Who would win the battle - USA vs CHINA

[dragonx]

USA-
cons- Slow manufacture/Lack Lustre Economy

You reckon?
Only have to look at the 2nd world war to see that the USA's production can step up a gear or three when required but as has been said, China's manpower would resist an invasion quite easily but this theoretical war I believe would not be fought with sheer manpower alone.
Mao once said a nuclear war would not defeat China because if you wiped out 100k people, it's only a spec on the whole population or something very similar along those lines.

Hahah thats in the past! Can't you remember the 3 months ago the Us soldiers moaning about having to use banged up old armour on their armoured hummers and small tanks. Rumsfeld said they could only manufacture and fast as they could. They are a shell of their former self.

rubbish the aroouring companies stated "they had capacity to mak plenty more, the problem was willingness to purchase by some bean counter.

ohh yeah and i vote the US

it would take 1-2 days to enforce a US only airspace over china, im a fan of migs but they dont have the same air 2 air systems as teh us.

command and control would be the next to go, anything emiting a radio freg would be gone in the first 5 days (lets be honest in sure the us already has a strike plan for china in place right now).

they would be landing 1 single (excluding special ops) troops in china for a month or 3, they may not even ever invade mainland china. come back and bomb them every once in a while just so they know whos there daddy.

[SurfWagon]

USA-
cons- Slow manufacture/Lack Lustre Economy

You reckon?
Only have to look at the 2nd world war to see that the USA's production can step up a gear or three when required but as has been said, China's manpower would resist an invasion quite easily but this theoretical war I believe would not be fought with sheer manpower alone.
Mao once said a nuclear war would not defeat China because if you wiped out 100k people, it's only a spec on the whole population or something very similar along those lines.

Hahah thats in the past! Can't you remember the 3 months ago the Us soldiers moaning about having to use banged up old armour on their armoured hummers and small tanks. Rumsfeld said they could only manufacture and fast as they could. They are a shell of their former self.

rubbish the aroouring companies stated "they had capacity to mak plenty more, the problem was willingness to purchase by some bean counter.

ohh yeah and i vote the US

it would take 1-2 days to enforce a US only airspace over china, im a fan of migs but they dont have the same air 2 air systems as teh us.

command and control would be the next to go, anything emiting a radio freg would be gone in the first 5 days (lets be honest in sure the us already has a strike plan for china in place right now).

they would be landing 1 single (excluding special ops) troops in china for a month or 3, they may not even ever invade mainland china. come back and bomb them every once in a while just so they know whos there daddy.

You don't know jack , my background originates from China and from the media over there , there is no way the Yanks can enforce China Air Space within 2 days. Look at the surface area of China , it is huge. Iraq is only a pin prick comparison compared to it. It took longer than 2 days to enforce the airspace over Iraq. Get your military facts right.. The Chinese have their own copy of the F16 Fighter called the J10. Do some research under google for Lavi fighter or J10 fighter.

Anyway here's a link:
http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/fighter/j10.asp

Anyway please explain why they lost in Vietnam TrouserFxGT & dragonx? That was against a smaller military force with similar technology to china at that time. The yanks thought that war could be done with in a few months , instead it took almost a decade. In the end they came out tails between legs.


And for those who under estimate the technology of the chinese. 40% of your electronic goods in your household are from china , including the very computer you are using right now.


The only reason you think the chinese are inferior is because the media portray them as a backward country. Their economy infrastructure is the fastest growing in the world. Over 50% of US manufacturing is based in China , so I would think US would think twice before trying to **** with them.

I think your interpretation of china was probably correct in 1965 but now its 2005. They have a Space program , Olympics in 2008 , huge knowledge resources and of course the yanks paying them $$$ for manufacture.

[SurfWagon]

Just think of the US invading Iraq, how long did it take them and how many were killed by a few thousand stubborn ground troops!

Now multiply those by lets say 40million (cant remember the pop of China) as well as the Chinese having more up to date military capabilities.

IMO i would love to see Bush and his powertripping nazi politicians get an asswhipping

Yeah I fully agree. It would be a logistical nightmare to move american forces over to China.


Air Force (470,000 airmen; 2,556 jet fighters; 400 ground attack jets.)
Commander: QIAO Qingchen
Political Commissar: DENG Changyou
Introduction and General Information
Chinese Military Aircrafts
Chinese Military Aviation
Air-borne Force

Publications about Chinese Air Force (from RAND):
China's Air Force Enters the 21st Century
China's Air Force: The Long March to Modernization

Ground Force (Army) (1.9 million men; 14,000 tanks; 14,500 artillery pieces & 453 helicopters)
Introduction and General Information
Ground Force Aviation

Navy (250,000 sailors; 63 submarines; 18 destroyers; 35 frigates)
Commander: General ZHANG Dingfa
Political Commissar: General HU Yanlin
Introduction and General Information
Marine Corps
Naval Aviation

[Mr Revhead]

its the ppl numbers where china has the advantage, and the culture... they will just keep throwing men into it, even if they are just armed with sticks... worked for russia in ww2. the us would have to kill every man woman and child to take over.

dont be fooled, the chinese tech is quite good, good enough to make flying over a dodgy game... it was chinese equipment that gave the yanks a headache over veitnam, and they have improved tenfold since then

[Dr-X]

Man this topics getting way too serious. *yawn*

[Mr Revhead]

was there any need for that post?

[Dr-X]

Was there a need for that one? Or this one?

[SurfWagon]

Was there a need for that one? Or this one?

Your one bro!!!


Its a man's forum around here not a boy's one.

[Mr Revhead]

haha

come on, i dont wanna see this locked!

lets play nice! just like the USA and china!

[zEpHyRiNe]

I think China would wear the good 'ol US of A down purely on numbers, they have an almost endless supply of people to keep topping up the ranks.
Don't really know, don't really care, as long as NZ gets left out of it... and chances are high, no-one really knows were down here, plus a large number of foreign people think we're the little island off the bottom of Australia...

[pc]

I think that the US would win initially. If their goal is to smash the country, they can destroy the infrastructure without landing and "taking" ground. the US really only started loosing troops in Iraq once they landed and started cleaning up.
Vietnam was only the mess that it was because the US weren't equiped/prepared for guerilla warfare.
The real problem will be the oil supplies. China is a massive country (1/6 of the world's population) and is coming out of 3rd world status at an alarming rate, consuming massive resources as they go. There will eventually be war over these resources and we may not have to wait long before we see this war.
I'm picking by 2007 we will be seeing global oil related conflict/problems start.

[Mr Revhead]

actually you'll find that most ppl in the world wont even have heard of NZ
we really dont matter in the big scheme of things

[SurfWagon]

I think that the US would win initially. If their goal is to smash the country, they can destroy the infrastructure without landing and "taking" ground. the US really only started loosing troops in Iraq once they landed and started cleaning up.
Vietnam was only the mess that it was because the US weren't equiped/prepared for guerilla warfare.
The real problem will be the oil supplies. China is a massive country (1/6 of the world's population) and is coming out of 3rd world status at an alarming rate, consuming massive resources as they go. There will eventually be war over these resources and we may not have to wait long before we see this war.
I'm picking by 2007 we will be seeing global oil related conflict/problems start.

You have to realise that USA has huge investment in CHINA. Manufacturing is their biggest advantage. The can probably make a million Ak47s in 1 hour. The Chinese are masters at plagerism. They copy anything that come into their hands , including the US spy plane that crash landed in China back in 2001.

I think its unlikely the Americans will win. They struggled against Vietnam and had trouble with Iraq. Nothing is of ease. They have thousands of air defence missile deployments along the coastal regions. And a few hundy navy patrols on the water with air cover..
The chinese are indeed a sleeping giant. A very different beast from the cold war era.

[TrouserFxGt]

Hey Surfwagon I fully respect China and know their military capabilites quite well. In all fairness I loath America and would love to see them get a pasting but until China completes their current modernisation and procurement programes then the Usa would win in the air and on the sea.

How many of those j-10's and mig 29's are servicable and have both high quality pilots and air-air missles though? How many do you expect will get off the ground without being destroyed?

You say that China is a large country and it certainly is but dont forget that it also has the highest number of neighbours in the world and a few of those support America.

Any way we digress. This discussion is turning into something a bit more complicated.

Any war between China and the Usa would involve more than those two countries and be led by huge buildups on both sides. In this day and age use of infantry on the ground would not be needed if the war was to make a political point or as punishment. If the war was for resources then ground troops all the way however without a top quality and sustainable air force and air defence system then these troops are very vulnerable.

[V8MOFO]

Alot of it would come down to allies.

What about the 1 billion people in europe, they wouldnt just stand by and watch. It would turn into another world war...

[Mr Revhead]

the question was who'd win if usa INVADED china, so thats means ground troops.


i think we can leave the politics out...
as this is a hypothetical question... it doesnt have to make sense

[SurfWagon]

Hey Surfwagon I fully respect China and know their military capabilites quite well. In all fairness I loath America and would love to see them get a pasting but until China completes their current modernisation and procurement programes then the Usa would win in the air and on the sea.

How many of those j-10's and mig 29's are servicable and have both high quality pilots and air-air missles though? How many do you expect will get off the ground without being destroyed?

You say that China is a large country and it certainly is but dont forget that it also has the highest number of neighbours in the world and a few of those support America.

Any way we digress. This discussion is turning into something a bit more complicated.

Any war between China and the Usa would involve more than those two countries and be led by huge buildups on both sides. In this day and age use of infantry on the ground would not be needed if the war was to make a political point or as punishment. If the war was for resources then ground troops all the way however without a top quality and sustainable air force and air defence system then these troops are very vulnerable.

I think it's only the Brits and Aussies are that in the same bed with the yanks. I think its a tough call that many countries support the Americans. It was the UN and EU who didn't support the war in Iraq. It was an unjustified war that killed thousands of civilians. I think the capture of Saddam was the only highlight that Bush can take credit for. Even that , the yanks trained the the Iraq Regime in the early 80's to fight the iranians.

The politics of war are so complicated , the americans are so arrogant that I think it will get the better of them.

[Mr Revhead]

all this anti USA stuff cracks me up.... you ppl beleive the media too much.... 99% of the stuff you see on tv is rubbish, edited and presented in such away to appeal to the hysteria that seems to becoming more and more popular.

all that crap about america killing thousands of children is just that. crap.
saddam killed far far more, and would still be killing them if he could.

fact is not everything can be solved with love and words, at times, force is needed. its time the hippies realised that...


gee iv gone off topic again!

[dragonx]

the question was who'd win if usa INVADED china, so thats means ground troops.


i think we can leave the politics out...
as this is a hypothetical question... it doesnt have to make sense

you take INVADED to mean landing ground troops, i dont believe the Americans would land any troops, its not in there interests, it would be playing into the hands of china. the US will only play the war it can win, which involves total air supremacy and around the clock bombings.
some copies of f16's just are not going to cut the mustard. im a great fan of migs, they r fine planes, there air 2 air weapons r not up to the same standards, the yanks have field tested weapons, and experienced pilots 2 boot. (it got to test all its weapons during the 1st and second iraq wars)

i dont believe china has the ability to strike the continental US with any great force, and maintain it. and it would be costly if they tried, they couldnt reteat once the move had been made.

the yanks learnt a lesson in Vietnam, and wont repeat it.

[Mr Revhead]

dude! read my post again... it doesnt have to make sesne...


and you are underestimating the chinese... they are not the hicks they used to be... theres more to airdefense than planes.... they would be a tough nut to crack....