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.
And you proof is where?... did US war machines suddenly develop impervious armour? ... if I recall correctly they seemed pretty vulnerable in iraq to simple fragmentation grenades and home made bombs
Lets see... China's land mass is about the same as the US. Just think of the area those jets are going to have to cover.
Currently US allies are, Taiwan, Japan and South Korea... none of which would be willing to place themselves in the firing line of Chinese ballistic missiles.
Did you know China is the only country in the world that has spent the last 20 years researching into turning ballistic missiles into precision guided weaponry... accurate to a few meters. Nobody knows how advanced they are in this area, though it would be foolish to underestimate
I won't argue here... american pilots are better trained, but remember missile technology is roughly the same on both sides... so really it's all about fire and forget these day's. And what do you think will be making up the bulk of any US assault?... certainly not raptors.
China like I mentioned before will be using a selectionm of high accuracy ballistic (non-nuclear) missiles against carrier groups. B-2's can be detected with passive radars.
Yes... it had a malfunction ... I suppose the same could be said for the US submarine captains brain after it recently ran aground.
China's submarine force is deadly... they recently proved that twice against Japan and the pentagon has many published articles mentioning them as the number one threat to US shipping.
Stealth does not make an aircraft invisible... it simply returns lower yeilds making them harder to find and track. I have seen a video broadcast on the BBC showing a type-42 destroyer tracking a B2 bomber coming into UK airspace... the Americans denied it until shown the video.
Yes... use countries even further away ... fighter aircraft do not have that kind of range
Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
China isn't going to be be shooting at humvees if a war fights (even still, our armored humvees can take a blast from just about anything the Iraqis have, our tanks are nearly invulnerable).
American B-2's fly all the way from the Northern part of the US to Iraq. They have a huge range. Japan and China aren't that far apart. We only have to start at the coasts, then we can move our navy closer.
Missile technology is not equal. AMRAAMS are the best missile there is. They're 90% accurate. The avionics of American planes are far superior. And by the time China has any significant number of fourth generation planes, America will have over a hundred Raptors. A hundred Raptors are more than to deal with China's airforce. They're enough to deal with almost anyones within the next decade.
That's all assuming China has accurate ballistic missiles. Do you have any evidence to back that up? Of course you don't...
And China doesn't have PCL.
The two are completely different. Subs run aground frequency. How often do they stray hundreds of miles off course and end up in foreign waters all on accident?
Let's see some sources. As I've found in the past, most of what you say is only half-true.
I'm pretty sure the F-22 has the range to go from Japan to China, at least close enough to launch a cruise missile. The B-2 certainly can do it.
You can say whatever you want about China being able to detect stealth, but they're not going to do it from a hundred miles off their coast, now are they? A B-2 can fire cruise missiles well out of range, and head back to America.
Once coastal defenses are reduced, its safer for carriers to move in.
Is that why americans are scrapping for armour in iraq?
Yeah sure , take a blast what about the rest of the vehicle and the people?
I remember a thread where an american tank's armour was punctured and the tank almost exsploded.
Yeah and the world is afraid of americas "war on terror" which more reminds me of a war of conquest.
A B-2 cant win a war for you, simple enough.
Your navy can be taken down by anything even an old destroyer in a war exercise.
Also your navy can be taken down by mobile SAS missiles. Remeber a SAS is cheaper than a thomahawk.
Thats being overconfident, your only getting 200 odd and frankly you would send mabye 80 or 90 at most because anymore would seriosly damage your defense.
Do you have proof it has no vehicles capable of doing that , no.
Yet another disputed yet undecideable question.
Whoa whoa here....your saying subs as in the US subs , right?
Also Can you navigate underwater with a stopclock,chart and calculator?
UK subs have had only 1 incident in the last 20 years.....
I have also heard of that incident AND where they tracked a B-2 fly by with rapier SAM's
Air craft wont win a war.
Also jets need a runway, remove the runway and no jets.
The B-2 CAN do that but when a country has mobile defenses cruise missiles cant hit things. You need to get your head out of the skies, besides you think america could afford another war?
Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
The armored humvees now make up the large majority of those in Iraq. This is all relatively new, so it wasn't available as much before the war. The amount of humvees that have been armored has been great, though. They've gone from basically none to almost the entire force in Iraq.
The armored humvees have also been able to take the blasts, and prevent our troops from taking any injury.
I love these almosts and single cases that you guys always provide to try and undermine America's capability.
Maybe some Europeans are running around crying, but I doubt many are scared. I know their governments aren't scared.
They've never be in range while these coastal defenses exist.
And to think that China with lower tech, and training is going to beat our navy with their navy is absurd.
In an all out war, we'd send all. We're not talking about Iraq here (how many times have I said that, now?). America has no need for defense. No one can attack America.
And if war broke out with China, we'd see F-22's being pumped out as fast as possible. There'd end up being a lot more then the current amount ordered. People don't like to talk about why we're only getting 200 instead of the original 700.
Your asking me to prove I negative. I can't prove that Germany didn't have super rockets that could go to the moon, either, because no site is going to say someone doesn't have something like that.
How many UK subs are there, and how often are they deployed? In the case of America's, it's been almost constant. And that's 1 incident you KNOW of, or that's been revealed.
I believe I already address your claim in another thread.
China can't destroy the runways in Japan. They don't have the capability.
America's economy has been going great after fighting two wars. Europe has a larger deficit then we do. Think Europe can still afford their social programs?
America can always finance a war.
And mobile defenses can't out manuever a cruise missile. They won't be able to track it. They won't know its coming.
[/qupte]
Do you think they have onnly one set of them?
Thats it the mighty force has only one set of units...wow.
What, do you think that all of the nations in the world have never thought to develop a counter to mobile defenses, something they'd most likely have to face?
What, dont you think they developed a counter to the counter? Mobile defenses change and B2 bombers cant be on station every hour.
Defensive weapons are never on par with attacking weapons because they are developed after the offensive weapon
Technocally every weapon is offensive and defensive so your argument is about as useless as the underwater hairdryer.
Originally posted by Daedalus3
Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
This isn't the fuedal ages where they were forced to go fight for some King while their families starved. Our soldiers have the highest pay, and get the most benefits. They are the best equipped. They have every reason to fight well. Our soldiers believe in what they're fighting for. Our soldiers have high morale.
Is enlistment in the USMC purely voluntary??
America has no need for defense. No one can attack America.
Originally posted by proteinx
Did you realize he is a troll?
[edit on 23-1-2005 by proteinx]
Originally posted by devilwasp
Originally posted by proteinx
Did you realize he is a troll?
[edit on 23-1-2005 by proteinx]
Thanks, no i am not a troll, i dont create arguments othere people do.
Originally posted by proteinx
No, I am not saying you, I am saying the guy who said "American does not need defense, no weapon can attack America", whoever said that, who is a troll.
I browsed many other forum related to military, that is the core definition of troll and this is accepted by many forum. I donot know why this forum keep a troll here, I guess it would entertain lots people.
Originally posted by devilwasp
Originally posted by proteinx
No, I am not saying you, I am saying the guy who said "American does not need defense, no weapon can attack America", whoever said that, who is a troll.
I browsed many other forum related to military, that is the core definition of troll and this is accepted by many forum. I donot know why this forum keep a troll here, I guess it would entertain lots people.
I am sorry, really sorry.
I have to agree one of these attitudes could be known as a troll.
Once again i am sorry, bad call by me...
DW out ( Feeling like a jacka$$ and rightly so)
Originally posted by proteinx
no, I shall apologize for my unclear expression. English is not my native language.
But, you know what, watch the troll, just dnot feed him, you will see he will become really angry and entertaining.
[edit on 23-1-2005 by proteinx]
Originally posted by proteinx
Originally posted by devilwasp
Originally posted by proteinx
No, I am not saying you, I am saying the guy who said "American does not need defense, no weapon can attack America", whoever said that, who is a troll.
I browsed many other forum related to military, that is the core definition of troll and this is accepted by many forum. I donot know why this forum keep a troll here, I guess it would entertain lots people.
I am sorry, really sorry.
I have to agree one of these attitudes could be known as a troll.
Once again i am sorry, bad call by me...
DW out ( Feeling like a jacka$$ and rightly so)
no, I shall apologize for my unclear expression. English is not my native language.
But, you know what, watch the troll, just dnot feed him, you will see he will become really angry and entertaining.
[edit on 23-1-2005 by proteinx]
Originally posted by imAMERICAN
If the Chinese launch a counterattack at the USA. They would be destroying themselves... a massive attack-(I mean massive like you have no comprehension-no comprehension at all)-would hit China so hard with so many ICBMs, that Asia would be a radiation waste land and every city in china would be wiped off the map...
Originally posted by darktone
off topic
there's a joke about china that if they jump
at the same time we will be experiencing
earthquake with a magnitude of 7 and if they
piss at the same time, they will flood the world
Originally posted by Broadsword20068
Actually, America is the biggest, most elite military force in the world, and it could be even far more powerful if the U.S. wanted to be. Just accept the fact; no need for arguments. No, American equipment isn't all invincible, but the United States has done what sole few countries have done in history, which is create a military dominance that no one can match, no one in the rest of the world.
There is no real way to attack America; not unless you try to cross the sea to invade, which is pointless with modern tech defenses. .
China, in the future, will be a match no doubt, but the all-out victor would be the U.S. I am sure (again, remember, ignoring the use of nukes for this scenario).