"China thinks it can defeat America in battle"

[Orignal Earl]

No one is advocating invading or occupying China, even in the event of a war. As someone mentioned earlier, you wipe out their Air Force, Navy, and military bases using air and naval power and then just blockade them.

That's a HUGE border you got to cover, are you sure America has the man power for that?

 

[Scotteq]

We are playing all other countries sit back

Oh... serious answer?

The real question, to my mind, is Political: Would the USA actually step up to that plate? Hard to answer, given the unending stream of feckless clowns we've had running the country for the last couple decades...


Navy to Navy - I sincerely doubt the Chines Navy could beat the US Navy, even with heavy support from land based aircraft and missiles. We'd likely take losses, but ultimately China's ships would be permanently submersible... And I do believe in such a situation, and as a matter of course (We) would obliterate China's port facilities as part of the effort to cripple support for warships. An economic loss which (a) China would never be willing to endure and (b) a feat China could not duplicate without resorting to ICBM nukes. Given the scenario we have here is Conventional, then.... Loss for China.

With regards to a land war: I seriously doubt the US would have the stomach to even make the attempt. China's Army number in the millions (wiki says 2.2 Mio, with up to another 1.5Mio in the Reserves), and a population well over a billion. We have about one million total. 3 to 1 in their favor, home advantage, and manufacturing capabilities well beyond our own. We'd have to be morons to even try.

 

[Orignal Earl]

Oh... serious answer?

The real question, to my mind, is Political: Would the USA actually step up to that plate? Hard to answer, given the unending stream of feckless clowns we've had running the country for the last couple decades...


Navy to Navy - I sincerely doubt the Chines Navy could beat the US Navy, even with heavy support from land based aircraft and missiles. We'd likely take losses, but ultimately China's ships would be permanently submersible... And I do believe in such a situation, and as a matter of course (We) would obliterate China's port facilities as part of the effort to cripple support for warships. An economic loss which (a) China would never be willing to endure and (b) a feat China could not duplicate without resorting to ICBM nukes. Given the scenario we have here is Conventional, then.... Loss for China.

With regards to a land war: I seriously doubt the US would have the stomach to even make the attempt. China's Army number in the millions (wiki says 2.2 Mio, with up to another 1.5Mio in the Reserves), and a population well over a billion. We have about one million total. 3 to 1 in their favor, home advantage, and manufacturing capabilities well beyond our own. We'd have to be morons to even try.

Navy to Navy, yes US wins
Land war- I was wondering the same as you, but I think they all got wiped out from US air and Naval assets and all the advanced weaponry too in Indy's hypothetical

 

[CLite]

It'd be pretty awesome if China did not bully it's neighbors and we greatly reduced our military budget and countries started competing with each-other in producing useful goods instead of depending on wars and developing tools with which to slaughter mankind for economic stimulation.

All of that aside, we're pretty damn good at halting aggressive countries (see gulf war part 1). Stopping China from invading countries it's not connected to via land would be jokingly easy. On the other hand invading and trying to control China would be an abject failure, as demonstrated by every one of our failed attempts to nation build.

 

[kage69]

I have no idea
How many Chinese are killed when you blow the dam?

edit- In this hypothetical war, is China not doing any damage to the US while it's going on too?

Of course not, I'm sure China will land a blow here and there among assets of American, Japanese, Taiwanese maybe Australian origin, who knows? As you say, a hypothetical, merely thrown out into the tally of China's venerable spots in the (hopefully) unlikely event they are foolish enough to try and fight dirty and take the war beyond the scope of being Taiwan's would-be conqueror.

If that dam, and I guess some of the others, on the Jinsha especially, lost one of it's main stages the cascading blender of death that rolls down and over other dams would be catastrophic. The death toll within first 24hours would likely be in the tens to hundreds of millions. They have so many dams and communities stacked so close together, which along with China's awesome history on industrial regulation means the resulting washout and stagnant aftermath would probably be one of histories worst/costliest attacks in the history of organized warfare. The drain on resources and loss of production would both be enormous, to say nothing of the death toll, which yes, unfortunately would be largely civilian. All the factories, the open mines, the landfills, the bodies mixed in with it all...

Like I said, dirty. And without splitting any atoms mind you.

May things never get that desperate.

 

[Scotteq]

Navy to Navy, yes US wins
Land war- I was wondering the same as you, but I think they all got wiped out from US air and Naval assets and all the advanced weaponry too in Indy's hypothetical

China's weaponry is nearly as (just as, in some cases) advanced as that possessed by the USA. So I tend to weight that aspect closer to parity, perhaps, than many people would. I could be wrong, but IMHO, the technological advantage we might have in a land war is far outweighed by numbers.

And as far as manpower, it's no contest: We would be fighting at a 3 to 1 disadvantage to start off with. And conventional wisdom says the attackers should have a 4 to one advantage to be reasonably sure of victory. And that disadvantage would only get worse, since a 1.3 Billion population yields far more soldiers than the USA's 300 Million. AND we would have to fight half a world away. AND we have a well documented cultural fear/angst/revulsion against seeing large numbers of our sons coming home in plastic bags.

Hold areas for a while? Sure. But No way would we ultimately win on the ground in China.

 

[Zodiark1593]

Not to mention... *giggle*

....what if *snerk* North Korea attacks from the flanks?!??

BLAAAAAAAHAHAHAHHHAHAHHAHAAHA!!

Blah, North Korea is akin to that damn Chihuahua that just won't shut up, with Russia being the unfortunate owner. Sure, the Chihuahua can bite, but a swift kick will put it into it's place pretty quick.

 

[Jaskalas]

China probably sees what Russia did in Crimea and sees a Taiwan buffet just waiting to happen.

Would we commit acts of war if they already secure the country and depose its government before we arrive? Wouldn't they hold the lives of the people on the island hostage for supply routes? After all I'm assuming the island imports food. Probably depends on imports for all sorts of things. If they take the island hostage, it may not matter that we own the sea.

How would the United States attack Chinese supply ships if 100, 400, 1,000 civilian hostages were held onboard?

 

[Orignal Earl]

Of course not, I'm sure China will land a blow here and there among assets of American, Japanese, Taiwanese maybe Australian origin, who knows? As you say, a hypothetical, merely thrown out into the tally of China's venerable spots in the (hopefully) unlikely event they are foolish enough to try and fight dirty and take the war beyond the scope of being Taiwan's would-be conqueror.

If that damn, and I guess some of the ones, on the Jinsha especially, lost one of it's main stages the cascading blender of death that cascaded down and over other dams would be catastrophic. The death toll within first 24hours would likely be in the tens to hundreds of millions. They have so many dams and communities stacked so close together, which along with China's awesome history on industrial regulation means the resulting washout and stagnant aftermath would probably be one of histories worst/costliest attacks in the history of organized warfare. The drain on resources and loss of production would both be enormous, to say nothing of the death toll, which yes, unfortunately would be largely civilian. All the factories, the open mines, the landfills, the bodies mixed in with it all...

Like I said, dirty. And without splitting any atoms mind you.

May things never get that desperate.

Wait, you moved all your assets in this battle already to the coast of China, why would they waste anything hitting anything else.
You've already left America defenseless too.
You don't think there is any chance of a Chinese sub getting there?
Russians manage to do it

 

[Orignal Earl]

China's weaponry is nearly as (just as, in some cases) advanced as that possessed by the USA. So I tend to weight that aspect closer to parity, perhaps, than many people would. I could be wrong, but IMHO, the technological advantage we might have in a land war is far outweighed by numbers.

And as far as manpower, it's no contest: We would be fighting at a 3 to 1 disadvantage to start off with. And conventional wisdom says the attackers should have a 4 to one advantage to be reasonably sure of victory. And that disadvantage would only get worse, since a 1.3 Billion population yields far more soldiers than the USA's 300 Million. AND we would have to fight half a world away. AND we have a well documented cultural fear/angst/revulsion against seeing large numbers of our sons coming home in plastic bags.

Hold areas for a while? Sure. But No way would we ultimately win on the ground in China.

Agreed

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Navy to Navy, yes US wins
Land war- I was wondering the same as you, but I think they all got wiped out from US air and Naval assets and all the advanced weaponry too in Indy's hypothetical

You're not getting it. No land war. The US Navy and the USAF take out China's Navy and AF and the Navy blockades the country. Why would we invade China? It makes no sense. We could sit off the coast and launch cruise missiles all day.

Disagree with the "their weaponry is close to ours technologically" as well.

 

[kage69]

Wait, you moved all your assets in this battle already to the coast of China, why would they waste anything hitting anything else.
You've already left America defenseless too.
You don't think there is any chance of a Chinese sub getting there?
Russians manage to do it

What are you talking about? Where exactly did I mention anything about what I did with "my assets" in this battle?

Are you really trying to take over my hypothetical?


lol oh Earl....

 

[Orignal Earl]

What are you talking about? Where exactly did I mention anything about what I did with "my assets" in this battle?

Are you really trying to take over my hypothetical?

Sorry about that.
I guess there's too many hypothetical wars going on

lol oh Earl....

Nice..most people don't know the rignal is silent

 

[Orignal Earl]

You're not getting it. No land war. The US Navy and the USAF take out China's Navy and AF and the Navy blockades the country. Why would we invade China? It makes no sense. We could sit off the coast and launch cruise missiles all day.

Disagree with the "their weaponry is close to ours technologically" as well.

That sounds like the beginning of the Iraq war.
You could launch cruise missiles all day for sure.
Not sure how long it would take till China surrenders though

 

[HTFOff]

The monthly china vs. america thread. :hmm:

China doesn't want war with a superpower. It only cares for $$ and resources, really. Oh - and pushing around island nations..and buddhas.

 

[LegendKiller]

I do not even see that happening.

The united states government will take no action against china, nothing, zilch, zero, nada.

China has us by the balls.

We can not take action against china without putting our whole economy at risk.

And they can't take any action without us utterly destroying their economy, infrastructure, and political system within a day or two.

 

[LegendKiller]

If we do not import chinese products, russia and europe will.

Do you realize if china cut us off we would reset maybe 100 years? No motors, no replacement car or truck parts, no wheel bearings, no tools, no clothes,,, nothing.

Replaced wheel bearings on your car lately? Done a brake job? Chances are all those parts were made in china.

It would take us decades to rebuild the factories lost to free trade. We do not even have to tools to start rebuilding.

Russia and China have already bought as many goods as they want/can. Supply and demand curve dictates that if they have 20-30% less demand and the same supply they would need to drop prices. Since Europe has *far* more protections in place for domestic industry that would fail.

China can't afford to have 20% of their demand economy disappear overnight. Their entire bubble would collapse.

 

[LegendKiller]

China's weaponry is nearly as (just as, in some cases) advanced as that possessed by the USA. So I tend to weight that aspect closer to parity, perhaps, than many people would. I could be wrong, but IMHO, the technological advantage we might have in a land war is far outweighed by numbers.

And as far as manpower, it's no contest: We would be fighting at a 3 to 1 disadvantage to start off with. And conventional wisdom says the attackers should have a 4 to one advantage to be reasonably sure of victory. And that disadvantage would only get worse, since a 1.3 Billion population yields far more soldiers than the USA's 300 Million. AND we would have to fight half a world away. AND we have a well documented cultural fear/angst/revulsion against seeing large numbers of our sons coming home in plastic bags.

Hold areas for a while? Sure. But No way would we ultimately win on the ground in China.

What parts of China's military is on-par with the US?

They don't have AEGIS or an equiv.

They don't have a real 5th gen stealth fighter. Their canard equipped POS has russian made engines and has a massive radar sig.

They don't have nearly the same level of anti-missile.

They don't have the quiet nuke subs, their diesels are OK, but still pretty noisy comparatively speaking.

They don't have advanced systems like JSOW and such.

So really, what areas are there?

If we take out their sub hunters, we could get the SSGNs in and really rip shit up.

 

[Engineer]

I don't know about battle but they are winning the war...and it's not the military of either country that's involved in the war I'm talking about.

They keep winning that war, at some point, they will be able to win the other one.

 

[LegendKiller]

I don't know about battle but they are winning the war...and it's not the military of either country that's involved in the war I'm talking about.

They keep winning that war, at some point, they will be able to win the other one.

Meh, I don't really think they are winning it. I work with, or talk to, some of the best economists in the world and they pretty much all agree that any economic report coming out of China is at least 50% bullshit, and it's not like they release the data so you can pour through it and analyze whether it is bullshit, it's a complete black box. That tells you volumes about the accuracy of their reports.

 

[Karl Agathon]

What parts of China's military is on-par with the US?

They don't have AEGIS or an equiv.

They don't have a real 5th gen stealth fighter. Their canard equipped POS has russian made engines and has a massive radar sig.

They don't have nearly the same level of anti-missile.

They don't have the quiet nuke subs, their diesels are OK, but still pretty noisy comparatively speaking.

They don't have advanced systems like JSOW and such.

So really, what areas are there?

If we take out their sub hunters, we could get the SSGNs in and really rip shit up.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Orignal Earl]

They don't have the quiet nuke subs, their diesels are OK, but still pretty noisy comparatively speaking.

Yes they do?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People's_Liberation_Army_Navy_Submarine_Force

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_094_submarine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_092_submarine

 

[Orignal Earl]

They don't have AEGIS or an equiv.

To counter these defense systems, countries such as Russia are developing or deploying very low-flying missiles (about five meters above sea level) that slowly cruise at a very low level to within a short range of their target and then, at the point when radar detection becomes inevitable, initiate a supersonic, high-agility sprint (potentially with anti-aircraft missile detection and evasion) to close the terminal distance. Missiles, such as the SS-N-27 Sizzler, that incorporate this sort of threat modality are regarded by U.S. Navy analysts as potentially being able to penetrate the U.S. Navy's defensive systems.[4]

Recent years have seen a growing amount of attention being paid to the possibility of ballistic missiles being re-purposed or designed for an anti-ship role. Speculation has focused on the development of such missiles for use by China's People's Liberation Army Navy. Such an anti-ship ballistic missile would approach its target extremely rapidly, making it very difficult to intercept

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-ship_missile#Threat_posed

 

[Fenixgoon]

intervention in Taiwan is not the same as winning an all-out war.

with cyberwarfare and anti-ship ballistic missiles, china may very well have the ability to hold us off.

now that being said, i have no idea what countermeasures the US has against these threats, so the military may simply not worry about it as much as the rest of us do.

 

[LegendKiller]

Yes they do?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People's_Liberation_Army_Navy_Submarine_Force

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_094_submarine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_092_submarine

ROFL - the 095 is reported to be about as loud as a 688 or maybe an i688 but nowhere near as quiet as the Virginia. Apparently their 093s didn't work too well. As with many things made in China, looks good on paper, ends up being shit in actual use.