Read: Worst Case War Scenario, WWIII: East Asia....

page: 11
0
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 18 2005 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
Full of misunderstanding here....My post was intended to chinawhite and NOT to Daedalus3.

I've been hoaxed. My reply was to chinawhite's post : Post Number: 1391232 (post id: 1413125), thinking it was posted by him.

He saying he was fighting for india, etc took me by surprise.All this had to happen because chinawhite copy-pasted parts of Daedalus's earlier post (which i was unaware of) instead of quoting Daedalus.

And Daedalus, i wont reply to your following post.


Friendly fire sucks


[edit on 17-5-2005 by Stealth Spy]


STEALTH SPY everytime someone post a thing the numbers change.

You posted the article


how can i hack hoax???? this site very secure..

if you post something take the blame


i never quoted Daedalus3 the indian bearing arms.. you just changed the names on the thing hoping to fool other people


you quoted Daedalus3 then changed the name to chinawhite..


BUSTED




posted on May, 18 2005 @ 08:00 AM
link   
what does that have to do with anything?? Have you solved the re-fueling paradox?



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 08:03 AM
link   
I never did like u2us.. lets keep this civil chinawhite.. stick to the topic at hand.. no personal attacks and taunts.. I apologise for all personal commnets.



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 08:15 AM
link   
ok this thread seems to have been taken over completely by this hypothetical india-china conflict. i mean whtever happened to good ol World War III


ok for the life of me i cannot see india & china getting into any sort of conflict with each for quite some time. simply too much to loose. but let us suppose such a conflict does occur. regardless of who the aggressor is the conflict will not remain limited to the 2 countries in question.

u can betcha ass pakistan will jump in, to try not to help china but gain as much as it can from an india heavily engaged on the eastern front. thsi will in all probabilty be followed by the entryother major powers like the US, EU, Russia, Japan etc. i mean u cant have 3 nuclear countries having a war can u. i do not think tht these countries will take a side (too dangerous to do tht) but will simply work swiftly to de-escalate any conflict.

as for who will be the winner and who the looser. i think it will end in a stalmate, simply because the situation will be brought under control too fast for either china or india to make any gains. and as for pakistan it will enter the fray too near the end to really threaten any indian positions.



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Yepp, and that wouldn't stop there, for inctance Russia could attack Europe. And Japan would be in problems with China...



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 11:14 PM
link   
go to general chit chat

www.belowtopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 03:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by chinawhite
go to general chit chat

www.belowtopsecret.com...



why?? i thght this thread was about world war III type scenarios. the link was to a thread discussing which country has the best army

and as it any world war III scenario cant be complete without a discussion of the roles to be played by india, china and even pakistan for tht matter, as (though i hate to admit it) is where world war III, if it does occur, is most likely to start



posted on Aug, 13 2008 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Disturbed Deliverer
 


I know this post is old, but the chances of North Korea invading South Korea are remote. And if North Korea were to do so, South Korea would be reduced to rubble in a matter of hours by artillery strikes from DPRK forces alone, all of which have the range to hit Seoul and further south.

The PLA - if it attacked Taiwan, which given Hu Jintao's foreign policy at the moment makes this unlikley as well - China could very easily cripple Taiwan. Taiwan's only hope of survival is having U.S. military support at the beginning, not 72+ hours after the opening of hostilites that it would take to get sufficent US firepower in the area to face China.

A majority of what information is available to the public about China's military is generally by American think tanks, whom go to lengths to provide disinformation on China's abilities. China possesses a highly capable armed forces that posses a significant threat to regional countries and this should not be taken lightly. China has some of the most advanced naval weaponary in existance, including the Russian Shkval torpedo (which by U.S. Navy public admission, we have no countermeasure for) which can reach almost 300 knots, giving a target only a few seconds to respond.

China also has the highly capable Kilo and Song class diesel-electric submarines, a majority if not all have air independent propulsion (AIP), making them very difficult to detect. It should be noted that in U.S. Navy exercises with Sweden, the U.S. found itself seriously lacking in combating diesel-electric boats, and the Swedish Navy's submarine the Gotland was able to sink a carrier, a cruiser, and a destroyer and escape. To add further insult to injury, near Sanya in southern China, the PLAN is finishing a massive underground submarine base which gives China the ability to deploy it's boats without anyone ever knowing as satellites will no longer be able to capture heat plumes in reactors warming up or show submarines leaving their pens.

Do not underestimate the ability of China's military. It is by far the single largest strategic threat the U.S. faces in the 21st century. It is fortunate for now that it's current leadership is passive and unwilling to be aggressive or confrontational and practices are more sublte, diplomatic approach to solving it's problems. But keep in mind, previous leaders like Jiang Zemin made the U.S. his entire foreign policy objective. He was assertive, he was aggressive, and he was committed to laying waste to Taipei if he had to. And we will see more people like him after Hu Jintao retires.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 04:18 AM
link   
The USA's biggest strength is also it's biggest weakness. It is multicultural/multiracial, whereas China is mostly ethnic Han. Blood is thicker than water. Imagine China going to war with the USA. You would have 5th columns springing up in the USA. The only way the USA could maintain a military and nationalistic edge over China in the coming future is to reduce the minority race population in the USA and increase the white population. If you are a white soldier in the USA, why do you want to defend your country when the white race will be a minority in 50 years? Nationalism will always overcome patriotism ie. Patriotism is the love of one's country, nationalism is the love of ones race.

And the USA has to grow up and realise war has no rules. If China was fighting Iraq now, they wouldn't give a # who they shot. They would kill anything that moved unless it was Chinese, and win the war in 3 months, while spending 100th of the $ the USA would spend. The USA cares too much about killing of women and children, but who gives a f###. A real enemy eg. the Germans in WW2 took on the whole world and almost one, because they don't feel guilty about killing anything that isn't German. Yanks are brought up from day one with all this PC bull# about what is right and wrong etc.

If the USA became a national socialist state, nothing in the world would even come close to threatening them.

Multiculturalism and multiracialism will destry the USA. This is a fact. China just has to play a waiting game. The Chinese could wipe out every race in the world and not give a Sh##. WHite man would feel guilty just for killing one civilian in the middle east.



posted on Oct, 21 2008 @ 11:28 AM
link   



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xerrog
If America truly becomes entrenched those carrier groups will be needed there. Moving them to protect Taiwan over our hundreds of thousands of deployed troops would be insane. If we attack Iran and Syria you can bet Turkey will get involved in Syria. If Syria is attacked they will almost assuredly attack Isreal in retaliation (even just a missle or two). Isreal will not back down from any threat so it would most likely move to strike back. If Isreal strikes any muslim country outside of Palestine you can bet your ass Egypt and Jordan will get involved.

Egypt and Jordan are on basically friendly terms with the US but they wont stand by and watch Isreal attack anyone. If they came into the mix the US couldn't afford to deploy anything beyond subs away from that region.

With America tied up it would be doubtful if the EU or Nato would be willing to risk direct confrontation with Russia. Nato without the US has done little to nothing. The EU bickers to much internally to come to a conclusion about directly involving themselves with Russia.

Pakistan and India are being forced to be nice at the moment by the big boys. Once Russia, China, and the US are off their backs economically and militarily it would take little to nothing to reingnite a conflict there.

And everyone knows no matter what the outcome would be Kim Jong Il is crazy enough to attack South Korea, and his troops are brainwashed enough not to question it.


LETS leave fantasy and talk briefly about THE ISSUES.

1.) Russia and Georgia and the Russian's seem to have new missiles that can GET PAST the missile defense program the US seeks to employ and has began to employ in ROGUE former Soviet "states." I have been looking to see if others noticed this "ticker" on the news (missiles). Implications of THIS, and the oil Russia has is a HUGE branch of a potential war scenario.

2.) Iran and Israel tensions. There are implications here also.

3.) PAKISTAN/Afghanistan. This worries me. A while back, I told somebody, "If a NUKE accidentally went off over there, in Pakistan/Afganistan, it would be a HORRIBLE ACCIDENT." News is pushing that terrorists are taking over PAKISTAN. Pakistan is SAID to have a nuklear aresnal although I DO NOT know how many missiles, or what delivery systems for that matter they might have. I can see this being USED as an excuse to BOMB the said nuke sites (but could probably be US DROPPING NUKES) as an easy end to the situation over there (easy in terms of life lost for U.S./Allied forces, and MONEY). Biden said, "It won't appear we are right, but we'll need your support, not financially though." Powell said January 21st or 20th or something like that. I feel this is VERY likely.

4.) WHAT are the actual force CAPABILITIES of world powers anyway. TECHNOLOGY, PREMPTIVE capabilities, etc.

U.S.: Army--outnumbered by China, but probably better technology. Navy--U.S. controls seas I believe although this is hard, one scenario I have is a "ship" launches a missile and takes somewhere out, even by "accident." AIR FORCE; DOMINANT. Others are said to have this or that, but experienced pilots, missile technology, smart-target capabilities; WE WOULD WIN most wars in terms of PREMPTIVE striking, and taking out power structures, communication structions etc. WEAKNESS: HOLDING places, occupation is not what U.S. is made for. IF Osama is real, and engineered it, then US brass is playing into it and has been ALL ALONG.

Other countries? What about DEFENSES? Sensor technology? Can they stop our subs? Can they stop Air Force attacks? I have a feeling the U.S. has AURORA craft that can be in and gone with ORDINANCE DROPPED before defenses can even fire (modern defenses). What is it most don't know about? EMP? Other defenses? Other weapons other than nukes?

--I THINK Russia, Iran, China, North Korea=threats.



posted on Oct, 24 2008 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by imAMERICAN
 


I would like to add to the "CONVO" as it were.... I feel that wars start in certain regions and then that spreads those that are fighting and that causes a majority of mostly everybody to run in retreat and say "oh my gosh, they finally did that one thing we knew they would sell us out on..." but then no one would be around to hear it or say "what me worry?". Just my plucky opinion.





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 8  9  10   >>

log in

join