Us Vs China
reasa
Join Date: 2002-11-10 Member: 8010Members, Constellation
Join Date: 2002-11-10 Member: 8010Members, Constellation
in Discussions
I was thinking of posting this in MonsieurEvils topic but his was about the internet and I don't think he would want it turned into a war talk.
So anyway worse case scenario all out war with china, whos gonna take sides with who? Who well have the advantage? Who would attack first? What tactics would be used? Who would win? Discuss.
So anyway worse case scenario all out war with china, whos gonna take sides with who? Who well have the advantage? Who would attack first? What tactics would be used? Who would win? Discuss.
Comments
I, for one, welcome our new insectile overlords
Mainly because of the retaliation from possibly every nation in the world, and the fact, that it's obvious that the opposition would most likely respond back with nuclear weaponry.
And I hope all sides understand this <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->there wouldn't be winners, only survivers. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Which I <i>think</i> they do.
Make of that what you wish.
Assuming convential war... US wins hands down. China has 1 (non-working) Nuclear Sub. Most of their military is comprised of soviet equipment, although it is the top of the line 1980's stock. They're trying to upgrade, but its hard since they have an inferior economic system. If they open up their markets though, they're pretty much forcing the eventualof communism.
NEM: Yeah, of course they want Nukes becuase our military will rip them a new a-hole. And I don't think China will esalate on Taiwan, since Bush has proven time and time again that he will go to war and honor his word. He said pre/9-11 that the US would stand by Taiwan militarily, as well as economically.
<a href='http://www.dod.mil/news/Jun2000/china06222000.htm' target='_blank'>Annual Report on the Military power of the PRC</a>
<a href='http://www.strategypage.com/articles/pla-air-assets/default.asp' target='_blank'>Chinese Army Aviation</a>
<a href='http://www.strategypage.com/articles/pla-air-assets/1.asp' target='_blank'>Chinese Air Force</a>
<a href='http://www.strategypage.com/articles/pla-air-assets/2.asp' target='_blank'>Chinese Naval aviation</a>
<a href='http://www.hazegray.org/worldnav/china/' target='_blank'>Chinese Navy</a>
<a href='http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/agency/pla-inventory.htm' target='_blank'>Chinese Army</a>
<a href='http://www.cdi.org/products/almanac0102.pdf' target='_blank'>CDI's US (and to a much lesser extent, world) Military Almanac (2002)</a>
<a href='http://www.hazegray.org/worldnav/' target='_blank'>US Navy</a>
That being the case, any combat between the USA and the Peoples Republic is going to be a mostly Naval and Aerial combat, and likely would be a defensive action by the US that did not result in full-scale invasion of the chinese mainland. There might be some small scale amphibious warfare against the mainland, as well as lots of Special Forces nonsense. And of course, if China hit the beach in Taiwan there would certainly be ground combat, mostly of US Marines and Airborne forces allied with the Taiwanese army.
Considering all that, it's pretty likely the US goal would be to simply fight the Chinese to a standstill (which would frankly not be very hard in Naval and Air terms, as the Chinese use mostly used russian and french equipment from the 50's and 60's). Then negotiate a ceasefire, and send the PLA back home to lick its wounds.
Other notes: War with China stopped being a likely scenario as soon as they became dependent on the US for 90% of their foreign trade and manufacturing. Their dictatorship will fall in a predictable way with all communist dictatorships - economic pressure of capitalism undermining governmetn control until the demand for MTV and Levis leads to enough internal dissent to topple the government. While they are pretty hardline like the russkies, they ultimately have a country too big and unwieldy to completely control.
The nuclear issues raised above are not very likely in my opinion.
Dragging this off-topic, I'd like to note that for big parts of western China (the poorer rural regions and the areas in the Himalaya), there's a different possibility: Fundamentalism.
The Peoples Republic likes to view itself as atheistic, but the matter of the fact is that big parts of the rural population did never let go off its traditional believes, which range from the typical 'eastern' religions to strong Muslim convictions, and of course Tibetanian Buddhism. Especially the Muslims start gaining a new identity with the increasing influence of their religion throughout the world.
The government in Bejing is currently working hard on connecting the rural areas to the capitalistic shores, but should they fail, and seeing how big a task they're facing I'm inclined to assume they will, we'll possibly see parts of western China splitting away and forming Muslim fundamentalistic states.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The nuclear issues raised above are not very likely in my opinion. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Neither are they in mine, the study I mentioned could very well be leaked on purpose, but as in the confrontation with the SU, the nukes have to be taken into consideration, especially since China does, as far as I know, not neglect the option of a pre-emptitive nuclear strike.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->NEM: Yeah, of course they want Nukes becuase our military will rip them a new a-hole. And I don't think China will esalate on Taiwan, since Bush has proven time and time again that he will go to war and honor his word. He said pre/9-11 that the US would stand by Taiwan militarily, as well as economically.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That was said by the same man who warned North Korea from ever touching nuclear material again, right?
It's like you need the scale of 100 to wipe out a country. US has 1020320430 and China has 23298.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
30 nukes is not enough to make it past our pacific wall, and did anyone see our new anti-nuke plane that uses a laser?
is the so-called american "goldeneye" still in development or it is actually protecting our country right now?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
30 nukes is not enough to make it past our pacific wall, and did anyone see our new anti-nuke plane that uses a laser? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
sources plz
and even if one nuclear weapon get's past, thats still massive disrruption of electronic comunications, and a generall state of disorder...
China's sabre rattling is politics. It wants Taiwan to join the mainland and one of the important functions of the SEZ system is to showcase Taiwan how its administration could be handled if it were to join China - autonomous state with special freedoms. If Taiwan doesn't go for the deal, all China is going to do about it, is rattle its sabre a bit more. The real "barrel of gunpowder" of the Far East is North Korea which by my prediction, will ignite in some way during the next five years. Hopefully it ignites as an internal conflict, not as an international one.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
30 nukes is not enough to make it past our pacific wall, and did anyone see our new anti-nuke plane that uses a laser? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You mean the Boeing?
Well, honestly, all that is toys. SDI and the precessors have until now never reached enough precision to destroy more than one third of the attacking targets (even with the balantly too low number of 30 nukes, that would mean 20 major American cities becoming plasma). Not to mention that until today, there is <i>no</i> working defense<i>plan</i> against rockets with multiple warheads.
The fact remains - the best defense against nukes is, was, and will always be diplomacy.
Ehhhh, not exactly sure how applicable that is. Ignoring the fact that it is designed to shoot at low-altitudes, not against nuclear ICBM's, and on a battlefield, it *did* hit its targets. How many 'friendly' incoming ballistic missiles do you see coming down over Los Angeles?
<!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Your logical extrapolation is frankly bizarre. Not being insulting, just trying to wrap my brain around these weird posts...
Hence, all the missile sheild serves to do is annoy China. The world has operated fine under deterrance stratagy and the world as a whole would like to see it continue, seeing as nuclear weapons are a reality and there seems to be no better solution. China will make more missiles and more bombs to ensure that they could respond to a US nuclear attack. Starting off a new cold war in the name of fighting terrorism strikes me as ill-advised and extreamly short-sighted.
do we have an american "goldeneye"?
stay off the movies
1st. Goldeneye was a high-air nuclear blast to create a EMP (electromagnetic pulse) to disrupt electrial equipment. It has limited use as a defensive weapon, unless you've already been invaded.
2nd. I know one of the guys that wrote some of the orignal code for the patriot system (actually I'm related to him) and he rates the system as.....not too great. It, and the seaborne Aegis system are designed to stop conventional missiles, not ICBMs.
The big differences between the 2 are: Speed, and altitude.
Convential explosive missiles are launched close to their target, and don't actually fly that high (some are designed to fly low to reduce the chance of detection, then "pop up" to attack). Although they are fast, they're generally not much faster than a quick fighter plane. These are the sort that the patriot is designed to intercept. Unfortunately this means the system has trouble differentiating from low-level fighters, and inbound missiles.
ICBMs are <i>intercontinental</i>. They almost skim the earth's atmosphere (which is why "star wars" was proposed). So they are only interceptable by systems like the patriot at launch, and in the final stages of attack. ICBMs are designed to be quick. they have massive motors to reach near-orbit, then gravity, and these self-same motors power them down. The net result is an inbound thats VERY fast. Not only would it be very difficult for the patriot to track them, the timing on the proximity fuse of the interception missiles mean that the ICBM would be past the blast radius too quickly for a kill.
Military faction, please feel free to pick me up if I'm spouting nonsense.....
With a operational missile defense system, MAD will become a thing in the past , at least to US. The US of A will then have the absolute power to use nuclear weapons on another country without any fear of retaliation. In short, America will have the ultimate trump card in the game of international "diplomacy".
America will not use any form of WMD as of now unless it is attacked with WMD first. I doubt any country in the world will want to risk a nuclear war with the US and its fleet of nuclear-subs that is capable of launching 2nd strike. Not even China.
Any military conflict between China and US in the near future will remain strictly conventional unless:
1. China deploys WMD.
2. The US ABM shield becomes a reality.
Having ruled out the use of nuclear weapon, it is clear that China does not possess the advanced military technology that US has. Not now any way.
If a conventional war is to take place, my bet is on America.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Can this be made clear? We are not usesing the patriot system to defend our coasts, the patriot works best at shooting down scuds, not incomeing nukes. We have a completely differnt system for coastal defence, a much more depedable one then the patriot. I'll look for some more info about it.
heres a good read <a href='http://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/nmd/' target='_blank'>http://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/nmd/</a>
this flash by the BBC is great I advise you all to watch it <a href='http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/americas/2001/us_missile_defence/flash.stm' target='_blank'>http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in...fence/flash.stm</a>
Dr. Suredeath was asking why the system couldn't stop a ICBM...