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.

 

Top Chinese General: "China does not have the capibilitay to challange the US."

page: 9
21
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Xterrain
 


I'm just curious how you possibly could have gain access to all that information by traveling to China and Russia. They let you test out all their capabilities and then they didn't kill you? China is extremely secretive about their military's capabilities. I would love to a see a single source that would raise the validity of your post because it looks like BS to me. Also very few people are aware of the United States full capability. We built the B2 in 1970. 35-40 years ago. They have nothing like that. Or they would be parading down the main drag. There is also a Law or doctrine that the USA will immediately attack any place in in the Northern Hemisphere that has Nuclear weapons that are a danger to the USA voted through Congress. Was drawn during or after the Cuban missile crisis.

Sorry I thought you stated they had nukes at that fruit chevez place, you simply stated that they have nuke strike capability, Ironically Iran is building silos there. hmmm 2 million Chinese troops there you say?

Do you have a source on that, I find the two about that place alarming the silo's and the troops.
I just re read your post. China doesn't have a single operational aircraft carrier. Period as I stated earlier they bought a Kirsk class off the Russians. That carrier won't even be competitive to our oldest carrier. Plus they have no cruise missile capabilities. confirmed by the fact we just put a guy in jail for the rest of his life because he was trying to get some of that technology to them. And a tiny Navy. We have 11 Super carriers. 1 battle is stated to be as powerful as the all the military's in the world minus the top 4. And that I have personally witnessed. One US Navy Battle group is an impressive site to see. And they have multiple Nuclear delivery options.

Their new main battle tank is based off the T72's that we crushed in Iraq. They buy ALL their military fiber optics off of israel and south america.

I'm no expert. but obviously your less of one. I could get you 4 other sites that state they have no aircraft carriers other than the one their building.


Try this site. www.globalsecurity.org...


So for you to know first hand the capabilities of all three countries I was gonna say you would have to be a spy. But even then you still couldn't know all three.
edit on 5/20/2011 by JerryB08 because: (no reason given)

edit on 5/20/2011 by JerryB08 because: (no reason given)

edit on 5/20/2011 by JerryB08 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 20 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by MajorKarma
 


I never said they did. In fact it would destroy their economy if we simply stopped trading. that is the last thing china wants or probably the USA. You misread my posts.

BTW someone said China has a better economy than the USA. That is false. They are the worlds number two economey and growing faster than the USA.which is growing at 3 percent this year.
edit on 5/20/2011 by JerryB08 because: (no reason given)


Guess all the us haters have had enough. I'm sure they'll reload. BBL
edit on 5/20/2011 by JerryB08 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Xterrain
 





While China has global ability; aircraft carriers that rival ours, a technical deployment system that is just as advanced as ours is (fiber optic communications, remote satellite uplinks, etc.) and a steady influx of soldiers into their already MASSIVE combat ready head count they have obtained over the years.
You are mistaken. China does not have global power projection capabilities. China does not have aircraft carriers to rival ours. Are you just making this stuff up as you go along or what?



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by TinfoilTP

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
This time around it is technical superiority not industrial might.
Technical superiority alone does not win wars. Don't believe me? Ask the Germans in WWII. It takes more than superior technology.


We can get there, they can't get here, a simple illustrative example of technical superiority.
Sorry, but no. WWII level tech would get them here. The problem, as stated before, is logistics. Even if they got here, they could not feed their troops. Thus they lose due to starvation.


Lol, they would be at the bottom of the ocean with whatever they tried to use to transport with, we would get there no problem.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by StopFool
 




Do the maths... 2 draws know victory for the United States both in Korea and Vietnam even though the United States, had the strongest military in the known world too at this time, and were being opposed only by ill-equipped soldiers from North Korea and China!

Do you study history at all? Korea was a draw only due to politics. Had we turned MacArthur loose there would be no communist China today. The nationalists could have resumed power after we beat China's A**. In Vietnam, we won every battle and brought the north Vietnamese to the bargaining table. Then, once again, the politicians walked away and gave south Vietnam to the north. The Iraqi army(considered by some the 4th strongest in the world at the time) was militarily annihilated in days. Political issues keep us tied up there, not military ones. The same goes for Afghanistan. When you use the wrong tool for the job, you cannot expect optimal results. The US military is NOT a police force. Their job is to kill people and destroy things. They did that superbly. They need special units to handle counter insurgency, you do not use Marines and Infantry units for that role. Not successfully anyway.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
How many aircraft carriers does China have?
Excellent question. The PLAN has a grand total of zero operational aircraft carriers. They have a grand total of zero aircraft designed to operate off of a carrier. They have a grand total of zero naval aviators(ok, this one is just a guess. They have been training off of Brazil's carrier).



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by TinfoilTP
Lol, they would be at the bottom of the ocean with whatever they tried to use to transport with, we would get there no problem.
I was giving them the best case scenario. I agree that they could not run the naval and air gauntlet that would be viciously attacking their shipping, and even if they did manage to get here they still die of starvation.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Why does everybody always think they know their US/China military relations?

Come on, get real, there isn't going to be a war against the US. China does things differently, they have so much more on their plate that they're trying to actually take care of, having a tough time already trying to keep inflation at bay, why the hell would they go to war and throw it all out the door?

China =/= US



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 10:10 PM
link   
I believe it was a scripted remark, authorized by the Chinese higher ups. He wouldn't just spout off a comment like that on his own, because he would be shoveling #, if not executed when he got back to Beijing.

The Chinese are wily bastards, and no one should take what they say at face value. I don't trust them as far as I could throw them.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 10:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
reply to post by StopFool
 




Do the maths... 2 draws know victory for the United States both in Korea and Vietnam even though the United States, had the strongest military in the known world too at this time, and were being opposed only by ill-equipped soldiers from North Korea and China!

Do you study history at all? Korea was a draw only due to politics. Had we turned MacArthur loose there would be no communist China today.


This x1000000.

Had Truman not been such a pussy, we wouldn't be having this discussion today. MacArthur foresaw the coming problems with the Chinese way back then. He wanted to bomb them back to the Ming dynasty. Truman fired him.

War with China is only a matter of time, IMO. But we should have taken it to them when it would have been easier, instead of harder.

After all, were they not killing American forces in North Korea? Would we have been wrong to go in and level China to the ground? Apparently Truman thought so.



posted on May, 20 2011 @ 10:38 PM
link   
You people sound like a bunch of kids saying "The US is better, No China is better". China nor the US will attack the other so stop trying to see whos stick is bigger.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
reply to post by StopFool
 




Do the maths... 2 draws know victory for the United States both in Korea and Vietnam even though the United States, had the strongest military in the known world too at this time, and were being opposed only by ill-equipped soldiers from North Korea and China!

Do you study history at all? Korea was a draw only due to politics. Had we turned MacArthur loose there would be no communist China today. The nationalists could have resumed power after we beat China's A**. In Vietnam, we won every battle and brought the north Vietnamese to the bargaining table. Then, once again, the politicians walked away and gave south Vietnam to the north. The Iraqi army(considered by some the 4th strongest in the world at the time) was militarily annihilated in days. Political issues keep us tied up there, not military ones. The same goes for Afghanistan. When you use the wrong tool for the job, you cannot expect optimal results. The US military is NOT a police force. Their job is to kill people and destroy things. They did that superbly. They need special units to handle counter insurgency, you do not use Marines and Infantry units for that role. Not successfully anyway.


The reason the war in Korea ended is China had become involved militarily, letting loose would have resulted in long tiring war, perhaps millions of people dead both sides and regional and geographical devastation. You also can't just roll into China and expect the Soviet Union to stand back and allow this to happen, if history had followed your way of thinking there is every likelihood the planet would have lot less people walking about today. I find Americans attitudes to war juvenile and puerile and the obvious lack of understanding shown by you and the other American citizen show's me how much American values have changed and not for the better.

To finish up. America won every battle in Vietnam? I could cry reading stuff like this, frankly it not for me to correct every mistake you post. The Vietnamese were holding there own against the American Military and had won numerous battles on the road to liberation of the whole country. The American government of the time in 1975 made the decision to seek peace because of the social unrest this war was causing back home, the large numbers of American servicemen been killed in the jungles of Vietnam,, the cost of sustaining the war long term, and operationally for ten whole years America wasn't achieving anything overall victory wasn't possible, so the decision was made to pull the plug on this whole sorry affair. You are showing a complete lack of understanding of a war your country got involved with.

Wiping out a phantom Army is a great achievement! Seriously 90% of the Iraq never showed u to fight. This maybe in America is viewed as a great success and evidence of US military power to the rest of the world that war was a joke. You could have parachuted a couple of thousand marines into Baghdad and saved the American economy whole bunch of cash, really truly, the war could have ended in a day very possible.
edit on 21-5-2011 by StopFool because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-5-2011 by StopFool because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-5-2011 by StopFool because: Speling

edit on 21-5-2011 by StopFool because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic4life
 


inventors.about.com...

Until the death of Stalin, it seems that the majority of the inspiration was from German Engineering.

Makes sense. If something works, build off of it. Saves alot of R&D....also means you get to live a little longer in Stalins Russia.

After him? Thats when the Ruskies came alive with REAL independent jet concepts. Until the A10, the most durable ground attack plane was the Sukoi.

Early migs were cool except for one thing. Compressed air braking.

If you runny out of air? You no stoppy


I guess jets are like everything else. Someone might get the idea but the glory goes to the one that can perfect it.

Interesting that everyone was working on jet tech about the same time though.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Darkrunner
 


Why do you think they whacked Patton and ran out Mack?

Your right about Truman but he was a POS like the invalid he served under. The next "good" leader we had was Ike.

Beware the Military Industrial Complex.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by DuceizBack
 


You really need to study history and current politics a bit closer.

yes, we have some good tech....some (if not all) is partially made (or stolen to) China.

Our equpment is aging.

they do have a nearly unlimited pool of humans to pull from.

Our troops are stretched thinner than air. They are tired of 10 years of BS fighting.

Chinese are now able to project force where they will.

In the event the west comes to war with China (not russia), nukes WILL BY NECESSITY BE USED.

The only way to stop a human wave is by using massively destructive power. Period.

In Korea, they would send waves of nearly (if not totally) unarmed people with a few armed commisars in the rear to attack positions. After the mg's had melted down and the grunts were out of ammo, it was over.

They will have to be nuked. in the very least, fuel air bombs.



posted on May, 21 2011 @ 02:20 PM
link   
I am neither a China supporter or an American hater, just an objective thinker. Having said that I would say the problem America has is that major wars are not won on technological advances, superior technology may be successful in small wars against small nations, but not in major wars. In major wars it's manpower and production capacity that wins it. Just, looking back at WW2, the allies did not win it, because of superior technology, because the axis was outpacing them in technological innovation. The allies won WW2 because they and primarily America had a production base that could not be rivaled by the axis nations, the allies were able to outproduce them, making more bullets, more bombs, more guns, more tanks and etc.

Looking at the world today, the sad fact is America's production base is shot and China's is constantly growing and if China were to mobilize their people and ramp their production to full capacity, they would easily outproduce us, in weapons manufacturing and would have far more people to use those weapons as well. Personally, I think the general's comment is simply strategy, like the Taoist's say, when facing the great, be small and when facing the small, be great. Plus, I don't think China feels they need to worry about war with America just yet anyway, since we haven't yet publicly told them we are never going to pay them the trillions of dollars we owe them.

Peace be with you.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 01:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by grey580
China doesn't need to have a better military. War can be won by sheer numbers. Like in the civil war.
In fact China doesn't have to fire a shot.

Send in 1 million Chinese and have those guys surrender.
Day 2 Send in another million. Surrender
Day 3 Another Million. Surrender
Wash rinse repeat.

And they can keep doing this for a while.
Pretty soon you don't have room to put chinese and you have to work something out.

There are ways to win if you are willing to think outside the box.


I am guessing your a Dixie? The South lost because it was both curb stomped in the numbers department and because the North was much more technologically advanced. The South was still in the 18th Century while the North was getting ready to help launch the 20th Century(South=Musket, North=Repeater, South=horse-mounted reconnaissance, North=Balloon reconnaissance, south= boat and horse drawn wagons, North=Railroads).

The truth is modern Gatling guns pretty much demolish the advanced Chinese numbers. And China only has those numbers for another decade at most. In fact I doubt they could even field a soldier for every Man, Woman and Child in North America, let alone the USA anymore.

The only way China could win is American men refused to fight.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 10:51 AM
link   
The US Military has a huge disadvantage in weapons...they are too powerful to be used in a limited engagement. We could have dropped a nuclear weapon on Osama and he would be dead... but we used SEAL's instead.
The tactics used in todays warfare requires minimal collateral damage to civilian populations for political reasons or economic concerns. In an all out slugging match the US could totally eliminate any navy or army it wishes... but what would be the price to pay?



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ancient Champion
You people sound like a bunch of kids saying "The US is better, No China is better". China nor the US will attack the other so stop trying to see whos stick is bigger.



Just because people make comparisons doesn't make them bitter.
Stop whining.



posted on May, 22 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by themessengernevermatters
 


Production bases will get wiped off the face of the earth in 8 minutes or less so the dynamics of a modern world war are not comparable to WWII.







 
21
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join