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.

 

Can China Invade Taiwan?

page: 27
1
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 19 2004 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist
China might find this difficult as they can barely project any power even 100km off shore. Besides your 'tactical missiles' inventory depends on how much Russia decides to sell to you


I guess we will have to wait until that day finally come. Good luck to your confidence.




posted on Sep, 19 2004 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist
Exactly why thousands of cruise missiles would be used to take out your air defence.


You can only field about a couple hundred cruise missiles in two CVBGs, which would probably be the number of CVBGs in such a situation.


You and zcheng are by far the lamest on this thread!



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 12:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

Originally posted by mad scientist
Exactly why thousands of cruise missiles would be used to take out your air defence.


You can only field about a couple hundred cruise missiles in two CVBGs, which would probably be the number of CVBGs in such a situation.


You and zcheng are by far the lamest on this thread!


Oh OK, sdo the US would only commit 2 CBG's in a major war with China ? What are the rest doing, on holidays ?

Besides, you left out the Air Force ?

Oh nooo, I've been insulted, I'm sorry I'm so lame
. Why am I so lame because I point out all the mistakes you make on this thread and expose your complete lack of knowlege of these subjects.


[edit on 20-9-2004 by mad scientist]



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 05:42 AM
link   
madscientist,

Dude, you said thousands. Do you realize the absurdity of that? No, of course not.


Apparently you have no idea on the subject. Thousands of cruise missiles. Yeah right. Considering a total of 4,170 Tomahawks were made, and just a few thousand ALCMs are in inventory, yeah, let's use ALL of them against just one country! That's smart. Maybe by then we can use guns for long-range strike!


Anyway, I'm done responding to you. Don't bother to reply. Or I'll return the favor.

[edit on 20-9-2004 by sweatmonicaIdo]



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 06:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
madscientist,

Dude, you said thousands. Do you realize the absurdity of that? No, of course not.


Apparently you have no idea on the subject. Thousands of cruise missiles. Yeah right. Considering a total of 4,170 Tomahawks were made, and just a few thousand ALCMs are in inventory, yeah, let's use ALL of them against just one country! That's smart. Maybe by then we can use guns for long-range strike!


Anyway, I'm done responding to you. Don't bother to reply. Or I'll return the favor.


They can build more Tomahawks
, what do you think they just build some and thtas it ? Besides Tomahawks are just part of a family of cruise missiles ever heard of the JASSM ? I didn't think so because you obviously really don't know anything. Your post just reinforces your lack of knowlege in this area. Do some some reading you ignoramus.

You sound like a kid, I'm done responding don't bother to reply, I'm hurt
. didn't mommy change your daipers



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 08:20 AM
link   
Could we stay away from personality assassination?

What about unmanned supersonic fighters to take out the air defence system of china?

Bode



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by bodebliss
Could we stay away from personality assassination?
What about unmanned supersonic fighters to take out the air defence system of china?
Bode


In his time frame, the UCAVS may not be operational in full strength yet. However, 4 Ohio class SSGN's with 154 tomahawks each, packs quite a punch. Cetainly a large number would get through the ChiComs air defence network and do some damage. B-52's flying out of Diego Garcia Armed with CALCM's would also get into the act. And as someone above pointed out, don't forget the JASSM for highly defended targets.

I agree with you though, stealthy UCAVs make ideal SEAD aircraft



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
In his time frame, the UCAVS may not be operational in full strength yet. However, 4 Ohio class SSGN's with 154 tomahawks each, packs quite a punch. Cetainly a large number would get through the ChiComs air defence network and do some damage. B-52's flying out of Diego Garcia Armed with CALCM's would also get into the act. And as someone above pointed out, don't forget the JASSM for highly defended targets.

I agree with you though, stealthy UCAVs make ideal SEAD aircraft


Do they still store tactical nukes at Diego Garcia?

The limited number of Tomahawks and CALCMs are really the only big advantage the U.S. has over China. Being able to deliver destruction without ever coming into harm's way. Only problem is, you only have so many Tomahawks, and madscientist is just hilarious.

Plus, how close does one have to get before they are in range to fire? By then the B-52s are probably well within-range of Chinese long-range SAMs and air defense interceptors like the J-7. Then you'd have to escort the B-52s, but then you only have so many fighter aircraft availiable.



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT

In his time frame, the UCAVS may not be operational in full strength yet. However, 4 Ohio class SSGN's with 154 tomahawks each, packs quite a punch. Cetainly a large number would get through the ChiComs air defence network and do some damage. B-52's flying out of Diego Garcia Armed with CALCM's would also get into the act. And as someone above pointed out, don't forget the JASSM for highly defended targets.

I agree with you though, stealthy UCAVs make ideal SEAD aircraft


Hey Fred, have tou sen the test Videos of the JASSM ? They used to have their own website, but have moved here :

www.missilesandfirecontrol.com...

Talk about manouverable.



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

Originally posted by FredT
Do they still store tactical nukes at Diego Garcia?
Plus, how close does one have to get before they are in range to fire? By then the B-52s are probably well within-range of Chinese long-range SAMs and air defense interceptors like the J-7. Then you'd have to escort the B-52s, but then you only have so many fighter aircraft availiable.


Thats where the F-22 would come in running a figter sweep ahead of the Buffs. The CALCM has a range of 600nm. but its actuall range is classified. The Jassm ER is said to have a standoff range of 500. I think a stealthy fighter escort would be able to shield the Buffs long enuf to launch. While the Chinese have some front line fighters ie the SU-30MMK and the J-10 etc, the bulk of thier force is older Mig17 / 21's that don't have as much range. What Im getting at is that the PLAAF is used to flying pretty close to thier shores and tend to stay within thier ground based radar coverage. They have bought a few AWACS planes, but to go out 600 nm and try to engage the Buffs or better yet B-1's would be pretty hard in terms of range and detection to pick up without some sort of Radar picket. even the ESRA on the Raptor can only see so far.

No I do not think they have tactical nukes at Diego Garcia. Maybe Guam. DG still does belong to the Brits and they may be skittish about that. I do believe that the navy has ditched thier tacticals. I think that they are int eh CONUS as they could fly them in pretty quickly if the need arises.



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Thats where the F-22 would come in running a figter sweep ahead of the Buffs. The CALCM has a range of 600nm. but its actuall range is classified. The Jassm ER is said to have a standoff range of 500. I think a stealthy fighter escort would be able to shield the Buffs long enuf to launch. While the Chinese have some front line fighters ie the SU-30MMK and the J-10 etc, the bulk of thier force is older Mig17 / 21's that don't have as much range. What Im getting at is that the PLAAF is used to flying pretty close to thier shores and tend to stay within thier ground based radar coverage. They have bought a few AWACS planes, but to go out 600 nm and try to engage the Buffs or better yet B-1's would be pretty hard in terms of range and detection to pick up without some sort of Radar picket. even the ESRA on the Raptor can only see so far.

No I do not think they have tactical nukes at Diego Garcia. Maybe Guam. DG still does belong to the Brits and they may be skittish about that. I do believe that the navy has ditched thier tacticals. I think that they are int eh CONUS as they could fly them in pretty quickly if the need arises.


That's even assuming the F/A-22 is in service when we go to war with China (if ever).

Tactical nukes I believe are still carried onboard ship, just that they're dissassembled, therefore they cannot be called tactical nukes.

On a larger note, I think that if we ever fight with China, the U.S., over a long period of time, would eventually emerge victorious in terms of air warfare and naval warfare. Would it be a Turkey Shoot? Absolutely not. Will America lose one plane? No, they'd lose lots. But would America eventually win? Yes. Same for the Navy.

Ground combat is where U.S. forces are destined to lose, and eventually the war, since you always have to win the ground war. Even with air superiority, I seriously doubt the U.S. can pull out a victory on the ground. But then again, that's a different story from this thread.



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Ground combat is where U.S. forces are destined to lose, and eventually the war, since you always have to win the ground war. Even with air superiority, I seriously doubt the U.S. can pull out a victory on the ground. But then again, that's a different story from this thread.


No i don't think anybody on this thread has ever said we could invade the mainland. I agree with you. there is simply no way. Much like the CHiComs lack the phibs to go after Taiwan, even if we got every phib to there plus all the ready reserve fleet up and running. We could not get enough troops on the ground to win. The PLA is really set up for that type of attrition warfare. If it progressed that far, you would have to use the AF to take out critical infrastructure then blockade them.

I do disagre that the Navy has even diassembled nukes on board these days. Its costly. Now for your scenario it is resonable that during rising tensions, it would not be that had to load the ships up though. The 688i's and thier TLAM silos would take some doing, but there is a sub tender at Guam I think.

The F-22 is nearing serial production. Even if you leave it up to the F-15's, F-18E's etc with AWACS support should still be able to keep the BARCAP off the Buffs back. I think though given the threat it would be B-1 at Mach 1+ Scoot in shoot, scoot out.

The other thought I have is that the ChiCOms would not commit all of thier frontline SU-30's etc to this op. They would have to leave some of them to defend thier cities from other air attack



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
On a larger note, I think that if we ever fight with China, the U.S., over a long period of time, would eventually emerge victorious in terms of air warfare and naval warfare. Would it be a Turkey Shoot? Absolutely not. Will America lose one plane? No, they'd lose lots. But would America eventually win? Yes. Same for the Navy.

Ground combat is where U.S. forces are destined to lose, and eventually the war, since you always have to win the ground war. Even with air superiority, I seriously doubt the U.S. can pull out a victory on the ground. But then again, that's a different story from this thread.


US is not even winning the war in Iraq equiped with RPG and AK47. What the heck do you think US will win in war with China? The best outcome, US can expect is that both are destroyed.

You assume war between China and US can be determined from the computer war games? If so, US would have long claimed victory in Iraq. Of course, I know Bush did that a year ago. Your analysis are good amusement though.



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
No i don't think anybody on this thread has ever said we could invade the mainland. I agree with you. there is simply no way. Much like the CHiComs lack the phibs to go after Taiwan, even if we got every phib to there plus all the ready reserve fleet up and running. We could not get enough troops on the ground to win. The PLA is really set up for that type of attrition warfare. If it progressed that far, you would have to use the AF to take out critical infrastructure then blockade them.

I do disagre that the Navy has even diassembled nukes on board these days. Its costly. Now for your scenario it is resonable that during rising tensions, it would not be that had to load the ships up though. The 688i's and thier TLAM silos would take some doing, but there is a sub tender at Guam I think.

The F-22 is nearing serial production. Even if you leave it up to the F-15's, F-18E's etc with AWACS support should still be able to keep the BARCAP off the Buffs back. I think though given the threat it would be B-1 at Mach 1+ Scoot in shoot, scoot out.

The other thought I have is that the ChiCOms would not commit all of thier frontline SU-30's etc to this op. They would have to leave some of them to defend thier cities from other air attack


That's pretty much the Chinese defense policy. Bring them onto our soil, so to speak. China almost needs the enemy to invade China in order to win, because China has a near defense-only military. Again, another reason for China not to invade Taiwan.



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by zcheng
US is not even winning the war in Iraq equiped with RPG and AK47. What the heck do you think US will win in war with China? The best outcome, US can expect is that both are destroyed.

You assume war between China and US can be determined from the computer war games? If so, US would have long claimed victory in Iraq. Of course, I know Bush did that a year ago. Your analysis are good amusement though.


Lance (Bass), can you repeat that?

Uhhh.... uhhh.... uhhh....

Dude, if you read what I wrote, I clearly stated the U.S. would lose the war because it cannot win the ground war, which is necessary for any military victory. Geezus!



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Dude, if you read what I wrote, I clearly stated the U.S. would lose the war because it cannot win the ground war, which is necessary for any military victory. Geezus!


Where will the ground war fight in war between US and China, Dude? In Europe, or North America?

If there is a war, most likely it will be near the coast of China. US can easily defeat China in open ocean. But when it is near Chinese coast, China can combine land-based airforce, missiles from various kinds platform, China has the advantage.



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by zcheng
Where will the ground war fight in war between US and China, Dude? In Europe, or North America?

If there is a war, most likely it will be near the coast of China. US can easily defeat China in open ocean. But when it is near Chinese coast, China can combine land-based airforce, missiles from various kinds platform, China has the advantage.


Uh... since when do infantry and tanks fight on "open ocean?"



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist
Hey Fred, have tou sen the test Videos of the JASSM ? They used to have their own website, but have moved here :


Thanks for the link! That is one kick butt system. Talk about percision strike. I wonder if they can prorgam it for evasive manuvers to avoid sams and AAA?



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 03:49 PM
link   
one thing to take into acount is the "Sunburn" missiles. they are acurate and deadly.
but nbot sure how many china has.



posted on Sep, 20 2004 @ 05:17 PM
link   
unfortunately, we can and will never be able to invade mainland china- i mean we COULD pose a good invasion if we had called up the troop strength and trained them and such, and launched millions of men and tanks and planes like in dday in ww2-but this isnt ww2 and were in the 2000's, and heres the truth: with all the liberal bleeding hearts in my country, theres no way they would allow such a " mindless bloodbath of the noble enemy" as it will probably be called. dont forget, with the amount of telecommunications and satelites and such theres almost no way to keep a massive invasion like that secret, top U.S generals have even stated this. and the outpour of bleeding hearts in this country would turn it into another vietnam type thing. and our troops morale would probably shatter-becuz the idiots in my country (not all but many of them) dont realize its important to support ur troops who fight for u, im not saying every one, but a good many of them. ANYWAY, with that being said, i dont think the invasion could be pulled off-needless to say, china could never pull off an invasion of our country either-but the problem is not with any of that. it is only 2 things: a risk of a nuclear retalation-and guerilla warefare when trying to occupy area's of China.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join