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: 20
1
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 10:52 PM
link   
U Iranian dumbass (sorry MOD) russia and china have pretty good relations. Afghanistan wrred with russia at its weakest point so thats y russia did not accomplish their goal but they sure as hell did not get a whooping.




posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent47

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Alright, alright. Debate over.


You better u2u a mod and have him come lock this down before more heat flares up. Clean up your own madness bro.


Hey, I just wanted a clean, intelligent debate. You can chalk up the madness to American Mad Man.

I will u2u a mod, but save your blame for the one truly responsible.



posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

I will u2u a mod, but save your blame for the one truly responsible.


Well if you can take him out of the equation I cant see why this excellent discussion can continue.



posted on Apr, 30 2004 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Hey, I just noticed something interesting. We (the US) are actually occupying a country (Afghanistan) that has a direct border (though a small one) with China. I'm not sure that has happened in the last century. Can't you just see those Special Ops guys up in the Hindu Kush partying with the Chinese border guards? What's Chinese for "yo, pass that hooka"?

In the past it seems China has always come out past it's borders and fought in the countries bordering it (Vietnam and Korea by proxy) rather than let someone get close enough to actually cross into China itself. I find it surprising that they didn't seem to bat an eye at Afghanistan.

I have a feeling that China and the US might actually be better friends than they are letting on to the rest of the world. The economic ties are tremendous, for certain. They gave us Bruce Lee, Kung Fu, and Shaolin Temples. How can we not like those guys? They probably don't like the look of fanatical Islam anymore than we do, either.

Ok, everybody smile. China and the US are gonna be good buddies.




posted on May, 1 2004 @ 01:56 AM
link   
I'd just like to point out...
My father literally just got appointed an advisor to one of the richest business men in the world to help advise the Chinese (aka Beijing) government interests in Hong Kong :p



posted on May, 1 2004 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent47

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

I will u2u a mod, but save your blame for the one truly responsible.


Well if you can take him out of the equation I cant see why this excellent discussion can continue.


I'm sorry, did you mean can or can't continue?

If you want to continue this discussion, then I'm all open for it.



posted on May, 1 2004 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by browha
I'd just like to point out...
My father literally just got appointed an advisor to one of the richest business men in the world to help advise the Chinese (aka Beijing) government interests in Hong Kong :p


Really? Who is this businessman?

That brings up something, what effect will economics have on China's policies with the U.S.?

For example, both China and the U.S. have expressed interest in the Spratly Islands oil stocks. Has this gone anywhere?



posted on May, 1 2004 @ 01:28 PM
link   


I'd just like to point out...
My father literally just got appointed an advisor to one of the richest business men in the world to help advise the Chinese (aka Beijing) government interests in Hong Kong :p

And?



Its nice that sweet has decided to bring an end to this - how righteous and noble - a similar sentiment among your fellow comrades

Ill summarise the for and against


China

Higher morale because they are being attacked/ blockaded

Underestimated air defence/navy/ballistic weapons

High domestic population thus higher pool of combatants

Urban militia warfare - High US casualties in the event of invasion

Little government debt


USA

Tested and proven superior technology in every field - own the air - own the sea - level the ground - with a strategy of minimal casualties.

The ability to dictate the battle and sustain no domestic losses



Having anything of value or strategic interest levelled at a leisurely before even considering a land invasion a stale mate is beyond me. China doesnt have the ability to win - the US would have to loose it.

As i have said before the US and China are on a collision course - in the coming years China will have to start showing its hand.



posted on May, 2 2004 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Ahh, the allmighty T-90.



posted on May, 3 2004 @ 12:19 PM
link   
The U.S. would win the sea and air war. It wouldn't even go into a land war, fighting China on the ground is a stupid idea.



posted on May, 3 2004 @ 09:20 PM
link   
A picture is worth a thousand words....take a peak at the chinese Air, Sea, and Ground arsenals...

Chinese stealth destroyer in Shanghai...


Chinese's SU30MKK


HQ9 long-range air defense missile (Chinese version of Russia's S300PMU/PMU1)


"ZHUK-MSE" has three different range resolutions: BARS radar's average power is 1-2 kW (ZHUK-SME 1.5kW), impulse 4-5kW (6kW for ZHUK-SME). BARS can track 15 targets and attack 4 of them simultaneously. Used on Chinese fighter jets...


CHINA LASER JAMMING SYSTEM modulized and can be used to tackle the enemy's semi-active laser, TV, mm-wave radar-guided bombs and missiles.


Chinese Subs...


Chinese T-98 production line...



KOLCHUGA passive radar systems from Ukraine. Chinese's capability of striking stealth aircraft.






[Edited on 3-5-2004 by firestorm2k4]



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:56 AM
link   
As a war with China would be comprised of almost exclusivly a Naval and air war. The U.S. has advantages in this area, but China is catching up.



posted on May, 6 2004 @ 10:15 AM
link   
I'd just like to remind everyone that laser weaponary is easily defeated through use of fog, or rain, and similar.



posted on May, 6 2004 @ 10:33 AM
link   
I can't believe there has been +- 400 replies to this query- what a stupid thread???


The US is still stumbling around in Iraq - let alone storming the beaches into China

Talk about a whitewash in 1 week from China!!



posted on May, 6 2004 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Who said China was an enemy

www.freepressinternational.com...

[Edited on 6-5-2004 by project_pisces]



posted on May, 6 2004 @ 12:37 PM
link   
This was done on the assumption of 'IF they went to war'
there's been some very interesting debating but most of the intelligent stuff died off a while ago



posted on May, 25 2004 @ 07:04 AM
link   
Hello all. I'm Chinese and I think I know more about China weaponry than most friends else here. Here are my answer to the main thread.

1. Can the U.S. invade China in the first place?
Very difficult. As I understand, "invade" means occupying part or entire China mainland by ground force. Given the size and complexity of China landscape, and her big forces & population, and the natural logistical disadvantage for U.S. forces fighting thousands of miles away homeland, it seems hardly possible unless China herself falls into chaos due to some reasons.

2. Are America's technological and firepower advantages helpful in the long run against 1 billion people?
They will only help in the short run. When the war elapse for one year or more, China will have chance to catch up the current technical gap. I have to point out that China have sufficient clever heads and resources, but currently everyone's thinking about how to make themselves rich. If the nation is in danger however, we can concentrate much more materail and human resources in military.

3. How effective would U.S. airpower be?
If China and U.S. have a duel in somewhere far from their home(e.g. on Indian Ocean), U.S. airpower will surely dominate. But if the battleground is over China mainland, things will be different. China has positioned the anti-aircraft missiles as the first-of-all force in their weaponry. There have been intensive research about how to overtake advanced aircraft with large numbers of old ones. I personally estimate that China will at least not lose all air control.

4. Is it safe to say every Chinese citizen would fight?
Not at all. During WW2 many Chinese acted as traitors and fought for the Japanese invaders. Nowadays people are living better than before and their will to fight degrades. Fortunately we do not require every citizen fighting in order to defeat a U.S. invasion.

5. Can the U.S. hold up against a modern military supported by guerrilla warfare?
It depends on the size of the opponent army and/or the guerrilla. Fact has proved that a small country like Vietnam(supported by USSR and China) has the potent to exaust U.S. via guerrilla warfare.

6. Any other thoughts?
Most friends here have either overestimated or underestimated Chinese military power. China have made great advances in modernizing the forces recently, but there should still be a technological gap of 10 years or more, comnpared with U.S., I think, esp. in air/navy. And most of the Chinese army are equipped with obsolete weapons(J-7, 59 tank...) belonging to 1970s. This is because China wants to invest all her money into economic development, infrastructure construction, etc to sustain growth. If there's necessity, much more modern weapons can be produced. Currently China protect herself by several key weapons including nuclear power and secret technologies that can sink carrier groups getting close to her.

If any friends have questions about China, I'd be very glad to answer.



posted on May, 25 2004 @ 09:03 AM
link   
1.China would have no use of one billion people excluding army. They have to arm them first. So they must make wapons. Industry is needed to make weapons. First, industry would be primary or secondary target for all bombng raids, second, feeding 1 bilion people is hard even durning peace, directing extra manpower to army and industry will cause a nationwide famine in China. And hungry people want food, not fight agressors.
2.Chinese air defense and air war. I agree that they are realying on russian ones, but are inferior to originals, like all chinese copies of russian equipment. And they have just about 300 Su-30's, only chinese fighter that can be match for F-1,4 F-15 or F-18. And every american carrier have about 80-90 fighters, F-14's or F-18's. Lets say that US will move 8 carriers to china, they have 600-700 very good fighters piloted by vary good pilots.
And their most numerous aircraft, J-7, is a 60 years designed MIG-21, fitted with OLD AMERICAN AVIONICS INCLUDING RADAR PROGRAMMING. That means, that every american ECM warfare aircraft can easily make J-7's radar not work.
3.Sea. At sea chinese navy is no match for US one. They have some old missile destroyer, that can be easily destroyed by harpoon missiles, few SSBN's of their own design, considered to be worst nuclear submarine designs in the world. The only dangerous thing in chinese navy are few kilo class diesel submarines bought from russians. And they will have to survive american ASW helicopters, frigates, destroyers, and Los angeles SSN's.
A carrier strike group CAN defend itself from kilo's, chinese air force and land launched missiles, so it cant be nuked. And even if china use nuclear weapons in war, they will use them on their own territory, and sinking carrier strike group will surely cause a bloody nuclear revenge from US, possibly destroying chinese industry and 80-90% of chinese army, destroying their number superiority and radiating whole china. Even if US will withdraw after that, china would be a radiated wasteland for next 500 years. So china wont use nuclear weapons unless US do that first. When tactical nuclear weapons are used to destroy attacking army on defended tarritory it causes even more long term harm to defending country.



posted on May, 25 2004 @ 12:20 PM
link   
u gota be careful with kilos they CAN sneak into battle groups
but i do agree with the above yeah there is little the chinese navy/airforce can do
but america doesnt have the man power or supplies to invade



posted on May, 25 2004 @ 12:48 PM
link   
I did not want to read through the entire 20 pages so Im going to put down my points and others may have allready said similar.

1. Why would the U.S. want to invade China. No good reason so we would not even attempt it hopefully.

2. If we did have war with China, nukes would be used by china and possibly a few U.S. Cities would be burned to a crisp. I doubt we would return a full volley of nukes however we might possibly use a few to illiminate leadership and their larger bases especially any with known nuke capability.

3. After the first 3-4 weeks we would destroy their air power and air defence capabilities as well as there entire Navy (their Navy would be destroyed withen a week or two max).

4 The finale would come after a month or two of cleaning up any remaining military capability and at this point the war would pretty much be over and the US/UN would begin to talk about rebuilding china and the U.S would be recovering from a few city losses.

We would never need to put any ground troops in china to destroy it. Once we remove thier combat capability there is no furhter need of war as the US does not need to expand in people or resources to coninute to be the worlds super power.

Again I dont see the U.S and china ever going to war but you might apply the above to North Korea and add in a severly crispy South Korea and you will have similar situation.

This may change in the next 20 years as the U.S tech advantage decreases but for now that is what the war would look like.




top topics



 
1
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join