"The US cannot win a war against China"

.

reply to post by Sablicious


There will never be war between USA and China. There might be conflicts but there will NEVER be a war (not in our lifetime). If the USA even lasts that long. There have been talks of war for decades about China vs USA or USA vs China/Russia. You all better hope and pray to whatever gods you believe in that there will never be war, because it would defiantly mean the end of the world.

War with China? Are you freakin kidding me? What side would Walmart be on? How about the other corporate slimey little sh$ts that have sold out the American worker, closed shop, turned American cities and towns into the land that mad max forgot and screwed to China so that they could rape the environment with impunity and exploit the crap out of the Chinese worker? I have an idea, why don't we American workers and Chinese workers and all the other workers around the world realize who the real enemy is and get rid of them??? No I'm not advocating violence, just make them clean the toilettes or something, something that involves NO authority ??

8

Originally posted by DrWh0
.

Profound statement. I second it and make a motion that it is carried over until Jamie Dimon stops cross-dressing.

reply to post by eywadevotee

Chinese will not choose surrender.

Everyone said the same thing about Japan...look what happened.

reply to post by Gorman91


You make a very good point about the Dark Ages having produced worthwhile things. It went for quite a period and wasn't simply devoid of activity. However, that's the ultimate making of Lemonade from lemons and starting with pretty rank ones at that. You must admit.

I'll definitely say I don't believe collapse is the end of anything. When the Wall fell, some of those nations did collapse with that last bit removed and nations like Hungary just kinda stayed flat for economy by what I've read. Most recovered though. So will we. How long it takes...and how painful it is, becomes the main question. Is the pain years or generations?

I'm hoping it's not all past the point of changing which way that goes. War with China or any new MAJOR war makes all those decisions for us, I believe.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Probably a generation or two. We'll get back by high tech production.

In all likelihood, the year 2050 is a world run by China, produced by America, powered by Europe, and fed by South America.

Originally posted by TKDRL
Depends..... If anyone tries to invade us now? They would be defeated easily. Wait a few more years, maybe liberals will have won, and got rid of our individual right to have fire arms.

LIBERALs is a Mind Control NLP anchor word by the FOX NEWS silent weapon 4 quiet war platform.

Besides....id rather use clubs to blugeon with and swords to slice and dice the enemy when that day comes...purge all the rage properly.
Besides... Firearms are so cowardly.

Originally posted by purplemer

Originally posted by TKDRL
Depends..... If anyone tries to invade us now? They would be defeated easily. Wait a few more years, maybe liberals will have won, and got rid of our individual right to have fire arms.

I dont how Americans think they can defend themselves against a trained military with hand weapons..

The element of surprise, we still have militia's in the USA. There would be hundreds of ambushes all throughout the country....I mean dude look at Afghanistan how they ambush americans. You think were not capable of that with thousands of guns in our country..wake up. They can't liberate us without putting boots on the ground, if they could even make it across the ocean before we sank every ship. Doesn't china only have like 1 carrier anyways lol.

china owns U, long time... U can make them looks stupid, but they owns U... more west U go, more made in china U will find... question is, ... why people from america are so stupid???.... ok, cos no one give a #h... or... all are stupid ****

nice game, feels real...

reply to post by 0zzymand0s


a) They wouldn't but having the option is great, that is why Afghanistan, Syria and Iran are a nuisance...

b) Mostly by water, that is why China is interested in deep sea ports (for economic expansion and military use)

But any attack initiated by China would start in Taiwan and initially by proxy in South Korea, making the US have to deal with multiple fronts. The US would have to protect his pacific coast. Japan would probably attempt to help Taiwan and get a quick response from China from there on it would be amusing to see how the high tech of the US would be maintained/replaced...

This allied with an vertiginous decline in the purchasing power of the dollar (as China would flood the market with its reserves) fallowed by most everyone...

In Vietnam, for instance, it is claimed the US lost about 60,000 soldiers, while the NVA lost approximately 1.5 million. America and SV did not win that particular war by the historical standards of occupying territory, but the US mission never was to occupy territory, rather it was to seek out and kill as many NVA as possible. Some strategy right?

Anyway, in a war with China, the US will have many of the same problems faced in Vietnam. First, the sheer size of the opposing army. Even if the US could maintain a 10, or more, to 1 kill ratio against Chinese soldiers, they would just keep fielding them, and at some point, America will have no troops to act as reinforcements coming from the US. The main reason that the US could counteract this disadvantage in Vietnam was that we had air superiority. The ability to call in airstrikes and use helicopters to re-supply and evacuate the casualties was extremely important.

In a war with China, not only would they have the numerical advantage, but they also will be able to match us in technology. Maybe the US has more sophisticated weapons systems, but the Chinese have enough advanced technology, and the correct government structure to force laborers to produce equipment and battlefield resources on a large scale, that the US probably could not match them in a LONG TERM war. The key, therefore, would be to hit them early and hit them hard...Before they could field a large army to mount an effective counter-attack.

Their weakness may also lie in their type of government. If you begin this war by bombing government buildings, targeting government officials, you may be able to topple the current regime almost immediately. Their leaders, many of who have held the same position for some time, will not be able to be effectively replaced, especially not on the timescale I am talking about. This would immediately create a threat to the chain of command of the Chinese Army. But fighting an air war, which I am confident the US would win, although may not dominate, putting massive amount of troops on the Chinese mainland is another story.

An air raid larger than anything that has ever been seen before, coupled with an immediate troop invasion by sea on the same massive scale, would likely be the best strategy for giving the US an immediate advantage, which is very important...Without this immediate advantage, not only will any war last much longer, but may go in China's favor. The main thing is that many people will die on both sides. Many more than seen in other wars. I'm almost positive the Chinese would lose countless numbers of troops compared to America, but they will keep replacing them, which the US cannot do indefinitely. Plus, the structure of government in the US will be a disadvantage as well after a while, because unlike China, our politicians will be plagued by public dissent after a while, at least possibly...Of course this depends on the course of the war.

The key to a war like this would be allies as well. If a large military country, say Russia, were on the US side, China would be at a disadvantage strategically, as Russia is to their North, and America would be attacking from a different direction. Then there are the navies. China will have no formidable naval presence in the Atlantic. Australia would side with the US, and would be a great help on the sea. Japan, if not allied with China, would also prove to be a good ally. Japan aligned with China would prove difficult on a grand scale, as we saw the Japanese resolve when they were an empire during WWII.

If the US and its allies could win the war that would erupt in the Pacific, and gain access to the coast of China on every coastline, the cities near the sea would soon fall, offering a large beachead for soldiers if they had not already made landfall. This is all theoretical, and is assuming no one uses nuclear weapons, which I don't think they would initially. But when everything is almost lost, one side will likely use them if they are still able to. This may mean that a better strategy, if war with China were inevitable, for the US to stage a coup in the country. Or at least execute a large black-ops mission to kill or capture as many high-ranking officials as possible. If the US would be able to eliminate the workings of their military, economy, and government, a new, puppet government could be put in place. I don't think the US would want to occupy China on a grand scale, like actually run the country or assimilate it into America or anything. But who knows?

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.

LINK

Makes sense. After Korea and Vietnam, it's quite obvious the US lack that certain je ne sais quoi required to tackle Asian threats in the manner it may some Middle Eastern ones. Unless, of course, they bomb them to kingdom come with nuclear bombs--not really an option in this day and age nor against a threat who has similar weaponry).

So, what say you? Should the US be cosseting their communist 'friends' rather than futilely corralling their expansion? Or is a stick better than a carrot when it comes to the currency manipulating, rare earth element monopolising, human rights abusing Chinese?

At least China is honest about it's human rights abuse's, How many innocent middle eastern people have been murdered as a result of American collateral damage now? not to mention things within their own borders?

Hell, virtually every nation has a string of human rights abuse's to their name, My own nation has long list.
Pot calling the kettle black.

Aussie man is plonking, but also right, much of what China produces is from western patents agreements, Fenders, (guitars, also made elsewhere) Briggs and Stratton engines, ( lawnmowers) that's the agreement side. Trade, and jobs lost to the US in those cases. China also makes copy everything, including vehicles, BMW's, Cadillac's almost identical, sometimes with only the name changed slightly and there is absolutely no chance of that country being brought to book in that area. The situation is quite crazy really, this is obstensibly a socialist country that behaves in a capitalist manner in its production, against capitalist countries that lose out to them in jobs and revenue, and yes they are selling it back to those capitalist countries, AKA you and me. There may or may not be anything particularly wrong with what they sell either, only standards will out that, and nobody knows if there was never a nod or a wink from the original producers in the first place, just a very low chance though. Just don't buy it when your own part of the world is crumbling, buy at home..if you can. Forget about wars.

The same Chinese government that the US has shipped thousands of American jobs to for cheap labor? They aren't friends? Could have fooled me.

reply to post by JiggyPotamus


It's interesting but too puritan. You're forgetting the 3 million Koreans in Manchuria, and the fact that most of China is just farmers....much like Russia's soldiers in WW2.

You may recall the rumored Russian war cry "One Man has the rifle, the next man has the bullets..."

With the revolts as a result of widespread joblessness from no more American consumerism, and the Korean insurgency, you're looking at a incapacitated government. Oh it can still fight, for years even, but it cannot win. But don't assume that means America can win. For the Russians, the winter is what ultimately got the Germans. For America, what would ultimatly get them is the sheer volume of lawlessness and chaos of a billion people without a government.

No government, no matter how united, can keep 1.35 billion people under control in war time....especially when most of them are slaves.

reply to post by Raivan31


You're sort of smearing that. There are probably equal numbers of cases hidden from the media as there are for both sides shown.

And only 100,000 people have died in Iraq. In China, millions die quite often, only to be replaced by millions more.


The great tragedy in all this is numbers. China could literally cut off most of its population and operate on just 200,000,000, and still be able to defend itself for a prolonged period of time. The other BILLION people are nothing more and nothing less than cannon fodder.

To quote Mao, "Let 400 million Chinese die and 300 million will be left"

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.

LINK

Makes sense. After Korea and Vietnam, it's quite obvious the US lack that certain je ne sais quoi required to tackle Asian threats in the manner it may some Middle Eastern ones. Unless, of course, they bomb them to kingdom come with nuclear bombs--not really an option in this day and age nor against a threat who has similar weaponry).

So, what say you? Should the US be cosseting their communist 'friends' rather than futilely corralling their expansion? Or is a stick better than a carrot when it comes to the currency manipulating, rare earth element monopolising, human rights abusing Chinese?

...and in other news, scientists made an announcement today that they have discovered that water is wet.

Seriously....we have haven't won even a mediocre-sized armed conflict in 67 years. We have watched the likes of vietnam, n. korea, iraq, and afghanistan simply hand us our own asses time and time again.

...is there honestly even a single person in this country that thinks we could win a war with against an opponent who actually has electricity? Win a war against China??

We seem to have forgotten that in order to "win" a war you must do more than simply blow sh^t up.

Originally posted by ZakOlongapo
china owns U, long time... U can make them looks stupid, but they owns U... more west U go, more made in china U will find... question is, ... why people from america are so stupid???.... ok, cos no one give a #h... or... all are stupid ****

nice game, feels real...

edit on 6-8-2012 by ZakOlongapo because: (no reason given)

Are you seriously asking why people are stupid when you can't even talk right? My 5 year old can talk and type better than you ever could...so tell me why are americans so stupid? **cos amerikn's r 2oo stoopid???**