It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Hypothetical attack on U.S. outlined by China

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 08:03 PM
"Because the American public is “abnormally sensitive” about military casualties, according to an article in China’s Liberation Army Daily, killing U.S. airmen or other personnel would spark a “domestic anti-war cry” on the home front and possibly force early withdrawal of U.S. forces. (“The U.S. experience in Somalia is usually cited in support of this assertion,” according to the Rand report.) Once this hard-and-fast assault on U.S. bases commenced, the Chinese army would “swiftly divert” its forces and “guard vigilantly against enemy retaliation,” according to a Chinese expert. "

Wrong lesson. Please look up "7 Dec 1941".

Oh well. Nuke them from orbit. It's the only way to be sure. (Of course, you'll want to nuke them again in 30 minutes or so!)

posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 08:05 PM
if the chinese had any sense,which they do, they would not give away any real military stratagems they behold,this is nothing but psychological warfare in action!

posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 08:28 PM
Hmm, whoever wrote that rather sensational movie script deserves an award, nuclear "E-Bomb" in the pacific, yeah, ok, go ahead and try that. One thing to keep in mind, really simple, China would not be allowed to conventionally (forget about nuclear) or otherwise attack the United States vital assets without retaliation upon the homeland. While china has no real conventional capability to target the CONUS the US military can pulverize with impunity mainland China and reduce all of it's major cities to rubble without launching a single ballistic missile. We have conventional and nuclear superiority in force projection and defensive systems. Is China willing to trade attacking US regional bases for it's major cities? No, as such don't buy into BS misinformed propaganda designed to scare and exaggerate.

Another thing to keep in mind, air and sea routes would be closed by the US military effectively starving China of supplies while our forces hit the mainland with impunity. China would not be able to shut down our air and sea routes as their forces cannot project and operate on such a distant scale. They would also be incapable of directly attacking the CONUS with any real impact unless they go nuclear. And if they do that we have superiority in that field, so I'm not too worried. Don't sip the kool aid people.

posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 09:22 PM
Does anyone really think that our leaders actually work for the US public? I think it is more likely they would kowtow to the interest of the Chinese government and their commercial interests than advancing US interests.

Hillary after all walks into a poor Chinese neighborhood and comes out with buckets of cash. Her husband received millions from the communist Chinese in exchange for missile secrets via Loral. It's over folks. The Chinese already own us. We should just give them Taiwan and slink away into third world obscurity. We need China to build our military parts anyway since all of our industry has been sent over there anyway.

posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 11:29 PM
reply to post by WestPoint23

So westpoint, what about issues like this:

China establishing a military base in Iran?

Does this not somewhat contradict your assessment that the Chinese are not capable of forward deployment?

China has already surpassed Germany as Iran's number one trade partner. Sinopec, China's largest oil refiner, has just finalized a multi-billion dollar deal to develop the giant Yadavaran oil field, and this is in addition to the "deal of the century" contract for natural gas from Iran's immense North Pars field. Chinese contractors are also busy constructing oil terminals for Iran in the Caspian Sea, extending the Tehran metro, building airports, among other projects. And this while China arms sales to Iran have included such hot items as ballistic-missile technology and air-defense radars.

The growing Iran-China cooperation on the energy and trade fronts is bound sooner or later to spill over into more meaningful military cooperation and, in turn, this depends to some extent on the ebbs and flows of Iran-US and China-US "games of strategy", particularly if China feels additional pressure from the US on the geopolitical front.

For sure, Iran's willingness to show a greater willingness than hitherto to embrace China's naval vessels making port calls to Iran is now in the cards, this as a prelude to more extensive agreements up to and including provisions for a small Chinese naval outpost on one of Iran's Persian Gulf islands.

While I'd like to empathize with your write-off of the article and take pride in our tremendous projection power, I cannot help but feel to a degree that just because an octopus doesn't have his tentacles extended doesn't mean he can't reach you.

posted on Jan, 30 2008 @ 11:39 PM
A good friend of mine was in the Army Special Forces for 6 years. From my understanding, they run drills annually, maybe bi-annually. These drills are a dry run if a country invaded the United States of America. Worst case scenario type drills if you will. They don't run them against Iran, North Korea, or even Russia. Who did they project invading the United States of America? That's right. A force comparable to the Chinese.

Not to get you all paranoid, but each time they had ran these massive drills, we didn't fair so well. If China ever invaded the United States he said, "We should probably start learning Chinese." Wild.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by DeadFlagBlues]

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 12:17 AM

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Does this not somewhat contradict your assessment that the Chinese are not capable of forward deployment?

No, that article was discussed in good detail in the thread. It merely stresses the geopolitical implications if the PLAN were to establish an outpost near the Gulf if Iran allows them to use their territory. At this time, the PLAN does not have any significant global forward deployed bases, aerial, naval or otherwise. The US on the other hand has hundreds of essentially permanent global combined force bases fully equipped and backed by the most impressive logistical military machine of our time. Not to mention our forces are large enough, capable enough and experience enough to deploy anywhere in the world and win in that region. A token PLAN instillation in the gulf with perhaps some rotational PLAN vessels making port a few times a year is not that big of a deal. Yes you can send your ships to global ports but do you have the capability effectively fight, sustain and manage that force against the US military? For the Chinese the simple answer is no. They are currently limited to the First Island Chain, although they are making progress to expand that area of operations and force projection to the Second Island Chain.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
I cannot help but feel to a degree that just because an octopus doesn't have his tentacles extended doesn't mean he can't reach you.

The Chinese, are in no position to force wise, capability wise, and most importantly logistically wise to conventionally and effectively attack and sustain such an attack on the CONUS. No one else is either for that matter. Anyway, unless they go nuclear against the CONUS there is nothing to worry about, and they wont do that for several simple reasons. We enjoy nuclear superiority, this means, size of our force, delivery, survivability, reliability etc.. We have greater force projection capability over mainland China than they do over the CONUS, which means their nuclear arsenal can be preemptively targeted. We have a developing anti-ballistic missile system and we enjoy far far greater SA in terms of early warning and intelligence.

Originally posted by DeadFlagBlues
Not to get you all paranoid, but each time they had ran these massive drills, we didn't fair so well. If China ever invaded the United States he said, "We should probably start learning Chinese." Wild.

There is no reason to get paranoid as they run drills for contingency and must be prepared for all scenarios, no matter how unlikely they are, hence why NORTHCOM exists. However the simple fact remains that currently and for the foreseeable future no country, and I literally mean that, can effectively invade the CONUS. Besides the US military standing in your way there are natural barriers that still offer protection, they are called the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. No country in the world has the assets, logistical and offensive capability to simultaneously defend their homeland from the US military, defeat us and continue to project conventional power to the CONUS. And then mount what would be the biggest amphibious and naval assault (logistical undertaking) in the history of warfare to invade and occupy the US. It would make D-Day look like a field trip in comparison. Just even getting here would be next to impossible but then occupation, forget about it. Not even the Soviets could pull it off at the height of their power without going nuclear to attack the CONUS.

Smoke and mirrors folks, sleep peacefully.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by WestPoint23]

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 12:24 AM

Originally posted by Critical_Mass
Good point!

Fact is, we produce nothing here in the US anymore. Very few things.
A great many things we all have in our homes come from China and Taiwan.

Let's keep this thread going.

I want to ask everyone these questions:

1 Why (being the case) do you have such a hatred for China?

2 Who are you listening to that helped you form this opinion?

3 Do you honestly think the Chinese as a people wish you harm?

I think that through discussion we can clear up a lot here, so let's do it.

The US is the worlds second largest producer of goods....come again?

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 12:34 AM
reply to post by WestPoint23

Well, you sure sound good, except for one slight problem....That report mostly deals with disruptions to our forward projected forces, and has not much to do with attacking the CONUS. Did you actually read it?

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 12:48 AM

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by WestPoint23

Well, you sure sound good, except for one slight problem....That report mostly deals with disruptions to our forward projected forces, and has not much to do with attacking the CONUS. Did you actually read it?

The thing is...the US owns outer space.. God knows what the US truly has up there..Im sure the US would have a pretty good idea the chinese were about to do somthing. And there is alot of ifs and buts that plays out in this scenario. And im not even going to mention US black budget projects...

Either way, if someone is going to attack the US, better to do it now while their militarys are not obsolete against a still vastly superior US armed forces.. I say obsolete because of rapid advancments in US anti ballistic missiles along with rapid advancments in space forces such as "falcon" and "sustain". Along with kinetic strike platforms that can hit any point on the globe with accurate precision within seconds ANYWHERE. I could go on and on, but ill let the DARPA video im about to post below do the rest of the talking.

Just look at what DARPA and the pentagon have planned for the US armed forces.. be sure to read all the quotes from the pentagon/DARPA officials..

By 2025 the USAF will "control" the weather. It talks about it in the above video closer to the end...crazy things they have planned..

[edit on 31-1-2008 by West Coast]

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 12:50 AM
reply to post by TrueAmerican

Umm… yes I read it, and I've read a good deal of material on the subject, prior to people getting excited over a movie plot. I'd take the time to address each point in the article concerning why some of the given scenarios involving our forward deployed bases and overall result are unrealistic but it would take several full posts and days of research to do. I simply don't have that time right now. In any case, even in a hypothetical unrealistic blitz move upon some US regional bases the Chinese would do nothing but seal the fate of their mainland while being powerless to conventionally target our assets past the Fist Island Chain much less in the COUNS and elsewhere. The US would quickly recover using other regional bases not to mention the fact that you would have South Korea, Japan and Taiwan directly involved as well. Worst case scenario, US regional bases attacked, forces denied entrance to immediately respond, US attacks via alternative sites until overwhelming assets, firepower, capability and logistics ensure a victory.

Point is attack US vital interests in the Pacific, along with South Korea, Japan and Taiwan and mainland China will get attacked and destroyed while the CONUS will not. Now, who gets the better deal out of that?

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 01:06 AM
reply to post by WestPoint23

I agree to an extent. I don't think it would be that easy for anybody to waltz in here and take us out, though I think you have my post a little skewed. These are not my words, but that of a Army SF soldier. When he had partaken in the drills he said it was amazing to see how quickly the U.S. fell into enemy hands. They didn't succeed once to thwart the "invaders." You can take our geological barriers, our military capabilities, and all other variables into account all you want, but when a joint operation fails every single time, it seems like that is pretty telling as to just how well we would "hypothetically" do. I'm sure they take those kind of things into account, after all, these are the biggest and most extensive drills the military takes part in.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 01:30 AM
Umm.. With all due respect, you are misunderstand your friend there, as special operations solider he deals with irregular, asymmetrical, highly improbable scenarios. What his unit was likely training for are emergency NORTHCOM contingency plans. They can deal with a purely defensive operation inside the CONUS by remaining forces against an occupying force alredy here. They are not so much concerned with replicating the entire war which led up to that point as they are with focusing on how a decentralized force led by special operations personnel would be able to effectively mount a defense and resistant campaign against an occupying power inside the CONUS. And in that case I'd have to agree, if it came to the point where Joe citizen has to go Rabmo in order to stop a Chi Com invasion we're pretty F'd. But that's the stuff of Hollywood, the situation which would lead to that point has very very little chance of actually happening. Although nonetheless your friend being in Spec Ops will train for it because that's what they do.

[edit on 31-1-2008 by WestPoint23]

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 01:37 AM
reply to post by WestPoint23

It wasn't just a special forces exercise, but the entire military. The simulation is all ran by a computer and all branches of military have to respond accordingly. Though, if an all out war did happen, and we ended up "occupied," I'm sure the kind of upheaval that would take place shortly after would make Iraq look like a picnic.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 02:08 AM
I don't find anything hugely worrying about this.

As infinite pointed out earlier in the thread, military forces wargame against potential opponents all the time.

If they didn't, they wouldn't be doing their jobs.

[edit on 1/31/08 by xmotex]

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 02:11 AM
Well, doesn't seem to me the Chinese are all that terrified of our "superiority":

From China Flexes Its Muscles - Gordon G. Chang:

The U.S. Navy said it was "befuddled" by Beijing's last-minute November denial of a long-arranged port call for the Kitty Hawk carrier group in Hong Kong. This turndown was on top of China's refusal to provide shelter for two U.S. minesweepers seeking refuge from a storm, and its rejection of a routine visit for a frigate, the Reuben James. The Air Force also received a "no" for a regular C-17 flight to resupply the American consulate in Hong Kong.

The immediate causes of these rebuffs may be American arms sales to Taiwan, which China regards as sovereign territory, and the award of a congressional medal to the Dalai Lama, with whom Beijing has had a multi-decade spat. But so many turndowns suggest the decisions were made at the highest levels of the Chinese central government -- and at a time when senior leaders are reorienting the country's foreign policy. Washington's relations with Beijing, in short, appear headed for increasing disagreement and tension.

I dunno westpoint, you seem really sure of what your saying, and I can appreciate that, but with all due respect that report is pretty substantial, and I just can't write it off as rhetoric as easily as you. I really wish I could.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 02:14 AM
I love Chinese food! Anyway, this is an excellent post and what makes it good is that it makes people research the Chinese and their history of being patient and intelligent. They just do not jump into a situation half-minded. Just because an attack didn't happen day before it doesn't mean that it will not happen next month or even next year.

PS: Taiwan now has a Pro-China Government.

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 02:18 AM
Also, I just loved the way their sub popped up in the middle of "quote" "a recent Pacific exercise and close to the vast U.S.S. Kitty Hawk - a 1,000ft supercarrier with 4,500 personnel on board.
By the time it surfaced the 160ft Song Class diesel-electric attack submarine is understood to have sailed within viable range for launching torpedoes or missiles at the carrier.
According to senior Nato officials the incident caused consternation in the U.S. Navy."

PS: and as well it should have the Navy pooping rubber nickles!

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 02:19 AM
And what's more, westpoint, it seems those of us that express concern over China's capabilities are not limited to the mere ATS citizenry:

US concerned over China military build-up, Taiwan: admiral

Jan 14, 2008

BEIJING (AFP) — The top commander of the US Pacific Fleet raised concern Tuesday over China's military build-up and urged Beijing to clarify the intentions of its increasingly sophisticated armed forces.

Admiral Timothy Keating said he urged Beijing to increase transparency in military affairs during talks with government and defence officials here which focused largely on the issue of Taiwan.

"China's military is developing very impressively," Keating told journalists.

"We are concerned about the development of long-range cruise and ballistic missiles, we are concerned about their anti-satellite technology (and) we are concerned about area denial weapons."

From Military balance tilting toward China:

The military balance between China and Taiwan is turning in China's favor due to its huge defense spending that showed double-digit growth for the nine consecutive years from 1989.

Taiwan is said to have superiority over China in maritime and air force strength. But China has built up its naval force remarkably in recent years.

According to the defense white paper for 2007, China possesses 70 frigates and destroyers as against 30 held by Taiwan. China overwhelms Taiwan in the possession of submarines 60 to four. China's marine research vessels and submarines are stepping up their activities in the waters off eastern Taiwan.

China's air force also has been active in the airspace above the Taiwan Strait.

"Chinese warplanes have been flying into the airspace over the Taiwan Strait frequently and their flight technique has improved," a high-ranking Taiwan Air Force officer said.

Taiwan has deployed F-16 and Mirage aircraft as its mainstay fighter jets. China, on the other hand, announced last January a plan to deploy self-developed J-10 fighter jets, which are said to have capabilities matching those of F-16s.

China has deployed 1,328 ballistic missiles targeted at Taiwan, about seven times more than in 2000, when the administration of President Chen Sui-ban was inaugurated in Taiwan. Taiwan, on the other hand, has deployed only three sets of Patriot surface-to-air guided missiles (PAC-2) in the surburbs of Taipei and elsewhere. China successfully conducted an anti-satellite test last year, destroying a satellite with a missile .

As a counterbalance to China's military arsenal, Taiwan's military wants to possess PAC-3 missiles, P-3C antisubmarine patrol planes and diesel-powered submarines, which the U.S. administration of President George W. Bush decided to sell to Taiwan in 2001.

So it appears they are actively moving to control the Taiwan Strait. So what does Washington think about that?

[edit on 31-1-2008 by TrueAmerican]

posted on Jan, 31 2008 @ 03:34 AM
I still don't see a confrontation over Taiwan as particularly likely.

The Chinese are unlikely to use force to bring Taiwan into the fold unless it attempts to declare some kind of formal independence - a move the US is very unlikely to support in any way. And the chances of that happening have lessened recently, with the success of anti-independence factions in the most recent elections.

The Chinese are still a few years behind us technologically, but they would easily be the toughest opponent the US has faced since WW2, and their capabilities in their own region are extremely formidable.

Their forces are not geared for long range power projection, it does not appear to be part of their strategy. They are interested in accruing soft (economic) power overseas, but don't seem particularly interested in foreign interventionism.

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in