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: 18
1
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 12:08 PM
link   
My theory all along has been that China and the US will actually grow to be more like each other as capitalism spreads from Hong Kong (nods to Drunk) throughout the rest (*clue* having so much of our stuff made there spreads capitalism too!) of China, and the US sadly becomes more socialist.

Don't get me wrong. I really like China. I have long admired many things about the culture and spiritual beliefs that were refined there in the past. I think they chose a wrong path some years ago but I think they are slowly figuring that out. I wish their system of Goverment was a little farther along in the human rights department but it will come, we can hope.

Nah, there is too much messed up stuff going on in the world elsewhere. We don't need to be messing around in China or have them messing with us. We know it. They know it. Ain't gonna happen in the forseeable future, dispite N. Korea.




posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Agreed entirely.
China/US war will have no benefits for either side. The Americans are going to have to take it on the chin that they arent the world's only superpower



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 12:26 PM
link   
well said man well said!
couldnt have put it better myself !



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 01:11 PM
link   

China/US war will have no benefits for either side. The Americans are going to have to take it on the chin that they arent the world's only superpower


by the time thats true you could lump in Europe, India, Japan, Russia ......

I thought we were talking about who would win the war. Assuming no nukes - current tech and productive responses to war.

We have got past the bit where we decide who would benefit and why it started.



[Edited on 27-4-2004 by Vanguard]



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 01:49 PM
link   
See, I don't think you can assume no nukes when you're talking about the big boys. Any land confrontation would get out of hand really quick, I would expect. Could you see China facing a US land invasion and not using them? That is what nukes are for, to deter that kind of stuff. No thanks.

Taiwan is the big "if" I think. That could be ugly but that is something that China would have to start. I doubt they will. Here's why:

China-Taiwan Military Balance

Wow. Look at that. Taiwan has superior Navy. Who would have thought it, huh?

Personally, I think the US might not go to all out war over that. Sounds like they might need to. You have to wonder what Japan would do in that case too.

So, barring China partially disabling itself before the US even gets there good by attacking a surprisingly strong Taiwan, I can't see any other scenerio by which th US and China will come to blows. All China can do is defend itself really well by throwing hundreds of millions of bodies at anyone that invades them.



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 02:32 PM
link   
I think the aspect of M.A.D. solves any prospect of a nuclear war. We are no longer naive enough to think that anyone will survive/outlast another (in terms of countries. You will always have the elite hiding in a bunker, but to what extent? So they can lead themselves and some advisers?)
in a nuclear war.



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Again, what many of you seem to be missing is that the PLA is a purely defensive force. Obviously, defensive measures generally cost less than offensive measures, so military spending is rather misleading. And you have to realize China gets things that are cost-effective.

This is why you can't compare China's military to the U.S. military. The U.S. may be a superb offensive force, but China is a pure defensive force.



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 05:10 PM
link   
yes but the best form of defense is offense



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
See, I don't think you can assume no nukes when you're talking about the big boys. Any land confrontation would get out of hand really quick, I would expect. Could you see China facing a US land invasion and not using them? That is what nukes are for, to deter that kind of stuff. No thanks.


The reason for assuming no nukes is because if we assume nukes, then the outcome is simple - both sides die. You have to assume no nukes to even have this discussion.

............................

The best defence is a great offense. The fact that this whole discussion has been about the US attacking China speaks volumes on who has the advantage. It would be much like WWII in the respect that the US could sit back untouched on it's home soil while it pounded it's enemy.

This is why if there was a "winner" it would be the US. No US city would be attacked, while every town in China would be reduced to rubble.



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 05:39 PM
link   
This is why if there was a "winner" it would be the US. No US city would be attacked, while every town in China would be reduced to rubble.
you might not be right there mad man china has many weapons and plans we know nothing about
even the best military forces can be decieveid



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 07:33 PM
link   
You guys are still on this topic!?!, still trading barbs and false intel, I was especially amused by the assertion that "China has these large missiles in this picture Im posting, so that means they will ownerz ju!", Great job, you proved China has some things that looks like missiles, try statistical data next time, or proof that those things arent hollow.


I think you need to stop the little tit for tats and go back to the legitamite discussion you had at first.



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 07:36 PM
link   
i love chicken...and the chinese make good chicken



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 08:19 PM
link   
If China does not use nuclear weapons, then Taiwan and the US could likely hold off an invasion against Taiwan.

In head to head combat, the USA could probably push China back to its land borders and completely curtail any power projection over the sea, by aircraft or naval forces.

The US would probably lose some ships and planes in that scrap, but the Chinese would probably lose at least 5x for every US plane. If the US could successfully deploy most of its F-22 fleet to Taiwan first, then that alone could be very successful, as it has fully dominant air-air capability, as well as strike capability about equivalent to a F-117.

That could be devastating to ports and China's large navy ships.

At that point the US might be able to land some troops---but what then?

On land, US force relies heavily on armor and helicopters .
On land, a US invasion would be really bogged down right away, as the Chinese would certainly have far better anti-armor missiles than the Iraqi resistance, and far better anti-helicopter missiles as well. Not to mention an actually trained army. When a small band of actually militarily capable Iraqis regrouped in Fallujah and surrounding regions, they were actually able to inflict some significant hurt to the Marines, whereas before, almost all Iraqi army fighting was characterized by near total incompetence or cowardice.


Regarding Taiwan: the Chinese have I think only one successful way to win. It would be a surprise massive missile barrage, including neutron bombs on all the Taiwanese military facilities, cluster munitions to crater all the airfields preventing U.S. planes from landing, followed by an immediate demand for Taiwanese surrender. The Taiwanese might take the deal.



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
you might not be right there mad man china has many weapons and plans we know nothing about
even the best military forces can be decieveid


Fair enough - but come on. If we are talking about things we don't know about I'll put my money on the US having better "black" weapons and tactics.

I am speaking of what we can substantiate - and as it has been shown, they likely can't attack an Island a hundred miles off their cost (taiwan) so I REALLY doubt they can hit the US.



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 08:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

The US would probably lose some ships and planes in that scrap, but the Chinese would probably lose at least 5x for every US plane. If the US could successfully deploy most of its F-22 fleet to Taiwan first, then that alone could be very successful, as it has fully dominant air-air capability, as well as strike capability about equivalent to a F-117.

I believe the US has only 1 Raptor detachment (for now). F-15s would be doing the work, and doing it well as they have for decades.

At that point the US might be able to land some troops---but what then?

On land, US force relies heavily on armor and helicopters .
On land, a US invasion would be really bogged down right away, as the Chinese would certainly have far better anti-armor missiles than the Iraqi resistance, and far better anti-helicopter missiles as well. Not to mention an actually trained army. When a small band of actually militarily capable Iraqis regrouped in Fallujah and surrounding regions, they were actually able to inflict some significant hurt to the Marines, whereas before, almost all Iraqi army fighting was characterized by near total incompetence or cowardice.

A conventual army would play into the US hands - If we can identify an actual army, we can attack it without exposing our GI's. They would be better served going into guarilla style fighting.

Regarding Taiwan: the Chinese have I think only one successful way to win. It would be a surprise massive missile barrage, including neutron bombs on all the Taiwanese military facilities, cluster munitions to crater all the airfields preventing U.S. planes from landing, followed by an immediate demand for Taiwanese surrender. The Taiwanese might take the deal.


You have a point. But it would REALLY backfire against China in the UN - and especially if Taiwan asked for US help. Neutron bombs equalls nuclear war, so the majority of the world would most likely turn against them.



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 09:59 PM
link   
Most of you are still ignoring the fact that China's doctrine of warfare is different from the U.S.'s. China has never believed in the "best defense is best offense" theory. That's why that belief is irrelevant in the matter, because China's entire way of fighting involves letting the enemy come to their backyard, the place they're most familiar with and the place where they aren't hindered by certain complexities of modern warfare.

Now, a country like the 1980s Soviet Union can never afford to let an invader come onto their land. The way they live is not something that can withstand invasion.

China, on the other hand, lives in a manner that can withstand invasion and they are willing to lose it all to ultimately protect the land itself, if not the things they have.

That's the way China is. The worst enemy is the one willing to take it to the 18th dimension and beyond.



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 10:04 PM
link   
For those still unconvinced of the conviction and strength of the Chinese people, read on the Tianamen Square Massacre. Ignore the fact they were fighting the PLA. Do recognize that they were fighting a well-trained deadly army using gasoline bombs and rocks. They did that for a few days, not a few hours.

They never backed down. Who can forget the college student who stepped in front of the armored column?

That does not sound like cowards. None of that happened in Iraq, and if that happened in France, everyone would've cleared the streets the first soldier they saw.



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 10:12 PM
link   
Okay, man I wish I was president if a China war with USA goes on. Id say, "Okay people, raise both your hands at ALL times, if you let them down, BAM " And a attitude like that. Also, bush's dog died. He should get a Pitbull or a Rott, saying his strenght and saying he dosnt put up with stuff,



posted on Apr, 27 2004 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Laxpla
Okay, man I wish I was president if a China war with USA goes on. Id say, "Okay people, raise both your hands at ALL times, if you let them down, BAM " And a attitude like that. Also, bush's dog died. He should get a Pitbull or a Rott, saying his strenght and saying he dosnt put up with stuff,


Say what?

You want to be president of the U.S.? That's all I understood.


[Edited on 27-4-2004 by sweatmonicaIdo]



posted on Apr, 28 2004 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Moving politically, what kind of relations do you expect between China and the U.S. in the future?




top topics



 
1
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join