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.

 

War: Can China take Russia with 200 million men?

page: 8
1
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 02:57 PM
link   
China could take on Russia because they have more money than Russia. Russia is having trouble with Chechenya. There are large cities in the Amur region with hundreds of thousands of people and one paved road. Across the River China has Skyscrappers. Chian has so much more U.S. t-bonds than the russians do. They could take on russia only if America didn't go on Russia's side. The reason is we have the smart bombs and etc.. The war would be decided on who could adapt to the winter the best.




posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 04:07 PM
link   
No, there is a difference here. Russia does have the ONLY functioning anti-ballistic missile defense system in the world. It DOES work, it has been PROVEN to work. Russia couldn't stop a barrage of nukes, but 1 or 2 shouldn't be that hard. So the difference looks slight, but is rather significant; Russia may be able to knock out a few of those incoming nukes while China stands no chance against a Topol-M. Already there's a deciding factor in who's going to win, if that word is appropriate.

You think Russia cares about losing a few cities? How many cities were in total ruin during WWII? Russia will either fight the invaders and lose little to no land although several million people will die, or Russia does nothing and let the invaders come through the gates. If history repeats itself then Russia will be doing the former.

Less Russian people will die if Russia uses nukes. Unless China goes all out on Russia with nukes FIRST then China may stand a chance, but if that fails a Russian retaliation would be fatal to China. China will in that instant be blasted back into the fifth century. Russia, however, may be able to survive the devastation. They've lost 20 million in a single war before without blinking an eye while competing with the U.S. as a superpower.

Russia WILL go nuclear. Not to mention the world is not going to stand by and let this happen. No one is going to help China if they try to invade; they'll be #ed. It won't matter how much more money they have than Russia.

The Chinese know that, that's why China hasn't tried to invade so far, and probably never will. Where Russia stands now, they are at least a decade ahead of China in technology, and if it weren't for the stuff they're selling they'd probably be a century ahead. China cannot invade Russia and win.



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Big Papa
China could take on Russia because they have more money than Russia. Russia is having trouble with Chechenya.
Actually, Russia is having no trouble with Chechnya. That war pretty much ended in 1999. Russia controls the territory, they've leveled the city, and there has been no major battles for years now.



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Crow
No, there is a difference here. Russia does have the ONLY functioning anti-ballistic missile defense system in the world. It DOES work, it has been PROVEN to work. Russia couldn't stop a barrage of nukes, but 1 or 2 shouldn't be that hard. So the difference looks slight, but is rather significant; Russia may be able to knock out a few of those incoming nukes while China stands no chance against a Topol-M. Already there's a deciding factor in who's going to win, if that word is appropriate.


LOL, sorry to burst your bubble, but CHina has far more than one or two
Also since when has this Russian ABM system been proven to work ? and of course it is only deployed around Moscow, too bad for the millionsof people in other cities.


Actually, Russia is having no trouble with Chechnya. That war pretty much ended in 1999. Russia controls the territory, they've leveled the city, and there has been no major battles for years now.


LOL, Russian soldiers are getting blown up and illed every other day. There is no trouble because the Russian gvernment supresses the news



You think Russia cares about losing a few cities? How many cities were in total ruin during WWII? Russia will either fight the invaders and lose little to no land although several million people will die, or Russia does nothing and let the invaders come through the gates. If history repeats itself then Russia will be doing the former.


What a mentality, try 10's of millions. Then of course your economy would be in ruin, people would starve, teh list goes on. Your bravado is pathetic.



Russia WILL go nuclear. Not to mention the world is not going to stand by and let this happen. No one is going to help China if they try to invade; they'll be #ed. It won't matter how much more money they have than Russia.


Hmm, been reading a bit too much Tom Clancy. Russia is almost a dictatorship, there wouldn't be too mnay countries willing to defend it.


The Chinese know that, that's why China hasn't tried to invade so far, and probably never will. Where Russia stands now, they are at least a decade ahead of China in technology, and if it weren't for the stuff they're selling they'd probably be a century ahead. China cannot invade Russia and win.


LOL, the Chinese are smart, they'll take over Siberia not through military arms, but through other silent means.



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Crow
No, there is a difference here. Russia does have the ONLY functioning anti-ballistic missile defense system in the world. It DOES work, it has been PROVEN to work. Russia couldn't stop a barrage of nukes, but 1 or 2 shouldn't be that hard. So the difference looks slight, but is rather significant; Russia may be able to knock out a few of those incoming nukes while China stands no chance against a Topol-M. Already there's a deciding factor in who's going to win, if that word is appropriate.

You think Russia cares about losing a few cities? How many cities were in total ruin during WWII? Russia will either fight the invaders and lose little to no land although several million people will die, or Russia does nothing and let the invaders come through the gates. If history repeats itself then Russia will be doing the former.

Less Russian people will die if Russia uses nukes. Unless China goes all out on Russia with nukes FIRST then China may stand a chance, but if that fails a Russian retaliation would be fatal to China. China will in that instant be blasted back into the fifth century. Russia, however, may be able to survive the devastation. They've lost 20 million in a single war before without blinking an eye while competing with the U.S. as a superpower.

Russia WILL go nuclear. Not to mention the world is not going to stand by and let this happen. No one is going to help China if they try to invade; they'll be #ed. It won't matter how much more money they have than Russia.

The Chinese know that, that's why China hasn't tried to invade so far, and probably never will. Where Russia stands now, they are at least a decade ahead of China in technology, and if it weren't for the stuff they're selling they'd probably be a century ahead. China cannot invade Russia and win.


The PLASA(Second Artillery) Force is one of the world's strongest missile force.
they have the vector rocket engine technology, and all other things too
I don't think neither Russia nor US is more advance than China in terms of missile technology.
the second artillery force has always been the pride of PLA

and as for the number of A/H/N ICBMs, the elistmated figure of these things sit in silos is about 200-400 (the actually number is a top secret of PLA, and probably will never be told)
and the number for other types of A/H weapons such as plane bombs and submarine/vehicle carying ICBMs are unknown

PLA nuke force is nothing like that of NK, OK?

and this is why I totally disagree with you on that Russia would totally wipe China out in a nuke war.
That will not happen, both country will down to the ground.


PS. what do you think the DF-5s and the new DF-31 multiple nuclear warhead ICBMs are for?
they are not historical monuments you know?

PS.2 plz dont tell russian history here, that all the past. PLA kicked the all mighty United Nation force out of NK before during the korean war.
Things are changing.

[edit on 10-6-2006 by warset]



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Russia is the second largest exporter of oil, I'm sure quite a few countries would jump in to help.

Russia is practically a dictatorship, right? Well China is communist, even less will jump in there. Not to mention the various ethnic groups and Taiwan will be having a fieldday.

They (China) will silently take over Siberia by slowly populating the area. After that I assume they'll rise up with pitchforks and fight their Russian neighbors? Yeah, whatever. That'll happen the day Latinos reclaim the United States.

Eh, ten of millions, no big deal. Moscow and the surrounding cities are all that matter anyway. Siberia is so sparsely populated the combined deathtoll there from nukes would be like what, 10? China's population density is far greater, they'll be losing way more people. Their economy will also be screwed.

PLASA is good but not as good as Russian and the U.S.

Any way you spin it Russia has the advantage.



posted on Jun, 10 2006 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Crow
Russia is the second largest exporter of oil, I'm sure quite a few countries would jump in to help.


Or they might wait and see ?



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Russia will either fight the invaders and lose little to no land although several million people will die, or Russia does nothing and let the invaders come through the gates. If history repeats itself then Russia will be doing the former.


And so shall the Chinese... With almost 5000 years of history, the Chinese has survived through countless wars and invaders. I'm pretty sure the Chinese people and the gov't are not as stupid as some of you here suggest.

I hardly think a war between Russia OR China is going to happen anytime soon. They have become... more or less "warmed up" to each other against a similar "foe" - the US. If any fighting is going to be done, I believe it would be political stabbings by the combined forces of China and Russia against the US in international issues such as Iran.

Sheesh... some of you guys here have got to STOP reading Tom Clancy novels. They are STORIES, FICTION, not reality.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 06:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by warset
and as for the number of A/H/N ICBMs, the elistmated figure of these things sit in silos is about 200-400 (the actually number is a top secret of PLA, and probably will never be told)


Highly unlikely that they would have 200-400 ICBM's they fon't even have that many strategic Warheads. I'd like to know where you got your figures from.


and the number for other types of A/H weapons such as plane bombs and submarine/vehicle carying ICBMs are unknown


You wouldn't give PLAA planes much of a chance against Russian SAM sites, also they only have 1 SSBN, which is pretty much junk.



and this is why I totally disagree with you on that Russia would totally wipe China out in a nuke war.
That will not happen, both country will down to the ground.


In a nuclear war, teh Russians would be capable of launching thousands of strategic warheads against CHina, essentially flatening it. China only has mabe 100-200 strategic warheads, which would also cause alot of damage. Russia might survive as a going interest, China would not.



PS. what do you think the DF-5s and the new DF-31 multiple nuclear warhead ICBMs are for?
they are not historical monuments you know?


The DF-5 is ancient junk, with a CEP of 2km, I wouldn't be gloating about it. The DF41 ICBM is where CHina will pin it's future deterrance and teh JL-2 SLBM.


PS.2 plz dont tell russian history here, that all the past. PLA kicked the all mighty United Nation force out of NK before during the korean war.
Things are changing.


LOL, you're joking right ? You suffered a million casualties and couldn't push the UN back past teh 48th parallel. The US and UN didn't have the stomach for heavy casualties which is why they were content with static warfare, otherwise tehy would hvae been able to push teh PLA out of Korea and out of Manchuria if they so chose. Hardly a victory for the PLA, even with far superior numbers they got slaughtered.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 06:31 AM
link   
Whatever in a nuclear war Russia will screw China over. Infact they can screw anyone over execpt the US maybe and that too only because the US has a strong second strike SSBN capability.

China doesn't need DF-2, DF-41s or any ICBMs to target Russia. Their M-11s and other IRBMs will suffice. These don't have MiRV capability and so the major Russian cities will not be affected unless they are saturated with multiple repetitive missile strikes.
Also if Russia goes nuclear pre-emptively, it will definitely try to cripple China 2nd strike capability, especially the one at sea.
Anyways if these guys go nuclear, then they'll fumigate each other mostly.

They'll turn a barren wasteland into a radioactive barren wasteland!

It actually all depends. Russia will only be forced into using nukes and that too tactical theatre nukes if the chinese swarm the Northern forntlines with an armored/infantry invasion force.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
LOL, you're joking right ? You suffered a million casualties and couldn't push the UN back past teh 48th parallel. The US and UN didn't have the stomach for heavy casualties which is why they were content with static warfare, otherwise tehy would hvae been able to push teh PLA out of Korea and out of Manchuria if they so chose. Hardly a victory for the PLA, even with far superior numbers they got slaughtered.


no, far less than a million!
take a look at the figure yourself
www.centurychina.com...

and no, UN would not get Manchuria, they barely managed to keep the 38th parallel
and plz don't tell me that the UN didn't try hard, the war last 3 years! and look at how much material they spent compare to that of PRC's


and don't for get that china was fighting with the all mighty UN force made up of 18 countries', and with only a barely existing NK force along helping(NK force got nearly wipe out before the chinese came)

and the so called the mighty USSR barely supplied PRC with a few planes and truck



but u see, it's useless to talk about the korean war now, things are changing, the chinese soldiers nowadays aren't nearly as good as those during the korean war, and the commanders are worse too. so talking history isn't gonna help much.


PS. ironically, the UN commander commented the chinese force as nothing more than laundry men before china joined the war, predict it would be a massacre if the chinese even dare to come





Originally posted by rogue1The DF-5 is ancient junk, with a CEP of 2km, I wouldn't be gloating about it. The DF41 ICBM is where CHina will pin it's future deterrance and teh JL-2 SLBM.


no, DF-5s are not ancient and are not junks, they have an attacking range over 13000km (far enough to reach the US), so its CEP is good enough,
beside, DF-5 is purely designed for nuclear(hydrogen - 3 megaton) warhead only, so even if you miss the planned destination by 2km, you'll still get to level the city.

As for it's not ancient, the new DF-5As are believe to be build in late 90's and the future models with MIRVs are still in development.
The estimated figure for DF-5 ready to lunch is about 20+


the DF-31s is not acctually too much better than the DF-5s
DF-31A has a range of 10000km, and carrying 1megaton nuclear warhead, or three to five 20-150 kiloton nuclear warheads with the new MIRVs.
the most advantage of DF-31 is that it's mobile

[edit on 11-6-2006 by warset]



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by k4rupt

And so shall the Chinese... With almost 5000 years of history, the Chinese has survived through countless wars and invaders. I'm pretty sure the Chinese people and the gov't are not as stupid as some of you here suggest.


Wait, since when were we talking about China being invaded? I thought the title of this thread was "can China take Russia". I have complete faith in the Chinese when it comes to defending their own country. They have done it countless times before and and could do it again, but I also have that same faith in Russians. They've proven themselves over and over as well.

[edit on 6/11/2006 by The Crow]



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 04:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
Highly unlikely that they would have 200-400 ICBM's they fon't even have that many strategic Warheads. I'd like to know where you got your figures from.


Those are just estimates that I've also come across. The Chinese have said they possess the fewest number of nukes of any of the nuclear countries, which means they have less the than the UK's 200 or so. Of course the Chinese could be lying; it could be far less than that or greater, although probably not by much.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Crow

Originally posted by k4rupt

And so shall the Chinese... With almost 5000 years of history, the Chinese has survived through countless wars and invaders. I'm pretty sure the Chinese people and the gov't are not as stupid as some of you here suggest.


Wait, since when were we talking about China being invaded? I thought the title of this thread was "can China take Russia". I have complete faith in the Chinese when it comes to defending their own country. They have done it countless times before and and could do it again, but I also have that same faith in Russians. They've proven themselves over and over as well.

[edit on 6/11/2006 by The Crow]


Russia owns in terms of defending there country!



Originally posted by rogue1
Highly unlikely that they would have 200-400 ICBM's they fon't even have that many strategic Warheads. I'd like to know where you got your figures from.

nuclearweaponarchive.org...
this is a list estimated by NATO to the end of 2000, the number up to date(due to the huge increase of china's military spend eg. the new DF-31s) is unknown, but should be about the same.

Except for the oldest weapon in China's missile arsenal, the retiring DF-3 (2800 km), the other models(4/5) are capable of reaching any part of Russia; but only DF-5 and DF-31 can reach the US

[edit on 11-6-2006 by warset]



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 08:38 PM
link   
Okay, to make this topic more... "debatable," lets drop the use of nuclear weapons. If Nukes WERE used in such a war, both sides would be destroyed and left in bane. You can argue this that Russia has defense against one or two ICBMs, but hell, even if 1/10th of China's nukes were to hit Russia... lets just say it wouldn't be a pretty.

So, since this war between Russia and China seems completely ludicrous and out of reality, lets discuss it as a hypothetical war WITHOUT nukes.



posted on Jun, 11 2006 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by orionthehunter
I read the possibility on a site that China could attack Russia with it's army of 200 million men in the north. I started wondering could this happen? Could Russia be defeated by a modernized army of 200 million Chinese?


China have 25 millions people in the military reserves. I cannot imagine the logistical nightmares of handling that greater number of men involving in an invasion.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Lets get something clear. The Soviet Red Army soilder of the Great Patrotic War was a hunter. They felt at home in the prievil forests. Today they are not the same. China needs to expand. there are Generals in China probably just waiting to get into a good fight before they die. It's not just a Tom Clancy novel. They coud launch an economic war against Russia. The united States would have to stay out of it because China owns so many of our T-Bonds.

Then what would happen if Oil peaked in 2011? How much more would the Chinese have in allies. Look at how few countries now support Taiwan as being recoginzed as a Nation. China has wide Global infuence. They are now in Africa giving free aid and such with one thing as a payback. Not to recoginize Taiwan. So Somehow we will all globally eventually lose Taiwan to China like Hong Kong. (Even though Hong Kong was by treaty.)

Then China would somehow influence the rest of the world to slowly do this to Russia. Russia is Weaker than the United States and NATO. Plus they are right next door. It would provide a great Jump Off point for a future evastion of the United States. Russia could defend it or they could just see it coming and try to sell it to the Chinese. that would be thier Smartest Move for Survial.



posted on Jun, 12 2006 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by warset
no, far less than a million!
take a look at the figure yourself
www.centurychina.com...


It is occmon knowlege that the HInese never released teh true figure of the dead, so any official estimate is far less than the real total.


and no, UN would not get Manchuria, they barely managed to keep the 38th parallel
and plz don't tell me that the UN didn't try hard, the war last 3 years! and look at how much material they spent compare to that of PRC's


Compare the number of forces the UN had in total to what they committed in KOrea. It was a frsaction, they didn't try as hard as they could, they were cotent to sit behind their lines andpractice static warfare.



and don't for get that china was fighting with the all mighty UN force made up of 18 countries', and with only a barely existing NK force along helping(NK force got nearly wipe out before the chinese came)


LOL, most of those countries committed a few thousand men or less, hardly what you\d call total commitment. If this UN armies had fielded their full compliment of soldiers, it would hvae been millions.


and the so called the mighty USSR barely supplied PRC with a few planes and truck


LMAO, Well if you call creating and supplying China's airforce nothing. DO some reading you ignoramus. The USSR supplied all the planes and training to China's airforce about 800 Mig-15's. And when it was obvious the PLAAF was hopeless they comitted their best pilots to provide aircover for the PLA. LUcky for the PLA.



no, DF-5s are not ancient and are not junks, they have an attacking range over 13000km (far enough to reach the US), so its CEP is good enough,
beside, DF-5 is purely designed for nuclear(hydrogen - 3 megaton) warhead only, so even if you miss the planned destination by 2km, you'll still get to level the city.


THey are incredibly old, ike the old US Titan missile, they are liquid fuelled, There is absolutely nothing modern about them.


As for it's not ancient, the new DF-5As are believe to be build in late 90's and the future models with MIRVs are still in development.
The estimated figure for DF-5 ready to lunch is about 20+


Complete BS, why build old DF_5's whent ehy have teh DF-31 solid propellant missile. I think you should do some more reading.



the DF-31s is not acctually too much better than the DF-5s
DF-31A has a range of 10000km, and carrying 1megaton nuclear warhead, or three to five 20-150 kiloton nuclear warheads with the new MIRVs.
the most advantage of DF-31 is that it's mobile


Obviously you don't know what you're talking about.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
And when it was obvious the PLAAF was hopeless they comitted their best pilots to provide aircover for the PLA. LUcky for the PLA.


I was going say the same thing pilots that flew over Korea could tell you there were soviets there becuse they were harder to shoot down.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
Complete BS, why build old DF_5's whent ehy have teh DF-31 solid propellant missile. I think you should do some more reading.


The DF-5 can reach the east coast of america while the DF-31 can only reach the west coast.

Now take your advice and do some more reading



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join