China Pulls Almost Even With 1930's Japan

[ichy]

To be quite frankly, carrier aren't too useful to them when they have ICBMs that can deliver nuke payload to every South Asian country.

Just because you have nukes doesn't mean you want to use them in a military conflict!

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers#Chapter_5

There can be circumstances when it's just as foolish to hit an enemy city with an H-bomb as it would be to spank a baby with an axe. War is not violence and killing, pure and simple; war is controlled violence, for a purpose. The purpose of war is to support your government's decisions by force. The purpose is never to kill the enemy just to be killing him...but to make him do what you want to do. Not killing...but controlled and purposeful violence.

 

[JEDIYoda]

The idea of China invading the United States is the most absurd thing I have ever heard.

sounds like something Anarchist420 would say...........China invading the United States

 

[Texashiker]

You say that, but you really have no idea what you're talking about. Texashiker is probably the closest, would anyone actually stand up and fight? Or would we just be like "Hurry up and get it over with, we need to get back to watching American Idol?"

Thank you.

My opinion on the issue, the American people have grown fat and lazy. As long as nothing disrupts the flow of cheap food and entertainment, everything will be fine.

However, if we compare the US today to where Rome was, I see some similarities.

China could invade Washington DC, overthrow the US government, and I doubt the majority of people would care.

 

[werepossum]

Yup and more experience with naval warfare. Japanese Navy demolished Russia Navy in 1905 at the Battle of Tsushima.

I believe the Japanese had the strongest Navy in the world during the 1930s, being well ahead in carrier strength. We originally ranked them third behind Great Britain and then ourselves, but Pearl Harbor laid bare the value of battleships in the era of the carrier.

 

[Svnla]

I believe the Japanese had the strongest Navy in the world during the 1930s, being well ahead in carrier strength. We originally ranked them third behind Great Britain and then ourselves, but Pearl Harbor laid bare the value of battleships in the era of the carrier.

While Japan military force is not fearsome as it once was, it is still consider as one of the strongest in Asia, especially its navy force, in term of competency and professionalism.

 

[Anarchist420]

My basic point was that the tech means very little in the grand scheme of things and that the u.s. govt is a modern day Roman empire... The supreme legislation binding America today is not the same as it was at its founding. It then changed again in 1781. Then in 1789 a true coup d'tat was completed. Then in 1865, an illegal document was amended illegally. John Marshall's ruling was then overturned by a court just like his own... we had more activist judges. The point is the Federalists wanted activists as judges to bind America for as long as possible... and that is now coming to an end and now someone else even worse is probably going to bind the people if we don't lose this nationalism voluntarily. Even though it would be hard to conquer America completely, fewer and fewer people get to remain alive and healthy the longer it takes for it to collapse.

Anyway, Judges must be activist. Buck v Virginia is a prime example of how centralizaiton of power cant protect liberty. I mean, when has it restrained some of the States enough to make the bloodshed that was required to ratify the 14th amendment worthwhile when the sterilization legislation was in effect for more than 2 decades in some States.

All of that said, all super powers collapse due to their unsustainability and a sizable portion of us are going to get killed or die due to the upcoming hot war... probably half or maybe more and it will all fucking be due to our very own govt.

 

[K1052]

I believe the Japanese had the strongest Navy in the world during the 1930s, being well ahead in carrier strength. We originally ranked them third behind Great Britain and then ourselves, but Pearl Harbor laid bare the value of battleships in the era of the carrier.

Actually that would be the Battle of Taranto over a year earlier when the Brits sank half the Italian Navy's capital ships with a few biplanes. Few people were really paying real attention to the implications however. Even the Japanese were still enamored with battleships right until the war broke out.

 

[Karl Agathon]

The idea of China invading the United States is the most absurd thing I have ever heard.

Their navy would be obliterated before it got anywhere close to the American mainland. Not to mention the fact that their navy isnt anywhere close to American power projection blue water capabilities. Plus if it ever came to that, most likely an SSBN would park right off the coast of mainland China for some World War III in a can action. A nation with a massive nuclear arsonal will never be invaded. This isnt Red Dawn or Homefront.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Give it another decade, and china will be a world military power.

Currently they are a economic powerhouse. With free trade, we have given china all of the technology it needs to match the US in military might.

It will be interesting to see how much China wants to invest in a military. They might decide that they don't have a current need to prepare for war and might instead invest the bounty in further economic and infrastructure investment (in contrast to a certain other nation that enjoys throwing money away on foreign conflicts for no gain or benefit).

 

[WhipperSnapper]

The idea of China invading the United States is the most absurd thing I have ever heard.

It would be some sort of a situation, perhaps 40 years from now, where the U.S. has become the third world nation and where China has the most modern weapons, such as a nuclear missile shield and space-based laser death ray of doom, etc.

 

[OCGuy]

Jesus Christ the average age in this thread has to be near the average IQ as well.

There is no "land war" with China. MAD. Look it up. Ours are more accurate, theirs are bigger, just like Russia.

 

[ichy]

Actually that would be the Battle of Taranto over a year earlier when the Brits sank half the Italian Navy's capital ships with a few biplanes. Few people were really paying real attention to the implications however. Even the Japanese were still enamored with battleships right until the war broke out.

Sinking a battleship that was moored in a harbor was one thing, sinking one that as maneuvering on the open ocean was quite another. Even though the Brits were the ones who pulled off Taranto they didn't realize how vulnerable their ships were at sea until the Prince of Wales and Repulse were sunk.

 

[Sephire]

China's Navy wont even get a mile off the port before they get obliterated. Assuming there is already a state of war. US will have the entire coastline pegged.

 

[Zargon]

so much lulz

 

[K1052]

Sinking a battleship that was moored in a harbor was one thing, sinking one that as maneuvering on the open ocean was quite another. Even though the Brits were the ones who pulled off Taranto they didn't realize how vulnerable their ships were at sea until the Prince of Wales and Repulse were sunk.

I think the British really knew better since the Indomitable or Hermes was supposed to go with Force Z in the first place. Indomitable ran aground in the Caribbean delaying her transit and Hermes was considered to slow (5 knots less than Repulse) and would handicap them tactically.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Their navy would be obliterated before it got anywhere close to the American mainland. Not to mention the fact that their navy isnt anywhere close to American power projection blue water capabilities. Plus if it ever came to that, most likely an SSBN would park right off the coast of mainland China for some World War III in a can action. A nation with a massive nuclear arsonal will never be invaded. This isnt Red Dawn or Homefront.

The uninvited guest: Chinese sub pops up in middle of U.S. Navy exercise, leaving military chiefs red-faced

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ercise-leaving-military-chiefs-red-faced.html

One Nato figure said the effect was "as big a shock as the Russians launching Sputnik" - a reference to the Soviet Union's first orbiting satellite in 1957 which marked the start of the space age.

 

[sm625]

China doesnt need a navy. It has american elites and their media cohorts, as well as priceless support from corrupt globalist establishments like the CFR and Trilateral commission, not to mention dozens of think tanks and foundations, all hellbent on weakening america in order to fold it into a global system. And you have 100 million dumbed down sheeple who worship all of this despotism and support it fully with their votes for Obomney.

 

[alphatarget1]

Give it another decade, and china will be a world military power.

Currently they are a economic powerhouse. With free trade, we have given china all of the technology it needs to match the US in military might.

I doubt it- military assets take time to design and build.

 

[nyker96]

Just because you have nukes doesn't mean you want to use them in a military conflict!

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Starship_Troopers#Chapter_5

what you said is true, but what I'm saying is that they have alternative deterrences that carrier isn't essential.

 

[Icepick]

Well.....a bunch of rednecks with shotguns wouldn't make a damn bit of difference to a trained army anyway. Irag and Afghanistan had a lot of guns too....look where that got them. Not saying that an invasion of the US would be smart or winnnable by anyone, but the reason for that is not becuase of Jethro, his rebel flag, and his AR15.

This. Anyone who thinks that foreign powers will not invade the U.S. due to private gun ownership is living in fantasy land. What good is a bolt action rifle or a shotgun against modern military weapons? Would you really stand there and point your hunting rifle at a platoon of Chinese soldiers marching your way? Well, you could but you'd only get one shot before they lay waste to you.

The main deterrents to an invasion are #1 - overwhelming nuclear power. #2 - overwhelming sea and air power. There isn't another nation on the face of this earth who can compete with our navy. We rule the seas and the seas must be crossed in order to invade us.

 

[Icepick]

Almost.

They now have an aircraft carrier, they just don't have any planes that can actually land on it!

In all seriousness, geography and economics do not favor continued American dominance in the South China Sea in the long term.

China's stretch goal is solely to dominate the south Pacific militarily. This is the reasoning for their recent naval arms race.

As far as them achieving their goal and reaching dominance over us long term - that remains to be seen. I'm not completely sold that they'll ever be able to accomplish that.

 

[bfdd]

US vs China war is stupid it won't happen, neither side has anything to gain.

 

[Thump553]

I don't think Red China is attempting to match us tit for tat in a military arms race. Their goal is to out-think and out-manuver us, and rely primarily on economic diplomacy morphing into economic dependency. They are definately not aping the 1930's Japanese model.

I'm no military expert by a long shot, but aren't aircraft carriers these days pretty much the equilvalent of battleships in WWII? Too expensive, too vulnerable and designed to fight the last war. A main function of aircraft carriers these days is to "show the flag" which could just as easily be accomplished with a training carrier.

 

[Icepick]

I don't think Red China is attempting to match us tit for tat in a military arms race. Their goal is to out-think and out-manuver us, and rely primarily on economic diplomacy morphing into economic dependency. They are definately not aping the 1930's Japanese model.

I'm no military expert by a long shot, but aren't aircraft carriers these days pretty much the equilvalent of battleships in WWII? Too expensive, too vulnerable and designed to fight the last war. A main function of aircraft carriers these days is to "show the flag" which could just as easily be accomplished with a training carrier.

I disagree. They facilitate a mobile airfield from which air power can be projected anywhere it's needed. There is still a place for this capability in the modern armed forces.

 

[Darwin333]

Well.....a bunch of rednecks with shotguns wouldn't make a damn bit of difference to a trained army anyway. Irag and Afghanistan had a lot of guns too....look where that got them. Not saying that an invasion of the US would be smart or winnnable by anyone, but the reason for that is not becuase of Jethro, his rebel flag, and his AR15.

Combined Iraq and Afghanistan have a total of 11% of the United States land mass and roughly the population of California and New York. And you seem to forget how much of a pita just a relative small portion of Iraq was just a few years ago. Think about that on a much larger basis except they would be working with/for the US military.