"The US cannot win a war against China"

page: 13
21
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sablicious

Former [Australian] Prime Minister Paul Keating has warned that the United States cannot expect to win a war against China on the Asian mainland, in a major speech calling for the US and Australia to adjust to a rising China.


I think we've adjusted enough already, so who wants their "Asian Homeland", they can keep it.




posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Bodhi7
 


China is a massive country, have they seen all of it?



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Donkey_Dean
reply to post by TheLegend
 


The US pays $500 for a simple wood handled claw hammer! Our spending does not equate to military might! You can count on the tech gap closing over night as well!


You seen independence day? You know then why its 500 dollars for a hammer. Black projects that are off the books get their funding that way. Its one of the main lines they wanted cut from the movie because it is how they do get funding.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by la2
 


Let keep it simple, a US Marines perspective:

A: China and Russia have not been at was for 10 years under harsh conditions
- This allowed the US to sharpen its tactics
- Increase logistical efficiency even more so
- Pumped almost a Trillion dollars into defense, new weapons, x37, drones etc...
- Our Military knows what being at war is like, China and Russia do not
B: Logistics, no other country on earth could match us and keep a war going, supply lines etc...
C: US Military is the best trained in the world, because we have been honing our skills for 10 years

IMHO: The forced to fight Chinese Military and Russian Military would tremble if confronted with the US Military in full attack mode...because they have not been at war in the last decade, no experience other than training...

Come on people get real...

Sniper



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   
I have two words for why the U.S. would dominate should China attempt to invade... "CHUCK NORRIS"....

www.chucknorris.com...



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Sablicious
 


Well yea, carpet bombing solves most problems. But these are not wars over good and evil. These are wars over either power or resources. You don't want to kill everyone in those situations.

....So you end up with an insurgency. You cannot win against an insurgency in modern days. It's just that way. Unless people are willing to utterly exterminate the civilians, it will remain that way.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 03:23 PM
link   
I haven't had a chance to read through the entire thread, but i read this yesterday [or day before], and it pertains to the conversation

War game with China

It's basically the plan of attack in case we ever do fight China
in it, America wins


New cold war with China
edit on 7-8-2012 by squirelnutz because: terrorists made me



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by dayve
We would wipe china out.... They might look/act smart, but theyre not that smart
Not sure if Rickrolling or just stupid... Their women's army is larger than the entire population of the USA. Just lay down and say "no mas!"



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Hey I got news for you guys we already fought a war with China.
It was in a little place called Korea and the 2nd generation US /UK army mowed down the 1st generation Chinese army in literal waves. Special situation of course but it was not a good outting for the PLA.

This all depends on the situation. There is no scenario that has the US invading mainland China. Thats not ever going to happen. All arrows point toward the US defending a Pacific rim nation from Chinese attack. Specifically Taiwan. The US Navy is the best in the world. Hands down no contest, as in no one else is even in the same league as the USN. Any short term future conflict with China will involve a Naval engagement. China has very little means of conducting blue water operations. They could conduct a surprise attack using commercial cargo carriers to move land forces ala "Red Storm Rising". Their problem is that even Taiwan has a substantial naval force that the US sold them.
On the ground the PLA also comes up short. They have quantity yes but quality is not there. Ground operations on a modern battlefield depend largely on air dominance and the US again has Air supremacy. The PLAF is out dated and undertrained. Once the USAF sweep them from the sky they will decimate PLA armored forces in their staging areas.
It would not be a pretty sight and the US would sustain high casualties but it would do exactly what it did to Saddams army in 91 i.e. decimate it materially and capture massive numbers of Chinese ground troops.



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Dragoon01
 


Add that to the fact we could block all Chinese communications


I could see China teaming up with Russia and several other countries to attack us though

Or destroying us from within, with spies and planted politicians
It wouldn't be too hard with our current state of affairs



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 06:11 PM
link   
USA USA USA would pwn every other country in the world at the same time the USA has a better military in all forms airforce,navy,marines,army etc etc need I go on.USA has the best intelligence networks..I really doubt china could even touch the USA...and thats why every country looks towards usa in this world you either try to be like the western world or you hate it lol..

But all hype aside anythings possible win it comes to war if planned correctly, its just I don't see anyone taking on the usa at this time..and on a side note omg did anyone see the new navy drone www.popularmechanics.com...-1

goodluck taking on those



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   
As a Marine Corps veteran my response is quite simple: Remember the lessons of History's Past. Those that do not learn are fools. Those that refuse to learn are simply doomed...



posted on Aug, 7 2012 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by HumanitiesLastHope
 


Look. I am a fan of the US military. But even I know better than to say something as arrogant as the US can whip everybody's tail at the same time. You want to be known as the next Germany? Thats what they thought too.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 05:51 AM
link   
The US lost in Vietnam despite its superior technology.
It lost in Iraq. The US left Afghanistan. The US makes propaganda and intimidates. Hollywood makes a few movies and shows like CSI and people are dumb enough to believe that this is reality.

That's what bullies do. Trick others into believing that they are powerful, while in fact they are weak.
edit on 8-8-2012 by manbitesdog because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   
It's easy to seize power but really hard to maintain it. No doubt US could won the battle for now but may I ask how long it would last? We can conquer lands but we cannot conquer people's heart with the same method.

In other words, if US wish to win the war not merely battles once and for all they would need approval from huge majority of people in China, what I mean is they sincerely willing to let US take over their government and become their leader without hesitation.

However the situation in China is in fact stable enough to prevent such thing to happen which is why the CCP focus so much on stability probably even wiling to implement democracy if needed to ensure the country does not end up like the ones in middle east. Another problem is China is catching up pretty fast, I believe many have heard about J-20 Stealth Fighter and DF-21 anti-carrier missile but what about those that no one knows about? Don't be suprise if China suddenly came out a X-37B space plane equivalent out of nowhere. The risk going up against an enemy which you do not have good details especially like China would be disastrous.

US experience recently so far has been against weak countries but against the like of China? I would definitely listen to Paul Keating advice, for now do not expect to win a war against China on their mainland.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by HumanitiesLastHope
 


Americans like you are embarrassing.

Truth is, if we tried to fight on Chinese soil, we would lose. If China tried to come to the US, they would lose. Now what happens on third party ground is up in the air.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by manbitesdog
The US lost in Vietnam despite its superior technology.
It lost in Iraq. The US left Afghanistan. The US makes propaganda and intimidates. Hollywood makes a few movies and shows like CSI and people are dumb enough to believe that this is reality.

That's what bullies do. Trick others into believing that they are powerful, while in fact they are weak.
edit on 8-8-2012 by manbitesdog because: (no reason given)




Double facepalm.....
You are comparing sticks to atom bombs! Yes we "lost" in Vietnam (won all the battles but left the field). We did not however lose in Iraq. By all measure of victory we succeeded. Your seeing it as a single conflict and it was not. The first phase was a conventional war fought with 2nd / 3rd generation armies which the Coallition FAR outclassed the iraqis (who actually used a good deal of Chinese equipment and systems). The second phase was a 4th generation conflict low intensity insurgency. Both of those conflicts however were "won" by the US and its partners. The old Iraqi leadership was destroyed and replaced with a new elected leadership. The insurgency was disrupted and overcome. While it is still in operation there is no wide scale support for it even after the almost complete withdraw of coalltion forces. The US cripled the Iraqis ability to conduct conventional operations, destroyed its command and control and owned the field. The US withdrew only when it had completed the set up and initial operation of a replacement system. Yes Phase one was more simple and less time consuming than phase two however victory is not measured in military terms by how that replacement system ultimately succeeds or fails.If we draw a historical analogy would you say the allies "lost" WW1 because of WW2????

All that aside neither Vietnam nor Iraq are parallel situations to a conflict with China. While there may be similar characteristics in specific phases of a future conflict the situation would be unique. You can draw conclusions from Iraq and Afghanistan but they will only pertain to those areas of overlap. For example if China uses unconventional warfare to foster an insurgency in Taiwan. Setting up conditions for a follow on invasion. Most Western countries have trouble dealing with insurgency because we are not prepared to restrict the population as a whole to deal with the insurgents. Thats not a bad thing it just makes the job more difficult. So yes the US would have difficulty defeating that type of operation. If however the PLA followed up on that attack with an attempted combined arms invasion then it would be an embarassment. Getting to Taiwan with a large ground force would only be step one. Sustaining that force would be quite another thing. They dont have the capacity to do that. Will they one day? Sure you can only expect that day will come. Regardless that scenario has no parallel with any of the most recent US operations.
The fact is that the Chinese do know that they cannot compete system to system with what the US has in service. They know the US soldier is more experianced and better capable than his PLA counterpart. They know the US officer corp is more capable and that individual initiative on the battlefield is driven to the lowest levels of command. A single sniper team or anti tank rocket team can hold up an advance for hours if the advancing units are affraid to act without orders from higher command. The Chinese are aware of these things and thats why they have not made a move toward anything outside their borders. If you study the PLA you will see that it is large but its vast numbers are not organized and designed for offensive operations. They are designed to maintain INTERNAL security. The Chinese are not looking to make military trouble for a long time because they know their shortcomings better than AboveTop Secret.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by yuppa

Originally posted by Donkey_Dean
reply to post by TheLegend
 


The US pays $500 for a simple wood handled claw hammer! Our spending does not equate to military might! You can count on the tech gap closing over night as well!


You seen independence day? You know then why its 500 dollars for a hammer. Black projects that are off the books get their funding that way. Its one of the main lines they wanted cut from the movie because it is how they do get funding.


Thats not true I knew a guy who ran an Army navy supply and he sold hammers for $500.00! He kept the cash man!



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 07:55 PM
link   
If war with China ever happened we would win unless China's hiding something really powerful. Most of their tech is outdated and even if they went nuclear (neither US or China would do this under sensible leadership) they have far fewer actual warheads (240 total vs. 2100 active for US:
en.wikipedia.org...

And only 50 or so can actually be delivered relatively easily via ICBMs (the US is over 6000 km away at the shortest distance): en.wikipedia.org...

US has far fewer soldiers, but better technology like drones, advanced stealth tech, ships and more sophisticated armor and weapons for foot soldiers.

Of course, a war would never happen unless the rest of the world has a damn good reason to shut down its two biggest exporters and importers for the next couple of decades (if either nation ever recovered). I could see Russia coming up with a plan to take out the US after it's weak from taking on China, but key nations in the EU (France and the UK, most notably) wouldn't stand for it, and would at least make the cost too high for Russia.



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by marinesniper0317
reply to post by la2
 


Let keep it simple, a US Marines perspective:

A: China and Russia have not been at was for 10 years under harsh conditions
- This allowed the US to sharpen its tactics
- Increase logistical efficiency even more so
- Pumped almost a Trillion dollars into defense, new weapons, x37, drones etc...
- Our Military knows what being at war is like, China and Russia do not
B: Logistics, no other country on earth could match us and keep a war going, supply lines etc...
C: US Military is the best trained in the world, because we have been honing our skills for 10 years

IMHO: The forced to fight Chinese Military and Russian Military would tremble if confronted with the US Military in full attack mode...because they have not been at war in the last decade, no experience other than training...

Come on people get real...

Sniper



First problem@ The United States of America can know longer sustain itself like once could. America is economically bankrupt, it owes trillions, and 0% of that debt has actually been paid back yet to the people its owned to!

China, and friends own some of that outstanding debt and without China's been there and helping and giving assistance.The United States would have serious difficulties with paying the salaries of government employees. Is the United States military going to fight a war against China against the background of them being penniless?

Second@ Chinese and the Russian military separately have been fighting Islamic insurgents domestically and outside their borders for many years now/ go on YouTube some of that fighting has been bitter and horrible. So to say their completely unprepared for war, its not logic my friend.

China and Russia have a proud military heritage going back many hundreds of years, an argument could be made when America was still in diapers, and not yet a country, they were fighting someone! Honestly one can't overlook that history of military tradition to do so would be their enemies first mistake.

Now a trillion a year is unreal to spent on defense and does give America an advantage in today's world, But superior military technology alone does not win wars, if that was true. America would have been dominant over everyone else since 1945, and won every war since than. America has not fought a genuine well-equipped professional army since 1945. So to take on China or Russia. I don't see a winner from this only destruction and misery for everyone.
edit on 8-8-2012 by P12SOLD because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
21
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join


ATS Live Radio Presents - Bushcraft On Fire Radio ***On The AIR !!! ***
read more: Bushcraft On Fire Radio : 04/17/2014: Basic Packs, More on Police Encounters and PLANTS!!!!