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.

 

U.S. vs. China

page: 13
1
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
American Mad Man, let me try to explain this as civil as possible...

I said you can't read because yeah, your responses have shown that you didn't or couldn't read what I wrote. But hey, ignorant ain't as derogatory as idiot, stupid, etc. (go ahead, call me ignorant). Funny how you ignore everything you've written. The amount of times you called other posters idiots, dumb, and stupid just on this thread are are countless. Go through everything you've written.

Dude - I have read everything you said - I just happened to think you are wrong. That doesn't mean I "can't read" or I am "ignorant". For someone who uses the word ignorant so much wouldn't you think that it is damn ignorant to believe that your opinion is always right? BTW, on the name calling - this was done after it was done to me. OK - having gone back and having read EVERY SINGLE post I have made I have counted exactly ONE time where I used the words Stupid, idiot, or dumb to describe a person. 1 time! It was post #488545 where I used the word idiot. And if you read my post, it was in response to someone calling me an idiot. So please, before you accuse me of calling people names YOU rad what I have posted! Guess you can't count very high


Fortunately, I first chose to attack what you said, not you. You took the low road and it's all over your posts. I called you ignorant and unable to read because your posts showed that. But did I ever call you stupid, idiotic or dumb? I may have criticized your inability to "see," but I never criticized your intelligence or the person themselves, like you did everytime to others.

Calling someone ignorant and saying they can't read IS the low road buddy! I never called you stupid (which you essentially do, since you say "I can't read") 'till you chose to do so to me. So get off your high horse dude. Again - coming back and having read every single post I have made, I have never once called you or anyone else stupid, dumb, or an idiot with the exception of post #488545.

Don't worry, I didn't take "butt buddy" as an insult. I was just using it to show your extreme hypocracy.

Well then don't bitch about it.

Regarding "America," you are unfortunately incorrect. But if you want to blindly believe I hate America, that's your prerogative. Nothing I say will change your opinion on that. I mean, it's low enough already for you to use that as a part of your "kiss my feet" campaign. Did you really have that little to argue with?

Kiss my feet? Are you kidding? You had your opinion, I had mine. We both feel we are right. How is that any different? Just because I disagree with you and won't just say you are right does not mean I have a "kiss my feet campaign." By the way, if you say you don't hate America that is fine - but it sure sounds like you have something against your own country.

There you have it. Unlike you, I don't get into shouting matches. If I say something bad about someone (which is rare), it's because that's how it really is. So either prove me wrong (which you either ignore or fail to prove me wrong), take responsibility for your actions, or be a better liar.

Shouting matches? I was never shouting - I use caps to make sure that a sentance is clear since I use bold for my replies. What have I ignored exactly? What claims have you made, other then abstract things that cannot be proven and are simply OPINION, that you wish me to prove long? I take all responsability for my actions - what the hell are you talking about? Be a better liar - ha. I haven't lied a single time on this site - much less in this thread, so I don't see where you are going off with that. Again - having reread everything, I believe I have proved you wrong on your account that I have called everyone dumb and stupid.

I have seen enough, and I have seen you lose it like this in nearly every thread you've posted.

Lose it? Exactly what thread? I haven't had a single argument like this (that I can think of) on this site. And I haven't "lost it", I just disagree with you. And by the way - are you some kind of internet stalker keeping tabs on me?

"Grow up?" Hmm... that sounds like some reject bully trying to act bigger than everyone else. Interesting... Along with the "did your mommy give you that insult?" I have seen all I've needed to see.

Reject bully - hardly. I am the anti bully. I was the guy through out life that shoved the bully into the locker for picking on the little guy. And yeah - I think you should grow up. I have said in the last couple of posts that I just wanted to drop it, to get back to a civil nonhostile discussion - and you just keep blabbing. It's like you want to have a verbal fight with me. Yeah - I think that is childish - and you need to be more mature. Yeah - I am asking if your mom gave you that little jab because it sounds very much like something a mother would say.

I wish you all the best in life, I really do.

Already got it.


[Edited on 22-4-2004 by sweatmonicaIdo]

[Edited on 22-4-2004 by sweatmonicaIdo]


[Edited on 22-4-2004 by American Mad Man]




posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by f16falcon
About 5-6 months ago I read the USA white papers about China(I think that's what it's called). In it basically, was that China should be watched and that China is moving to downsize, but to better equip it's forces. But when I say downsize I don't mean down to a number equal to US military. Also, China has announced that it will increase defence spending drastically. The report made note to say, that Beijing only announced an increase of x dollars, but the real figure is speculated to be higher.


I have read this as well. The question is how long will it take to be on an equal tech level with the US. The problem China has is it doesn't develope most of it's own weapons, and so they lag behind. When they get there research up to par they will be a more then worthy adversary.



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 10:08 PM
link   
And why do they steal their tech and where does it originally come from? Because their politcal system doesn't encourage innovation and creativity so they have to steal it from someone like us who has that, or from someone like Russia (or sadly, supposedly Israel) who stole a lot from us originally. True, they can get more powerful but I don't think their level of sheer tech development will rival ours anytime soon, especially if they have to wait until we develop it and get careless enough to let them swipe it (or let them have it like Slick Willy did).



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 03:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man

Originally posted by f16falcon
About 5-6 months ago I read the USA white papers about China(I think that's what it's called). In it basically, was that China should be watched and that China is moving to downsize, but to better equip it's forces. But when I say downsize I don't mean down to a number equal to US military. Also, China has announced that it will increase defence spending drastically. The report made note to say, that Beijing only announced an increase of x dollars, but the real figure is speculated to be higher.


I have read this as well. The question is how long will it take to be on an equal tech level with the US. The problem China has is it doesn't develope most of it's own weapons, and so they lag behind. When they get there research up to par they will be a more then worthy adversary.




chinese tech level is pathetic.. they will never be ahead of russia/usa/israel in technology, show me one thing that china made and it doesnt suck or should have been released in the 70's


AS LONG AS THIS NATION USES MORE THEN 2000 MIG-19 FOR THEIR AIRFORCE THEY ARE NOT A SUPERPOWER


[Edited on 23-4-2004 by Flanker]



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 03:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
where does it originally come from?




all of their air-force/ground forces are made from cheap copies of soviet/russian, israel/us military equipment.



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flanker

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
where does it originally come from?




all of their air-force/ground forces are made from cheap copies of soviet/russian, israel/us military equipment.


This is exactly my point the whole time. They have VERY few updated air systems. This is why I have said all along that the US would own the air war. The only chance China would have would be in a non conventionally fought war. They couldn't go head to head with the US because modern tactics would be dominated by the US due to superior precision comunication and firepower.



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 08:33 AM
link   
most of their air-force cannot fire medium range air-to-air missiles or any guided weapons


[Edited on 23-4-2004 by Flanker]



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 10:14 AM
link   
exsactaly my point lads and ladies !
see if the us went to war the air war would be a piece of cake for the yanks



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 10:23 AM
link   
The air war debate certainly has gotten nowhere...

Let's shift gears. The GROUND WAR. What would it be like?

I believe that with an entire nation fighting for the motherland, it'll be nothing like we've seen in a long time. Even WWII was concentrated on mostly by military forces. THe civilians barely fought. But I think China will be different.

That's a worst-case scenario. To not have a single friendly or non-combatant face is the worst. This is a situation where superior firepower and technology doesn't really do the trick. Sure, we can call on air support, but with everyone fighting, attacks can come from anywhere.

And nothing's worse than a conventional force supported by guerrillas.

Thoughts?



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 10:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
The air war debate certainly has gotten nowhere...

Let's shift gears. The GROUND WAR. What would it be like?

I believe that with an entire nation fighting for the motherland, it'll be nothing like we've seen in a long time. Even WWII was concentrated on mostly by military forces. THe civilians barely fought. But I think China will be different.

That's a worst-case scenario. To not have a single friendly or non-combatant face is the worst. This is a situation where superior firepower and technology doesn't really do the trick. Sure, we can call on air support, but with everyone fighting, attacks can come from anywhere.

And nothing's worse than a conventional force supported by guerrillas.

Thoughts?




some info on chinese ground forces:

With the largest population and third largest geographical land size in the world, China deploys the world's largest ground force, which has a total strength of 1.8 million troops, 16,000 tanks and armoured vehicles, and over 30,000 artillery guns. In time of crisis, this force can be reinforced by a large reserve-militia force numbering more than 1.5 million personnel and a one-million-man People's Armed Police (PAP).

their tank force mainly consists of poor copies of t-54 tanks.



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 11:09 AM
link   
OK, the way I see it, all those tanks and men don't add up to much, because any time they would be put in groups, they would be easy targets for US bombings.

If you look at history, especially the GW, modern tactics can't be used against the US unless you are on a semi equal tech level.

All of those men and tanks grouped together would be easy targets for the US, so this is not what would work for them. They would have to go vietnam on the US. The problem with this though, is that unlike the North in 'Nam, they won't have anyone suplying them. There wouldn't be anyone sending them ammo, weapons, and such. They do have a lot of people though, so a ground invasion would have to start by bombing everything the US could.

After the main targets (like HQ, oil depots, airfields, ect) were taken out, the US would have to resort to attacking people - as in, attacking a city not for it's assets, but to kill their population off. I'm sure this would sit well with the UN.



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Are we so sure that the Chinese population is so very fond of their government that they will all fight anyway? Everyone points to their numerical superiority but I say that doesn't matter if only 20% or 50% of the actual population is willing to fight. Apparently most of them are farmers. Who knows? They might decide that actually getting paid a fair price for their labor is a pretty good idea.

I've already posted a link supporting my assertion that their Navy is several decades behind ours in both technology and numbers. I imagine this gap exists in most of their defense systems.



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Agreed. The only thing China really has in their Navy are those Russian tarpedo missles that go close to Mach 1. I think they have 20 of them or something.

As for how many would fight, I believe that the billion # is focused on too much. Out of those billion half are girls, part are the elderly, part are children, part are not able bodied and part are not willing to fight. Taking all of that into account, even 10 million men would be more then the US has ever faced.



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Agreed. The only thing China really has in their Navy are those Russian tarpedo missles that go close to Mach 1. I think they have 20 of them or something.

As for how many would fight, I believe that the billion # is focused on too much. Out of those billion half are girls, part are the elderly, part are children, part are not able bodied and part are not willing to fight. Taking all of that into account, even 10 million men would be more then the US has ever faced.




actually they have some russian mach-4 sea skimming anti-ship missiles, thats the only "dangerous" thing they have.



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 11:53 AM
link   
ahhh yes, i have heard of these as well. Do you know what they are fired from (ie ships, shore, subs)? And how many do they have?



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
ahhh yes, i have heard of these as well. Do you know what they are fired from (ie ships, shore, subs)? And how many do they have?



they can be fired from surface ships and some fast attack boats, there are also air versions of those missiles



chinese Sovremenny destroyers can fire them, they got two of them, the rest are pieces of crap, also i dont think they got many of those sunburn missiles, most of their are copies of soviet designs from the 60's/70's



you can find more info here www.sinodefence.com... and here www.china-defense.com...

[Edited on 23-4-2004 by Flanker]



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 12:37 PM
link   
very nice


And I assume that these would work against CBG deffenses?



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
very nice


And I assume that these would work against CBG deffenses?



they were made to counter these defenses, one such missile armed with 200kt warhead can destroy a whole group or more, but these are really export versions which are downgraded and china dont have many of them, most of chinese anti-ship missiles are old copies of such missiles as Skif etc..



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Expanding the topic a little, let's say the U.S. miraculously finds it's way into Beijing.

What kind of an urban war would we be talking about? I'm not too familiar with China's geography, so how big is Beijing in the first place? Compare it to a large city in the U.S. Is it the size of NYC, or more the size of Atlanta?

It seems like the ultimate MOUT scenario.



posted on Apr, 23 2004 @ 04:55 PM
link   
Something I noticed. The majority of you agree that occupation of China is a very stupid move.

Given that, are you suggesting that we drive the Chinese in PRC to extinction? Or did you mean neutralize them to the point where they simply can't fight? Both are rather drastic and unrealistic ways of doing things, but...

Shows how much politics would play a role in a war against China.

[Edited on 23-4-2004 by sweatmonicaIdo]




top topics



 
1
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join