U.S. vs. China

page: 68
1
<< 65  66  67    69  70  71 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 11 2005 @ 05:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by ulshadow

Originally posted by imAMERICAN

anyway wouldnt it be funny if some nation in EU or maybe even entire EU tries some ww3 crap...it would be fitting..seeing as how every world war has started there...


yea, lol, WW3 should take place in europe as a major front like the past two world wars lol, that way we can go in and save their sorry european butts again lol, but i don't see it happening now cause they seem to become prefist (spelling?)[trying to said peaceful] lol


Get some crip of the history Europe had wars and it had great cost to all members in conflict. Europe has always in history been warzone in one way or another, but on current settings i dont see how Europe or as now many prefer EU would join major war, unless its for their interests. EU is breaking itself from shackles of dominant pro-US. It wont be certain that EU would join forces with US if such major war would break like war against China it would most likely ruin all thats been build for ages and even worst case lead to defeat. You cant really meter loyalty from wars like Gulfwar I - II, both been fought on total upper dog settings. Fighting possible equal enemy is a bit different matter.

New war will most likely only break if China is aggressor towards US and that would certainly lead to Chinas destruction as many other nations would unite against it, currently theres scenarios like possible US invasion to Iran that would surely strike China as dependant of Irans oil flow and increasing oil market prices that would hurt Chinas growing economy.

US wouldnt stab itself by going head to head against China. even when its working class loses jobs to cheaper labor countrys and unemployment increase, not to mention military competition against China.

Most likely tension will grow but nothing happens, small conflicts will keep taking a place troughout the globe but nothing major will happen, that would shake whole world economy, unless we get more madmans to make desicions.




posted on May, 11 2005 @ 08:19 AM
link   
I don't see how China would ever be aggressor to the US. The only chance that China will ever confront the US is a fight over Taiwan, other than that, China basically does not care about the US at all. Maybe economically, but militarily, I don't think so.



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 10:34 AM
link   


The only chance that China will ever confront the US is a fight over Taiwan


But this is the reason that China and the US will come face to face.

Sooner rather than later aswell. The US has already stated that they will not sit back and watch China invade Taiwan, but China continue to look as though they will!

So China will have to confront the US military if it enters Taiwan.



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 06:29 PM
link   
ehhhh

China invades taiwan, US forces engage Chinese in a "undeclared war"

China threatens to expand the war if it is losing in Taiwan, and US does the same if its losing...

U.N is called in

either the fighting is stopped and taiwan is considered to be its own nation by the UN

or China is pushed back to the mainland and a war with the U.S starts OR it is ashamed in defeat and ends its agression...



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 07:14 PM
link   
A lot of assumptions there


I really can't see the Chinese going to war with Taiwan this decade. Why risk war when there is a strong possibility that Taiwan will be brought back economically?

The millitary option is always the last resort.



posted on May, 11 2005 @ 07:20 PM
link   
ill bet they will flex their military muscles at Taiwan alot in coming days..

also..big bad 2 million man army really only has 150-200,000 operational combat ready troops...

who knows what the rest are..

every one says china has biggest army.. but lemme tell you

the USA has 2 million man army also..but when you break it down like above.. we only have about 500,000 active operational troops...

[edit on 11-5-2005 by imAMERICAN]



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by imAMERICAN
ill bet they will flex their military muscles at Taiwan alot in coming days..

also..big bad 2 million man army really only has 150-200,000 operational combat ready troops...

who knows what the rest are..

every one says china has biggest army.. but lemme tell you

the USA has 2 million man army also..but when you break it down like above.. we only have about 500,000 active operational troops...

[edit on 11-5-2005 by imAMERICAN]


what the hell are you talking about???
lemme tell you


PLA ground forces are also categorised according to their readiness and manning levels. Class-A units are at or near full manpower (over 80% of personnel and equipment) and capable of deploying without significant argumentation and training. Class-B units are maintained at 60~80% manning level, lack some organic units, and require more training and more time to deploy than Class-A units. Previously there were also Class-C units, most of which were disbanded, became reserve units or taken over by PAP. This classification mainly applies to divisions and brigades. Sometimes entire group armies may also be categorised as Class-A or –B, though the difference between two class of GAs are much less evident.


do some research before using your american propaganda

also the taiwan and china have also improved relatioins since the start of the year.

news.yahoo.com.../nm/20050510/wl_nm/china_taiwan_dc_4
read the link



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 01:39 AM
link   
Seems China still uses the antiquated Soviet system of Cat A,B and C units. Even your Cat A formations may only have 80% of their strength, seems that even your frontline units are underequipped.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 03:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
Seems China still uses the antiquated Soviet system of Cat A,B and C units. Even your Cat A formations may only have 80% of their strength, seems that even your frontline units are underequipped.


when you have such a large military you need some of them to less prepared because the cost of maintaining the armys at full readness or close to that is Enormous.

also 80% is a high number. no military keeps their army at 100% its to hard to maintain.

im not to sure if chinas rapid reaction units are the Class-A units or something else. because they can move to areas in 24-48 hours



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lucretius
The millitary option is always the last resort.


exactly.

the us and china have far too much to lose economically by going to war.
it is in the best interests of both countries to be friendly. culturally and economically.



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
The Su-30's would be dealt with either upgraded F-15's

F-15s are already a lot older than those 6-year-old Su-30s. I don't say that those Su-30s are of higher quality though.



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by MickeyDee


The only chance that China will ever confront the US is a fight over Taiwan

But this is the reason that China and the US will come face to face.
Sooner rather than later aswell. The US has already stated that they will not sit back and watch China invade Taiwan, but China continue to look as though they will!
So China will have to confront the US military if it enters Taiwan.

That is not aggression towards the US. I was responding to this quote

Originally posted by Observer83
New war will most likely only break if China is aggressor towards US


Anyway, what some people said here is pretty true. Realistically, a China-Taiwan-US war is not likely. I think politicians on both sides are intelligent enough to know how costy a war between the two powers would be. Maybe except for Bush. But let's hope he gets kicked out in the next election
The Chinese government is also aware of a chance that reunification (or perhaps federation) can be achieved without a single bullet shot. They'd rather go for that than go reckless and start wars.

[edit on 14-5-2005 by Taishyou]



posted on May, 15 2005 @ 03:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Facefirst

Originally posted by Lucretius
The millitary option is always the last resort.


exactly.

the us and china have far too much to lose economically by going to war.
it is in the best interests of both countries to be friendly. culturally and economically.



Wal-Mart has the most to loose, where will they get all the junk they sell. theres a huge billion dollar lobby group demanding peace.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 03:06 PM
link   
The United States would win in a full-scale war with China. Even in a nuclear war we would win... by 2010 are current missile defense system will not only be able to defend us against terrorist countries and rogue generals in Russia, but will be able to defend us against the entire Chinese ICBM arsenal. We could honestly defeat China conventionally in a matter of weeks or months (especially since their government is unstable), and the occupation wouldn't be anything like Iraq, because their wouldn't be the whole Christianity v Islam thing that many extremists think is going on in the middle east... after all, the occupation of Japan, Germany, and the Phillipines was like icing a cake... the Middle East is totally different.

[edit on 1-6-2005 by nappyhead]



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by nappyhead
The United States would win in a full-scale war with China. Even in a nuclear war we would win...

[edit on 1-6-2005 by nappyhead]


Nobody wins in a nuclear war...

Anyhow you are incorrect... it took the US led forces over a week just to take Iraq.

Now picture a far more modern and sophisticated millitary than Iraq ever had... A country that is roughly the same size as the U.S and of course the fact you have to fight an offensive war against the defenders.

The US would probably win eventually but it would take months and untold losses on both sides. Even then the country would not be occupied by U.S forces... it is simply too large, but rather a collapse of government and leadership will be what they are aiming for.

Hopefully inspire a revolution....

A ground war in China would be unwinnable



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 05:18 PM
link   
if war came with china the US would pull out some its black toys that the world doesnt know about, no holds bared death from above and a certian dam that has a huge amount of water behind it would be toast washing iirc mos tof the food production of china out to the ocean, nothing likea wall of water the size of rhode island crash all the way to the ocean be just the the end of the Ice Ages that ripped washington's eastern top soil and deposited in oregon valley.

the death toll would be huge and china better has a huge amount of stored food with that many mouth to feed in both the military and civilians I dont know if china could hold out.

Either way it would suck huge costly ww3 over some stupid foolishiness, wow it reminds me of reading about the feelings of pre-ww1. WW1 being the worst war to be fought since the dark ages, in a word: brutal.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 06:38 PM
link   
true US could deal a Deathly blow to China But all china would have to do is Send a Missile into yellowstone national park and Disrupt The Super Valcano that lies beneath the surface, Geologists predict that if that Volcano Erupted it would wipe out 3 US states in the area and when the Dust settled it would have Coated the upper eastern states with a foot and a half of Ashe,

However i think it is very unliekly that china could get a missile there

By the way can someone please post a pic of the 3 gorges Dam in china and maybe a map of where it is, im just curious to know where it is and what type of damage it would do to china if US bombed it open



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Current American ABM arsenal is no where near stopping hundreds of MIRVs. The ballistic missile shield constantly fails tests. I still think the best defence is a good offense so America should keep the MXs and state that either your with me or against me and the arguably best ICBM in the world would land in your country if you do anything irrational.



posted on Jun, 1 2005 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by COWlan
Current American ABM arsenal is no where near stopping hundreds of MIRVs. The ballistic missile shield constantly fails tests. I still think the best defence is a good offense so America should keep the MXs and state that either your with me or against me and the arguably best ICBM in the world would land in your country if you do anything irrational.


they are getting rid of the Peacemakers, but they are keeping the Tridents in the Ohio class subs, but in ani case we dont need so many nukes. in ani case deterrence may fail so some type of star wars shield can help.



posted on Jun, 2 2005 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by zakattack

By the way can someone please post a pic of the 3 gorges Dam in china and maybe a map of where it is, im just curious to know where it is and what type of damage it would do to china if US bombed it open


Nothing short of a nuclear device could breach the 3 Gorges Dam... it is simply too massive... even with sustained strikes against it.

The Dam itself is 2 miles long










new topics
top topics
 
1
<< 65  66  67    69  70  71 >>

log in

join