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.


U.S. vs. China

page: 52
<< 49  50  51    53  54  55 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 02:04 PM

Originally posted by myer7025
I still dont believe China can defeat America in a war. China just trying to take over taiwan can cripple it. And I believe The US has enough defense to protect Alaska while the US send troops to that state (responding to your post on page 48). You speak of these SAMs but America also has their own SAMs that are good enough to take out a large amount of Chinese Aircrafts.

By defeat, I only mean hold off the retake of Taiwan. Which I think they could do. Once they have it they have it.

AS for me mentioning Alaska, that would only happen if everywhere else kicked off as well. E.G. North Korea, South Korea, Japan, Middle East, etc. Before Russia would even think of doing anything/if they still can/will be able to in 5 years.

Originally posted by myer7025
Now you might say that China might be able to recruit more soilders to fight and any loses can be replaced easy for China. But what about the equipment they use. Yes China might have this weapon and that weapon but do they have enough to replace the ones they lost? I can honestly say I dont know and if you do please post it because I would like to know.

In 2005? Not a chance in hell. 2010? Without the reliance on oil, due to incresead nuclear power stations and dams (after all, three gorges damn is 10 Nuclear Power stations) they'll be able to increase labour, build more factories and need to import less and less oil. (Most of the oil they import is for power.)

Originally posted by myer7025
IT also depends on what type of war this would be. I dont believe if China were to attack Taiwan and America responded with force that it would result in total war. I believe America would limit itself to only Air power.

If they limit it to Air power and China has got Taiwan, it'll be seen as a win for China. America can kill a lot of people, but China has 1.2billion people. It's not going to run out anytime soon.

Originally posted by myer7025
Yes I read a article that stated China's Navy fleet in 10 years could out number the Americans, but how? Would it have more Carriers?, Destroyers?, subs?

Is there a box where I can tick for all of the above? They'll be getting maybe one/two carriers. About 5/6 top of the range subs, God alone knows how many of anything else. With the increase on military spending, if they keep it up by 2010 it'll be roughly 100billion USD? Or around that margin. In a nation like China, with such low wages and costs that's a hell of a lot of money.

Originally posted by myer7025
And you speak of American liberals and communist attacking inside the country while we are distracted but what about the people how yearn for democracy in china and are still pissed about what happened in 1989? I dont believe America has to invade in order for the Chinese government to fall. I believe a civilwar would start which can turn the tide of the war. I dont believe the American public would let their country be controled by communist or any other type of government. Lets be forreal America just needs reforms not to be overthrown compare to China that many believe needs a change in government.

China has such a large police population and such a collectivist group of people. In about 5years, it'll be so different to how it is now. It'll be the sort of change from the 1980's to Now. But this time, they'll be increasing land usage, housing, reforms, public transport, etc.

Originally posted by myer7025
Now you talk about allies. Yes I agree with you most of the arab world would go against Amerca for the simple fact of Iraq alone. But im sure even the French would get into it to support America even if relations are bad. Both countries are still allies. Europe is still apart of NATO and was and still is protected by America. Dont you think Russia might want to return to its Soviet borders? So a American defeat is also a European lost. And the last time I read something about if NK attacks SK it was said that SK can win even though it might be devistated by NK units. And lets not forget one important thing. If China looked like it was ready for a war with America, Japan will re-arm itself. They would alter their laws to do so just for the fact that America might not be able to protect it.

[edit on 9-3-2005 by myer7025]

The French just might. Depends who's in power then. They actually have a very racist leader, incharge of the second party and it's possible in 5years he'd be in power. He's also Anti-American.

Same goes for the U.K.

If it goes full scale war. E.G. N.K. invade S.K. Iran attacks Israel. You might just see Japan rearming itself. But, it's so in debt this could be a rather large problem.

On another note, I myself think those missiles China has pointing at Taiwan and its ships they'll only need to use about half. The other could be to send at ships if America joined in.

Imagine if they did declare war and China was able to send 300+ missiles in one moment? That'd overwhelm the SAMs the Americans use and also destory a lot of their ships before they could get involved.

posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 08:15 PM
Dude, i dun think Chinese missiles can reach any American ships.

Unless it's like docked in Hong Kong.

posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 08:25 PM

Go have a look.

13,000KMs. Nope...they can't hit a single U.S. ship.

posted on Mar, 10 2005 @ 09:41 PM
Be more specific, quote from it.

Where did you get 13000km from??

Are you talking about ICBM's???

[edit on 10-3-2005 by rapier28]

posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 01:35 AM

There has been 3 acts of, what I would call agression via the US towards China...

The Spyplane Incedent
The Bombing of the Chinese Embassy
The "bugging" of President Zemins

Not to mention all the technology the US is basically giving Taiwan for free...

The Chinese have been very diplomatic in their reactions to these incedents... heres a quote from the Art of War:

"In conflict, straightforward actions generally lead to engagement, surprising actions generally lead to victory."

posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 01:43 AM

Originally posted by Odium'china%20army%20missiles'

Go have a look.

13,000KMs. Nope...they can't hit a single U.S. ship.

When the DF-5 was first tested in September 1971, it had a range of 10,000 to 12,000 kms which allowed it to threaten the western portions of the United States. Beginning in 1983 the Chinese inaugurated the improved DF-5A, with an increased of over 13,000 km and a more accurate guidance system. The DF-5A upgrade increased the throw-weight of the system from 3,000 kg to 3,200 kg.

Step near Hawaii and the D-5 can hit US carrier fleets,but then it is a ballistic missle,the accuracy won't be that good.

posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 03:58 PM
Go over all of the first link and the 'missile' part of the second. Just displaying that China has missiles that can hit American ships.

posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 05:58 PM
But it's a ballistic missile, it's an ICBM, it won't be used to hit ships.

It's accuracy would be dodgy, i was inferring to cruise missiles.

posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 07:49 PM

Originally posted by rapier28
But it's a ballistic missile, it's an ICBM, it won't be used to hit ships.

It's accuracy would be dodgy, i was inferring to cruise missiles.

The Chinese have quite a few good Russian anti-ship missles,for example the modified Kh-28 Kyle, the Kh-31 from Russia,and C-801 anti ship missles. These will probably take over the role of the cruise missles that the US need.

posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 08:24 PM
Yes, i know about those missiles.

Ok, the real issue to me is;

If the US parks carriers on the other side of Taiwan, can China hit it? Because if China can, then the US might think twice about helping Taiwan.

posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 08:37 PM
A Flanker can probably reach the shores of the Philipines and back again,and Taiwan for sure. The only difference between cruise missles and aircraft launched anti-ship missles is that one requires to be fired from a manned aircraft and the other does not.

posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 08:42 PM
I think a carrier parked near Taiwan could defend itself from missiles China would fire on it. Those missiles would really have to have a good targetting system and be able to defeat the air defense systems of a carrier group. Don't forget a carrier can also fire missiles into mainland China if need be as well.

As for something like a Flanker, as I said, it'd have the threat of anti-aircraft missiles as well, as well as other aircraft.

[edit on 11-3-2005 by Broadsword20068]

posted on Mar, 11 2005 @ 09:31 PM
A Flanker can launch Sunburns against the fleet, but i guess it would need either protection or a clear run.

Personally, i think a fleet on the other side of Taiwan would be problematical for China as it would always allow supplies to Taiwan. I guess it just comes down to how long it takes China to take Taiwan.

I've heard reports that the US wants Taiwan to hold out for 2 weeks before the fleet will arrive.

A Kuomintang General has apparantly said that they can only absolutely guarantee 10 days.

posted on Mar, 13 2005 @ 09:10 PM

Originally posted by rapier28

  1. I guess it comes down to how long it takes China to take Taiwan.
  2. I've heard reports that the US wants Taiwan to hold out for 2 weeks before the fleet will arrive.
  3. A Kuomintang General has apparently said thy can only absolutely guarantee 10 days.

China has said it would "blitzkreig" Taiwan before the US could get involved, and if they did get involved they would vapourise Los Angeles...

2 Weeks, hmmm I reckon that by the end of the second week Taiwan would be under Chinas effective control, off course their would be riots etc, but never the less it would be Chinas turf now.

Even 10 days is too long to wait... The US doesn't want to get involved early, probably just so they can see whether it is in their interests to do so or not... They dont care what happens, they just want to remain top dog... Its all gonna come down to whether the US is willing to start World War 3, just to prove the point, that they ARE top dog...

posted on Mar, 13 2005 @ 10:57 PM
There's different tactics when going for Taiwan. I'll list a few below:

Kill the head of the pack and its main followers

Separate and chop (send in commandos and cut off major communication routes e.g. phone, electricity, fibreoptics then ballistic missile the airfields then airborne divisions go in)

Send Commandos to take over certain key missile sites and cause damage to runways then airborne divisions come at certain holes of defense. (Risky)

Ballistic missile ports (since Taiwan can only be accessed through 3 major ports) and starve Taiwan since they only have a emergency ration of 20 days, they don't grow food, just a little fruit.

Wait until ROC declares independance then commence economic sanction and barricade Taiwan's ports with mines and SSKs.

.....................All these tactics work but its just what to do with USN. If PLA could land FT-2000s and HQ-15s fast and secure airfields for landing of PLAAF fighters then there might be a decent fight. WHo knows, its not gonna happen for a few years so by the time it happens, China would have a lot of new toys to fool around with and develope new tactics.

posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 05:24 AM

Originally posted by rapier28

A Kuomintang General has apparantly said that they can only absolutely guarantee 10 days.

Monday, Aug. 16, 2004
Day one: without warning, hundreds of Chinese missiles strike Taiwan. Day two: China's jet fighters tear across the Taiwan Strait and reduce the island's air force to just 30 planes. Day five: paratroopers land near Taipei's Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall Plaza, storming the offices of President Chen Shui-bian. In 130 hours, China's hostile takeover of Taiwan is complete—at least in cyberspace.

Last week this ominous scenario—a computer simulation staged by Taiwan's armed forces—made headlines as evidence of the island's vulnerability in the face of the mainland's growing military might and underscored the frostiness of the cross-strait relationship as both sides wrap up war games. Chinese General Wang Zaixi promised to "crush" any move toward Taiwan's independence, and Taiwan Vice President Annette Lu fired back that the strait was in a state of "quasi-war."

6 days is not long at all...

posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 01:09 PM
if ww3 does start...think of the deaths! ww2 had nearly 60m death...yes 60m... many say around 40m death but they didn't include civilians or death in china or whatever...
if ww3 does start.think of the casuties...more like 60..BILLION...j/k..still...atleast 5times more dne ww2...

also...USA is the Hyper power of the world rite now... the yhave the power to take over china or any nation...

but..every great empire falls at sometime...look at the Romans ....British....soon America....whos the next big empire? China...

posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 01:26 PM
American isn't a 'Hyper Power' and can't take over China or that many contries. It's already spread thin with all the soldiers they're having to use in Iraq, Afganistan, etc.

If it was to invade China and take it over, how many men would that take? It's a big country that would kick up a lot more 'militant' activity then Iraq.

Think before you type, please.

hyper-power (HYE.pur.pow.ur) n. A nation that has vastly greater economic, political, or military power than any other nation.

Economy: E.U. has a better economy and will be 'One Economy' soon enough.(It just never gets counted as one, for some foolish reason).

Political: America has annoyed far to many nations and forces them away to be a strong political power.

Military: Best Air Force, Damn good Navy, not enough people in it or joining it to keep it this good.

It has to be greater in one, to the point nobody is near them. This isn't the case.

posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 04:59 PM
All the U.S would have to do is blockade China (which it could do).

posted on Mar, 14 2005 @ 06:01 PM

Originally posted by NWguy83
All the U.S would have to do is blockade China (which it could do).

US 21.1%, Hong Kong 17.4%, Japan 13.6%, South Korea 4.6%, Germany 4% (2003)
machinery and equipment, textiles and clothing, footwear, toys and sporting goods, mineral fuels
$436.1 billion

Japan 18%, Taiwan 11.9%, South Korea 10.4%, US 8.2%, Germany 5.9% (2003)
machinery and equipment, mineral fuels, plastics, iron and steel, chemicals
$397.4 billion


Firstly, America won't loose on such a big importer/exporter. Neither will South Korea or Japan. They need the trade. China can actually start to sell more to Europe and less to America - if it wanted.

As for Taiwan, they'd of invaded so they'd not worry about the imports.

Also remember a lot of what China imports, it can make in China. It just hasn't built the infostructure yet.

But also, how would America blockade them? Invade trucks that go over land? Or destroy boats full of chemicals and civilianz? I wonder how much of an outcry that would cause? A tanker of lethal factory checmicals being spilt into the ocean or tens of hundreds of INNOCENT people being killed. -shrugs- I miss they days when a war would be two armies on a battlefield and nobody else.

top topics

<< 49  50  51    53  54  55 >>

log in