me to thinking, imagine USA and Russia and British alliance? That would be sickning.

USA and Russian aviation scientists along with British.... Holy


So Russia has a chance in the beginning, but what happens 2 months down the road? China has a much better economy and more manufacturing capability.

I doubt any European/Western country would intervene - but what about the following alliances

Russia/Ukraine/Iran/Egypt

China/India/N Korea ?????



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Can i ask do you have the best trained army?
Best trained navy?
Best trained marines?
Best trained airforce?

Best operational units?
Best weapons?


Um lets See .....

I will have to go with -
Best trained Navy - USA (UK a close second)
Best trained Marines - USA (UK second)
Best trained Air Force - USA (By FAR) Israel second

Best operational units - USA (UK/Russia second)
Best weapons - USA (By FAR) Russia second

I can't see how you can argue about the Air Force or weaponry in the least bit......



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 09:02 PM
link   


So Russia has a chance in the beginning, but what happens 2 months down the road? China has a much better economy and more manufacturing capability.


Actually that depends entirelly on who goes offensive. An offensive push would be suicidal for either one of them. China can produce more stuff but Russia owns Siberia which is d@mn near impossilbe to cross against the will of the Russians. So a Chinese attack on Russia would pointless. They may as well tell them to strip themselves and wait in the snow to die. Of course Russia attacking China would be like walking into Hell with all the resistance they would be facing.

So like I said most likely Russia would win. Another thing I forgot about was that Russia has made numerous weapons sales to numerous nations. Russia has also supported many in more ways than just weapons sales. So I'd say that Russia is a bit more popular throughout the world. I can gurantee that Bulgaria would assist Russia. Other potential allies include most nations that were once part of the Soviet Union. With the right circumstances the entire former Warsaw Pact could go against China. Although depending on the circumstances the US and the UK would probably get involved some how. And considering that Russia is currently capatalist (even if it's not working for them) and China is communist the US would probably back Russia.


So economically China wins obviously, miltary wise Russia wins but it's close enough to sway either way depending on leadership. Politically Russia would probably have the advantage.

As for the border issuse, remember it's not a one-way border, although it is in China's favor. During the cold war the U.S.S.R. called the border problem to attention. There solution was to use helicopters to rapidly move up and down the border. As we saw in Afganistan before the introduction of US Stingers, assults by Mi-24 Hinds were lethal to the terrorist scum. If Russia used similar tactics in China they could probably be adapted to work with new countermeasure systems. Plus China doesn't have Stingers, maybe their own portable SAM, but not Stingers. Another thing the Russians worked on was attack helicopters. The result was the Ka-52 Hokum which is currently the worlds most advanced helicopter (with the possible exception of the now cancelled Commanche program). The contract also involved the losing design the Mi-28 Havoc, which was similar to our Apache, only a bit less adgile, ugly, a bit heavyer armed and better pilot safety systems.;


[edit on 1/7/2005 by cyberdude78]



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starwars51
Um lets See .....

Umm let me see....


I will have to go with -
Best trained Navy - USA (UK a close second)

Wouldnt say so if we trained your sub captains...hmmm?


Best trained Marines - USA (UK second)

Hmm lets see 32 weeks of RMC training VS 12 week boot camp....no.


Best trained Air Force - USA (By FAR) Israel second
[/qipte]
No,you are the best equiped, highly trained but not the best.



Best operational units - USA (UK/Russia second)

I personally would say germany, they havent had a real screw up.


Best weapons - USA (By FAR) Russia second

What about the goal keeper?
Better than the phalanx, or the new metal storm things comeing from australia?


I can't see how you can argue about the Air Force or weaponry in the least bit......

Well firstly you have lost to the germany,britain,iran,china,austria oh and russia (by far).



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 09:17 PM
link   
Well Devilwasp, I definatly have to agree with you on the marines. Our navy has most of the best equipment but our training could be better. We definatly have the best equipped AF. Our training is pretty good but not the best. As for weapons, it totally depends what kinds of weapons you're talking about.

I would have to say that the Brits have got the best over all training. However US equipment is generally the best, not in all cases though. In the end what we need is more and better training, with a bit more disipline.

[edit on 1/7/2005 by cyberdude78]



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 09:35 PM
link   
Just to tell you, Typhoons are Akulas. Different names thats all such as Lama and Amur.

I do not believe TU-160 was a copyoff of B-1. But correct me if I'm wrong.

Newest Russian SAM is SA-20 or S-400. Some sources say China bought one under secret for R&D purposes a year or two back.

Russia only has so many TU-160s you know, I believe some where in the ten to twenties according to a report that I forgot the source? Destroying the whole CHinese economic infrustructure? Thats hard, TU-160s can bomb 24/7 for years and that won't do much. 0.1%?

This thread is stupid. China vs Russia would never happen, at least until this generation is dead. China and Russia could only gain more trust and friendship toward each other in the future not fall to a state where full out war is needed. The only SMART thing to do in the next fifty years is to form a Asian + Ex Soviet alliance. CHina+India+Pakistan+Russia+SinoChinese nations and minorities+Ukraine+Other countries who could see the next 100 years are the years of the Asian continent. China, India (possibly but a few problems have to be fixed)and Russia (depends on the action of Putin) are the next super powers (50 years). America will gradually drop its military and political influence in the next 50 years and eventually become similar to Britain currently.

Why can't America form an alliance with China and Russia? Wouldn't that be cool? We could rule the world for another 150 years.



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by Starwars51
I will have to go with -
Best trained Navy - USA (UK a close second)

Wouldnt say so if we trained your sub captains...hmmm?


Maybe if the UK had, I don't know, maybe half as many submarines as the US they might have a highly publicized mistake here or there. Oh that's right - They don't.....




Hmm lets see 32 weeks of RMC training VS 12 week boot camp....no.


No marine gets by with just 12 weeks of training, depending on specialty they will get more training (even if it is basic infantry). The US Marines have an amazing record in combat since, well, just after we kicked the British out of the country...



Best trained Air Force - USA (By FAR) Israel second


No,you are the best equiped, highly trained but not the best.



What are you basing this on? Combat record? Performance in excercises? Capability to move large amounts of cargo anywhere/anytime? Your right, the US has the best equipment - but the best training as well.



I personally would say germany, they havent had a real screw up.


Not that hard when you don't really do anything..... Why not the Swiss? Japanese? Mexicans?



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Russia and China will not go to war for the same reason Russia and the USA or China wont.

TOTAL DESTRUCTION OF BOTH SIDES.

Neither side would win and their economies would be shattered. Warfare among the top powers has become a thing of the past. what would you win? If you had BOTH countries you wouldn't have 1/100 of what you had to begin with and it would take you generations to recover if you ever did. What would be the point?



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by COWlan
Just to tell you, Typhoons are Akulas. Different names thats all such as Lama and Amur.

I do not believe TU-160 was a copyoff of B-1. But correct me if I'm wrong.




Ok well I must have used the wrong names or something because the subs I'm refering to are two totally different Russian subs.;
Akula;

Tyhoon;


Sorry if these images aren't very well sized.

As for the Blackjack being different from the B-1 well let's just compare;
B-1;



Tu-160;


Notice the similarities?

[edit on 1/7/2005 by cyberdude78]



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amuk
Russia and China will not go to war for the same reason Russia and the USA or China wont.

TOTAL DESTRUCTION OF BOTH SIDES.

Neither side would win and their economies would be shattered. Warfare among the top powers has become a thing of the past. what would you win? If you had BOTH countries you wouldn't have 1/100 of what you had to begin with and it would take you generations to recover if you ever did. What would be the point?


So they would probably refrain from a nuclear conflict, but that doesn't mean that some regional state/border conflict could escalate into a nasty conflict. Russia and China have historically had confrontation over borders, particularly Mongolia.

I personally would not rule out some sort of conflict over Russian nuclear forces (ground mobile ICBM's) that are based in southern russia but realisticallly could deploy into Kazakstan - causing serious concern for China. Not to mention N. Korea. Who knows what kind of skirmish they could start. For example, lets say N. Korea publicly states that China has given them nuclear weapons/technology - and uses that to threaten Russia. Russia would probably take some sort of action against N. Korea, possibly going through China without their permission....



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starwars51
Maybe if the UK had, I don't know, maybe half as many submarines as the US they might have a highly publicized mistake here or there. Oh that's right - They don't.....

...who was talking about mistakes i was talking about training..




No marine gets by with just 12 weeks of training, depending on specialty they will get more training (even if it is basic infantry). The US Marines have an amazing record in combat since, well, just after we kicked the British out of the country...

Yeah and i remember soldiers back then didnt even get 12 weeks training.
Well the USMC boot camp is 12 weeks which is basic training and the RMC's basic training is 32 weeks.



What are you basing this on? Combat record? Performance in excercises? Capability to move large amounts of cargo anywhere/anytime? Your right, the US has the best equipment - but the best training as well.

I dont think so, your countries combat exsperience amounts to fighting an ill equipped and under trained enemy.
Large cargo , the russians rule there. Biggest jet in the world.



Not that hard when you don't really do anything..... Why not the Swiss? Japanese? Mexicans?

The germans GIG have been involved in many operations and are highly equited, also another unit is isreal or the gurkhas.



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 10:22 PM
link   
Oops, got confused with the Akula Typhoon and the Akula SSNs. Sorry, My bad.



posted on Jan, 7 2005 @ 11:11 PM
link   
The collespe of the Soviet Union has caused russia no end of problems.

Given that China in terms of econmics is on the rise and Russia trying to get over a decline this puts China at a big advantage. I am also assuming that levels of training would match the modernization of the Chinese military.

The former Air Forces and Air Defence Forces have now been merged into a single service (at a cost of some 93,000 posts), under Colonel General (Aviation) Anatoly Kornukov. Whilst still a large force, it has suffered from a decade of underfunding, which has led to a lack of modern airframes, abysmally low flight training levels and problems with repair and maintenance.
Full story



Perhaps natrual resouces could trigger a second Russian civil war.
A similarly dramatic struggle for the control of oil is going on in Russia. President Vladimir Putin, a former KGB boss who takes no prisoners when it comes to national interests, moved swiftly to arrest Khodorkovsky after warning him not to play politics with Russias oil without checking with the Kremlin.
When the defiant Russian tycoon, who thought he would be protected by making a deal with ExxonMobil, challenged Putin, he found himself behind bars facing charges of tax evasion, bribery and theft.
full story

Please ignore the left wing leanings of this story I dont want another war for oil debate. Im also sure that Khodorkovsky is no angel.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join