NationStates Jolt Archive

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2358&ncid=2358&e=1&u=/csm/20050211/ts_csm/olandspat_1

Tensions between China and Japan are (still) rising. They are (even) higher now that Japan has just formally claimed an archipelligo in the pacific, just below Japan. These islands are to be gaurded by the Japanese coast gaurd.

What are the Chinese going to do about it? An attack on Japan will bring in American military might.

Besides, Japan would trounce China with giant-super-robot mecha goodness :rolleyes:


But in all seriousness - how many countries does China now have a gripe with? Taiwan? Tibet? North Korea, and now Japan?

Well, if China attacked Japan, or vise versa, it would probably send the world into another World War. The US backs Japan, but if they attack China, then Australia (might) would step in on the Chinese side, because of alliance with them. Or they may side with the US because of alliance with us, or due to an alliance with both nations, remain nuetral. China out of Desperation, may go to North Korea for help, and get them to launch a(n Nuclear) attack on Japan and/or US forces. Which would cause South Korea to probably attack North Korea. Other nations, through out the world would probably dog pile on the issue and cracks would form, spinning the world into World War 3.

Japan and China fighting would definitely be a conflict on the scale of the World Wars..... my guess, in military terms, even without direct US involvement, the Japanese would sweep the seas of Chinese shipping and bring about an end to their economic miracle for the duration of that conflict. Japan has one of the largest and probably the second or third most effective navy around, an exceedingly powerful air defense system, and a lot more money and technology advantage that is very high.

But it wouldn't stop there. China would push North Korea to side with it and move into South Korea, China might also move into Southeast Asia (against Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia) to deal with the conflicting claims over the Spratley islands. Chinese control over Singapore (which they could do be overland invasion through Indochina) would close off the direct route of oil from the Mideast to Japan and is the only way short of nuclear attack the Chinese could seriously damage Japan.

The US would have to side with Japan due to a military alliance, and Australia and New Zealand would probably sit it out unless the Chinese moved into Southeast Asia although might join in on the Japanese side if China or North Korea moved on South Korea. Japan would instantly recognize Taiwan as independent, and probably the US would too.... something China would have a great reason to fear.

and then we look at the nuclear situation.

The Chinese have a couple hundred medium range missiles with nuclear warheads that can easily reach Japan, as well as South Korea, US bases in Okinawa, and anywhere in Indochina. They also have a couple of dozen ICBMs that can reach the US northeast (including Washington and New York). Now attacking the US directly with nuclear is an excellent way to committ suicide but wars are not waged by logical or sometimes even rational people, and even when carefully thought out, misperceptions and miscalculations can bring disaster too.

Lets all hope the Chinese decide to just yell a lot instead of doing something risky.

Lets all hope the Chinese decide to just yell a lot instead of doing something risky.

HAHAHA! That was funny

But anyways, the Chinese and Japanese have been bickering over claims for a while now, and I remember about 3 or 4 months back, Japan had an unidentified sub in their waters, but they were almost certain it was Chinese. I predict in about 4-5 years, they will be at war again.

USA Britain and South Korea would go up against China!

North Korea will side with China maybe.

The Philippines and Vietnam would probably side with Americans. Vietnam has never lost a conflict with China so that's a plus.

India could also go after China because of Tibet. Tiawan would take that opportunity to declare independence and would receive full recognition by the US since its already at war with the US.

China is screwed.

USA Britain and South Korea would go up against China!

North Korea will side with China maybe.

The Philippines and Vietnam would probably side with Americans. Vietnam has never lost a conflict with China so that's a plus.

India could also go after China because of Tibet. Tiawan would take that opportunity to declare independence and would receive full recognition by the US since its already at war with the US.

China is screwed.

Yeah well don't forget China has by far the largest army in the world, twice as large as the US', and that's just the standing army. Imagine if China calls upon the draft... Let's hope the tensions, if they ever break out into war, stay localized and not expand to engulf the rest of the pacific.

Yeah well don't forget China has by far the largest army in the world, twice as large as the US', and that's just the standing army. Imagine if China calls upon the draft... Let's hope the tensions, if they ever break out into war, stay localized and not expand to engulf the rest of the pacific.

Problem! US has the technology to fight the said army. The army is only as good as the technology it uses.

Top off the fact that other nations would go after China for a variety of reasons. India for Tibet for instence. China also has a very very very bad Human Rights record. Don't think that'll cause other nations to come in against them.

Problem! US has the technology to fight the said army. The army is only as good as the technology it uses.

Top off the fact that other nations would go after China for a variety of reasons. India for Tibet for instence. China also has a very very very bad Human Rights record. Don't think that'll cause other nations to come in against them.

Well, China is advancing rapidly. They've now sent a rocket carrying men into space. That same rocket could also be used to make nuclear missiles. Whilst I think the US and its allies would narrowly win if war did break out, the scale of devstation would be nothing but catastrophic.

It's just a little island... who cares. Blah, politics.

Well, China is advancing rapidly. They've now sent a rocket carrying men into space. That same rocket could also be used to make nuclear missiles. Whilst I think the US and its allies would narrowly win if war did break out, the scale of devstation would be nothing but catastrophic.

China doesn't stand a chance of winning a war. You have the US that is sitting on the most advanced planes, ships, and tanks in the world. Our Navy alone could blockade the Chinese Coastline.

The Army and Marines would take casualties. I won't deny it. However, the Chinese Army is not as well trained as ours. The last time the Chinese fought a war against UN Forces, they lost 1 MILLION troops. We didnt suffer 1 million casualties.

The Naval, Marine and the USAF planes would have total air supiority in a couple of days. Its hard to move when you have full control of the air and able to see what the enemy is going to do.

China knows that it won't have a prayer at winning a war especially if the rest of the Pacific takes them on.

Yeah well don't forget China has by far the largest army in the world, twice as large as the US', and that's just the standing army. Imagine if China calls upon the draft... Let's hope the tensions, if they ever break out into war, stay localized and not expand to engulf the rest of the pacific.

Men wise yes, they have WAY more men than we do. But our technology is a hell of a lot better. We have a far better navy, air force, and our ground equiptment is better, they just outnumber us. We also have stealth technology. And please keep in mind, that at the time Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, he had the 3rd largest army in the world, behind Russia and the US. And look at them now. It took only 100 days of bombing to topple them.

China doesn't stand a chance of winning a war. You have the US that is sitting on the most advanced planes, ships, and tanks in the world. Our Navy alone could blockade the Chinese Coastline.

The Army and Marines would take casualties. I won't deny it. However, the Chinese Army is not as well trained as ours. The last time the Chinese fought a war against UN Forces, they lost 1 MILLION troops. We didnt suffer 1 million casualties.

The Naval, Marine and the USAF planes would have total air supiority in a couple of days. Its hard to move when you have full control of the air and able to see what the enemy is going to do.

China knows that it won't have a prayer at winning a war especially if the rest of the Pacific takes them on.

Not totally true China is quickly devoloping nanotechnology which will make it the most powerful force on earth.

http://crnano.typepad.com/crnblog/2004/09/chinas_ambition.html

Men wise yes, they have WAY more men than we do. But our technology is a hell of a lot better. We have a far better navy, air force, and our ground equiptment is better, they just outnumber us. We also have stealth technology. And please keep in mind, that at the time Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, he had the 3rd largest army in the world, behind Russia and the US. And look at them now. It took only 100 days of bombing to topple them.

I did admit that the US would most probably win against China, but it would still suffer horrendous casualties. China is a whole different beast to Iraq; its industries are advancing rapidly every day and now it is almost as strong as the USSR was at its height, perhaps even stronger. Also, the US right now is still bogged down in Iraq with 150,000 soldiers. If a war with China does break out now, the US will be seriously short of manpower.

And please keep in mind, that at the time Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, he had the 3rd largest army in the world, behind Russia and the US. And look at them now. It took only 100 days of bombing to topple them.
4th or 5th I believe (after China, Russia, US, and maybe North Korea as well). As well, keep in mind that Iraq is still a considerably small nation with a lot of equipment of their own actually being purchased as opposed to being made domestically, not mentioning that they are already in serious debt as a result of the Iran-Iraq war of the 80es. China today is a considerably large nation with a fast-growing economy, not mentioning a large manufacturing capacity. With a ground war, the current manpower of the US Army will still be a large obstacle, especially considering that this particular obstacle is alrewady evident in Iraq (to quote the words of some former American Generals who commented on the war, the number of troops that the American sent will be able to defeat Saddam, but is far from enough to maintain security there).

You're all forgetting China also has Nukes of the same power or close to that the US has, yet nothing has been done about them because the US is too scared to act because it knows that would simply provoke China into war.
That's why the US is going after North Korea; its a much easier target than China is.

4th or 5th I believe (after China, Russia, US, and maybe North Korea as well). As well, keep in mind that Iraq is still a considerably small nation with a lot of equipment of their own actually being purchased as opposed to being made domestically, not mentioning that they are already in serious debt as a result of the Iran-Iraq war of the 80es. China today is a considerably large nation with a fast-growing economy, not mentioning a large manufacturing capacity. With a ground war, the current manpower of the US Army will still be a large obstacle, especially considering that this particular obstacle is alrewady evident in Iraq (to quote the words of some former American Generals who commented on the war, the number of troops that the American sent will be able to defeat Saddam, but is far from enough to maintain security there).

No, it was 3rd. I saw it on a show on Discovery Times Channel, before the outbreak of Operation Iraq Freedom.

Not totally true China is quickly devoloping nanotechnology which will make it the most powerful force on earth.

http://crnano.typepad.com/crnblog/2004/09/chinas_ambition.html

Don't believe that.

China's military budget is only $55 billion, the US has a military budget of $334 billion. China doesn't have the budget to develop weapons greater than America's.

I did admit that the US would most probably win against China, but it would still suffer horrendous casualties. China is a whole different beast to Iraq; its industries are advancing rapidly every day and now it is almost as strong as the USSR was at its height, perhaps even stronger. Also, the US right now is still bogged down in Iraq with 150,000 soldiers. If a war with China does break out now, the US will be seriously short of manpower.

USSR STRONG!!!! LOL!!!! That's a load of crock! They couldn't due much do to WWII! What they pulled was a bluff over the entire free world. Masterfully done!

I've got to find the evidence of this regarding the USSR and their military strength.

You're all forgetting China also has Nukes of the same power or close to that the US has, yet nothing has been done about them because the US is too scared to act because it knows that would simply provoke China into war.
That's why the US is going after North Korea; its a much easier target than China is.

WRONG AGAIN!!!!!!

China won't use their nukes unless provoked. They use the rational man theory and they also believe in MAD (Mutually Assurd Destruction)

No, it was 3rd. I saw it on a show on Discovery Times Channel, before the outbreak of Operation Iraq Freedom.

Your Right! Iraqi military was 3rd largest but we all know that most of them didn't want to fight except for the Iraqi Republican Guard.

Your Right! Iraqi military was 3rd largest but we all know that most of them didn't want to fight except for the Iraqi Republican Guard.

Thats true, thats why it was so easy to get to Baghdad...both times. But now, back to the topic of China and Japan. China wouldnt dare to use nukes against America. Russia would definatlly back us, probaby not militarily, but at least politically and condem the attack.

China wouldn't dare, as a conflict with the US would lead to mutual disaster. Why? Both nations have so heavily invested in the other that a war would be tantamount to economic MAD.

China wouldn't dare, as a conflict with the US would lead to mutual disaster. Why? Both nations have so heavily invested in the other that a war would be tantamount to economic MAD.

And so far, no one is talking about breaking off trade. If they break off trade, watch out.

And so far, no one is talking about breaking off trade. If they break off trade, watch out.

Haha! Yeah, everything says "Made in China" on it. If the US corporations brought all their business back into the US in the case of a war, there would be millions of Chinese left jobbless.

Haha! Yeah, everything says "Made in China" on it. If the US corporations brought all their business back into the US in the case of a war, there would be millions of Chinese left jobbless.

True but if nations break off trade, that is the start of something! Look at what we did prior to WWII with Japan?

Haha! Yeah, everything says "Made in China" on it. If the US corporations brought all their business back into the US in the case of a war, there would be millions of Chinese left jobbless.
And leave Americans with a severe lack of goods, for a while. And Chinese investment in US companies would dissappear...

China should definitely win. But I think with US intervention, it would keep them on the mainland. Just knock out their boats from afar.

But your right about them going South Grays Hill, which would be a big big big big problem. Some countries might just kowtow (bow down) and let them walk through without bothering about the hassle of fighting the 'People's Army'.

Ultimately, If China suddenly has expansionary plans.. It would get very screwy. I doubt they'll resort to nuclear attacks. And practically China is unconquerable because of it's crazy land mass, If US would have to throw practically every single thing at China short of nukes, and it they still would have enough soldiers to launch massive guerrila warfares.

Now another question is.. The overseas Chinese. You practically got them in every country of the World. How faithful are they to the motherChina?

I love how, every time there is a disagreement between two countries in the news, everyone on this forum starts writing scenarios for global nuclear war started by these countries.

Yeah well don't forget China has by far the largest army in the world, twice as large as the US', and that's just the standing army. Imagine if China calls upon the draft... Let's hope the tensions, if they ever break out into war, stay localized and not expand to engulf the rest of the pacific.

Correction: they have the world's largest land army. They have jack squat for a navy. Vietnam and South Korea might be SOL, but Japan and the rest could just sit tight.

Correction: they have the world's largest land army. They have jack squat for a navy. Vietnam and South Korea might be SOL, but Japan and the rest could just sit tight.

South Korea is no slouch either. Their army could withstand it.

As for Vietnam, they'll beat the Chinese back. The Vietnamese has never, I repeat, never lost a war against China.

USA Britain and South Korea would go up against China!

And lose!

Let's just hope it doesn't happen. Islamofascism is enough of a threat; how are we supposed to eliminate fundamentalist psychopathic strains of Islam and fight the world's second most powerful nation?

And lose!

And what do you base that on Stephistan?

I love how, every time there is a disagreement between two countries in the news, everyone on this forum starts writing scenarios for global nuclear war started by these countries.

Me too me too. :) All in good fun.

Let's just hope it doesn't happen. Islamofascism is enough of a threat; how are we supposed to eliminate fundamentalist psychopathic strains of Islam and fight the world's second most powerful nation?

China has a muslim population! Just get them enraged against the Chinese and the terrorists would fight the Chinese too :D

And lose!

You honestly think that SK, the USA, and the UK would lose to China? I really don't think you know what your talking about.

I think it would all be just terribly interesting to see something like this happen. Nothing exiting has happened in the world since 9/11, and I was too sad to care then (sorry) becuase my cat dies the day before. War is interesting.

And what do you base that on Stephistan?

I don't believe China is conquerable. Because of the land mass and the crazy number of people hearing propoganda for the last 50 years and willing to fight and die for their country.

Either than that, the only way to win is to buy China. :D They worship money.

Although not conquerable, but possible to bomb them to the stone ages that they can't be an invading threat no more.

China has a muslim population! Just get them enraged against the Chinese and the terrorists would fight the Chinese too :D
Hmmm...Forge an alliance with China against Islamofascists...Good idea, actually. If the US, UK, and China finally got serious about the War On Terror, it would be over in a month.

I don't believe China is conquerable. Because of the land mass and the crazy number of people hearing propoganda for the last 50 years and willing to fight and die for their country.

Either than that, the only way to win is to buy China. :D They worship money.

Although not conquerable, but possible to bomb them to the stone ages that they can't invade no more.
No one really thinks we can conquer them, unless we draft the US, UK, and SK. But toppling the government would not be impossible.

And what do you base that on Stephistan?

Reality.. all those nations plus Canada and (others I can't recall)went up against N.Korea and couldn't even win. Why? Because China got involved and we pulled out. Look at China's population. They have every thing as far as military goes as the Americans. There is no chance in hell America, the UK and S. Korea could beat China on their own soil. You just don't have the man power.

You want to talk nukes? Yeah, they have lots too. But to most of us, any thing that ends in a Nuclear winter is not a win any way.


Nope, no way, no how could America beat China on their own soil. Might be different if China tried to invade America. I stress might be. But nope, nadda, China would kick any one's ass on their own soil. No question.

Correction: they have the world's largest land army. They have jack squat for a navy. Vietnam and South Korea might be SOL, but Japan and the rest could just sit tight.The Chinese are rapidly expanding and modernizing their navy. Both Japan and the United States are very worried that the US may lose its naval superiority in the Western Pacific, so much so that ships are being moved from the Atlantic.

Hmmm...Forge an alliance with China against Islamofascists...Good idea, actually. If the US, UK, and China finally got serious about the War On Terror, it would be over in a month.

That actually IS a good idea! Go get em Bush! ;)

Reality.. all those nations plus Canada and (others I can't recall)went up against N.Korea and couldn't even win. Why? Because China got involved and we pulled out. Look at China's population. They have every thing as far as military goes as the Americans. There is no chance in hell America, the UK and S. Korea could beat China on their own soil. You just don't have the man power.

You want to talk nukes? Yeah, they have lots too. But to most of us, any thing that ends in a Nuclear winter is not a win any way.


Nope, no way, no how could America beat China on their own soil. Might be different if China tried to invade America. I stress might be. But nope, nadda, China would kick any one's ass on their own soil. No question.
Stephistan, you do realize we WON the Korean war? We didn't pull out because despite what MacArthur thought, our goal was never to go to war againt China. It was to defend S.Korea. It was an issue of political will. And back then, the US, UK, and SK (Especially SK, their military was in shambles during the Korean War) did not enjoy the massive advantage of training and technology they do now. Compare simply the military budgets of respective nations.

Reality.. all those nations plus Canada and (others I can't recall)went up against N.Korea and couldn't even win. Why? Because China got involved and we pulled out. Look at China's population. They have every thing as far as military goes as the Americans. There is no chance in hell America, the UK and S. Korea could beat China on their own soil. You just don't have the man power.

Ok! Your basing everything on MANpower. Your leaving out one particularly important factor. Technology. China doesn't have a technological army. The US, Britain, South Korea, Australia, Spain, and Germany do. The US has the most powerful navy and can choke off China from the sea. The Air Force will be able to establish air superiority. Coupled the ground forces with those of other nations, now you have a technological juggarnaut to deal with. Coupled their navies with ours and China is dead in the water. Air Forces? China won't be able to move their troops without getting bombed and strafed.

As for Canada? What can they bring to the battlefield?

You want to talk nukes? Yeah, they have lots too. But to most of us, any thing that ends in a Nuclear winter is not a win any way.

They won't use them because they also know that if they do, you can kiss every major Chinese city good bye. They don't want to risk that anymore than we do.

Nope, no way, no how could America beat China on their own soil. Might be different if China tried to invade America. I stress might be. But nope, nadda, China would kick any one's ass on their own soil. No question.

I just pointed everything out. Technology, survaliance, air power, sea power, and the high ground, space. China would be in deep trouble if it came to war because they will NOT have the edge that we do.

That actually IS a good idea! Go get em Bush! ;)
The Chinese would especially be a good idea, as they don't care about such things like human rights...
"Some random guy tokd us this village once had a picture of Osama in it. Of course, this means we will raze it to the ground, deport the survivors, and colonize this place."

The Chinese are rapidly expanding and modernizing their navy. Both Japan and the United States are very worried that the US may lose its naval superiority in the Western Pacific, so much so that ships are being moved from the Atlantic.

We have the most advanced navy in the world. And the World's largest too. We can deploy most of our Carrier fleet in a very short amount of time and coupled that with our air forces in the area.... Air Superiority will be achieved in short order.

A shortage of beef and brocoli....and no more egg rolls...daddies not happy, we may have to enslave some if it gets nasty

And the final issue is of mobility. Want to know the big secret on why Taiwan is practically independent? By the time the Chinese military actually GETS there, the political will is gone. On the other hand, US forces have a massive mobility advantage.

I love how, every time there is a disagreement between two countries in the news, everyone on this forum starts writing scenarios ....
Funny scenarios indeed...I wonder if they are all for real...they don really expect real life to be like a RISK-board-game do they?

*wonders what is the average age of RISKscenarios posters*

I hope they keep doing it...its werry entertaining

Mind you, I highly doubt China can be fully conquered. What will probably happen is that allied countries topple the government, and piece by piece restore order and establish democracy. One bit of China at a time.

Funny scenarios indeed...I hope they are kidding...they don really expect real life to be like a RISK-board-game do they?

*wonders what is the average age of RISKscenarios posters*
Hey, I hope it doesn't happen. But it is fun debating the the strategy of it.

Mind you, I highly doubt China can be fully conquered. What will probably happen is that allied countries topple the government, and piece by piece restore order and establish democracy. One bit of China at a time.

Agreed! It won't be conquered but then, sometimes the goal isn't to conquer but to topple the government. That could be the way wars are fought in future wars.

We have the most advanced navy in the world. And the World's largest too. We can deploy most of our Carrier fleet in a very short amount of time and coupled that with our air forces in the area.... Air Superiority will be achieved in short order.Oh, I'm not saying we don't have the advantage now. We certainly do. But they're trying their hardest to catch up. And, assuming they keep spending at the rate they are, they will catch up eventually.

And good luck trying to get the Chinese involved with the War on Terror. They're probably loving this, seeing our troops spread out across the globe, our resources being spent elsewhere.

Hey, I hope it doesn't happen. But it is fun debating the the strategy of it.

I'm sure that the Pentagon would appreciate it. I'm sure they have people seeing what people like us come up with for them to wargame!

Hey, I hope it doesn't happen. But it is fun debating the the strategy of it.
It is good fun
almost like an hibrid of RP and RL strategy...

Besides, Japan would trounce China with giant-super-robot mecha goodness :rolleyes:


But in all seriousness - how many countries does China now have a gripe with? Taiwan? Tibet? North Korea, and now Japan?

China Supports N. Korea

Oh, I'm not saying we don't have the advantage now. We certainly do. But they're trying their hardest to catch up. And, assuming they keep spending at the rate they are, they will catch up eventually.

But they won't! Technology is changing all the time and the US Navy is keeping up with it. We have the most technological fleet and that will not change unless something weird happens.

And good luck trying to get the Chinese involved with the War on Terror. They're probably loving this, seeing our troops spread out across the globe, our resources being spent elsewhere.

That wasn't my thought. I wanted to direct the terrorists attention from us and focus it on the Chinese government if there is a war. Hey, they want to help muslims right?

You're all forgetting China also has Nukes of the same power or close to that the US has, yet nothing has been done about them because the US is too scared to act because it knows that would simply provoke China into war.
That's why the US is going after North Korea; its a much easier target than China is.

China has Nukes even more powerful then America

A twisted kind of fun, but still fun. Kind of how Command and Conquer Generals is...

China Supports N. Korea

Are you sure about that now that N. Korea said they have nukes?

China has Nukes even more powerful then America
No, that is patently untrue. The US has the most advanced arsenal in the world.

China has Nukes even more powerful then America

HAHAHA!!! Gotta be the most funniest I've ever heard.

Correction: they have the world's largest land army. They have jack squat for a navy. Vietnam and South Korea might be SOL, but Japan and the rest could just sit tight.

No they don't ahve the largest land army, they have the largest air force. and yes they don't have that good of a navy, but they do have an entire artillary division of their armed forces

Are you sure about that now that N. Korea said they have nukes?
They knew they had nukes a looong time ago. Actually, the Chinese just want to sweep the issue under the rug.

And leave Americans with a severe lack of goods, for a while. And Chinese investment in US companies would dissappear...
China doesn't have significant investment in the US stock market, the flow of capital really goes the other way, with the US having massive amounts of capital in China. Although the world would almost undoubtedly be plunged into a major depression caused by this type of war (the leading manufacturing and service economies in the world at war? Oh that sounds good for the world economy), the US economy would ultimately be the winner for the simple fact that manufacturing economies are more easily replaceable. Whereas service economies need a massive amount of internal capital to become viable (read: The West can do this, along with a handful of other states, but thats about it), whereas manufacturing states need an influx of capital from any source, along with the proper infrastructure. As evidenced by World War Two where the United States picked up its production by many hundred fold, productional capacities are always well above the real-production of most countries. The US alone at the moment has productional potential likely 5-10 times as much as it currently produces, but due to lower external prices, an over saturated market, and other factors, that potential is not utilized. Increased spending in areas such as India, Indonesia, Thailand, and even Taiwan would ultimately correct the market for the loss of China.

Next!


A war in South East Asia would cause massive damage, but would almost without a doubt not involve a true nuclear war. Now by that I mean that if the Koreas were dragged on, it cannot be doubted that Kim Jong-Il in an attempt to retain power would in fact use every means at his disposal, including his nuclear arsenal. However, it is highly doubtable that the US or China would respond in kind, as the international response against those countries would have far greater repercussions than the benefit of using nukes (read: Sanctions). So lets quickly mark up the players.

Japan: Since World War Two, Japan has effectively given up on all militaristic goals, and become a pacificist nation. As such, their armed forces are almost entirely composed of Air Force and Naval units. Capable of protecting Japan itself, they pose no threat to the region.

North Korea: With the second largest army in the region (to China), the North Korean military is easily the nation's greatest asset. Their missiles are sold on the international market for their reliability and payloads, and along the DMZ alone they have over a million soldiers along with over 1000 pieces of heavy artillery and missile tubes, all capable of striking Seoul. The North Korean populace has been so inundated since the 50s by first Kim il-Sung, and now Kim Jung-Il that there is no doubt that an invasion of North Korea would be easily comparable to an invasion of world war two Japan. The Korean reaction to the death of il-Sung best illustrates this. There was over a week of absolute grief in the streets, people were in shock that the "supreme leader" "a leader such a none other in the world" "great man of uncomparable intellect" (note: il-Sung, and Jong-Il really have titles like these) had died. The reaction to invasion would be extremely harsh.

South Korea: For the past decade, South Korea has gradually convinced itself that North Korea will never invade, and can be placated. As such, their military is no longer even close to par with the North, even though their economy is vastly better. In the case of a war with the North, it is probable that the South would be overrun in a matter of weeks, if not days.

China: China has the single largest army in the region. Although its tanks and other vehicles are becoming obsolete (most are from the 70s and 80s), their air force has made huge strides, with the navy also making some major improvements. The Chinese major strength is of course their huge man power advantage. However, China does suffer from two huge problems. The first problem comes in a major lack of transportational capacity. With a major strike on railroad centres, the Chinese would have a large degree of difficulty in coordinating the logistics of moving their huge manpower. The second problem comes from China's internal disputes. With a huge divide between men of military age and the government (read: Student's hate the government), along with a major divide between the North and South (which resembles pre-Civil War America to a frightening degree), the capability of a weakened Central Commitee to fight a major war is uncertain.

America: Although America does not have significant forces in the area, the American military machine cannot be underestimated. American naval presence in the Pacific is unrivaled militarily (though not commercially), and given time, America would be able to control the sea ways completely, saving Japan and Taiwan from invasion. Furthermore, due to the weak air-forces of the likely opponents, the United States airpower would be virtually unchallenged. Even with the Chinese ability to produce a huge volume of aircraft, AWAC capabilities negate this advantage as quantity is more important than quality only if quantity can cleanly engage quality (read: Battle of Britain, more planes against better ones, but Germans couldn't see the Brits coming). Because China has not yet come even close to achieving a true passive-radar system, American stealth bombers along with other craft like Predators (intelligence and surveillance) would ultimately allow strategic strikes to be taken out against transportational centres, and Chinese troops movements would be easily identified, allowing airstrikes to hit major concentrations.



Conclusion: Any war in South East Asia ultimately would have the same conclusion. America would ultimately prevail, but total casuality numbers would probably surpass World War Two by a significant margin. Any war in Korea would likely cause the deaths of many millions, both civilian and military. Furthermore, a war between America and China would take a long time, as the American need to muster its forces would give China the opportunity to try a quick strike against Taiwan and/or Japan, before the American's could arrive in mass. However, the American advantage in both technology, combined with air, sea, and surveillance superiority would ultimately grant an American victory. China cannot hope to truly fight America due to its own military restrictions, however, its power compared to the rest of the region is unparalleled, as America's advantages against it are unique (read: Land power negated by Pacific, America's technological edge is incomparable to any other nation, America's surveillane capabilities are also incomparable)

A twisted kind of fun, but still fun. Kind of how Command and Conquer Generals is...

Its a great game to play :)

That actually IS a good idea! Go get em Bush! ;)

Uhh, never going to happen. Besides, China is holding all the cards right now any way. Look at the USA's trade deficit with China. not to even mention that China is buying up rough guess between 70-80% of all American debt. Sooner than later China will use this as political capital. Not a damn thing America will be able to do. China will own you. Only thing America can try is war, but it won't be in China's interest to go to war so they won't start it. They will be holding all the cards any way. So America would be forced to fight a war on China's soil, that's a war they can't win. Never going to happen! At the rate of spending by this current American administration, we may very well see the extreme decline of the American Empire sooner rather than later.

Personally, I hope it doesn't happen. I would prefer Americans to smarten up and vote a moderate into the Oval office, one that doesn't spend your money like there is no tomorrow. Because that at this rate is going to be your downfall. Just look at the numbers.

Believe me, as much as I'm not too fussy on American foreign policy, I would much rather have them running the show then China, so smarten the f*ck up in 2008 when you vote again.

Are you sure about that now that N. Korea said they have nukes?
Lets face it its the tension between Communist China and the US that holds that allaince together

A twisted kind of fun, but still fun. Kind of how Command and Conquer Generals is...
It is multitplayer too, and sometimes you get to learn facts from other countries...

No they don't ahve the largest land army, they have the largest air force. and yes they don't have that good of a navy, but they do have an entire artillary division of their armed forces
Actually, they DO have the largest land army, and their air force is very weak. The land army, however, has MILLIONS of people.

No, that is patently untrue. The US has the most advanced arsenal in the world.
Wrong, China has a 4,000 Megaton Nuclear Bomb, america's biggest is 350 megatons

But they won't! Technology is changing all the time and the US Navy is keeping up with it. We have the most technological fleet and that will not change unless something weird happens.That's funny, because I seem to recall another militarily inferior East Asian nation doing just that a century and a half ago.

No they don't ahve the largest land army, they have the largest air force. and yes they don't have that good of a navy, but they do have an entire artillary division of their armed forces
They have quantity, not quality. China's air force has never progressed beyond the Cold War standard meaning that although it can dominate the region, the US/NATO have a major advantage due to both stealth technology and AWAC capability. The number of planes you have doesn't necessarily equate to the total strength you have.

Actually, they DO have the largest land army, and their air force is very weak. The land army, however, has MILLIONS of people.
lol, jsut because their planbes are out dated deosn't make it weak, and their land army has the potential to have millions of people

Uhh, never going to happen. Besides, China is holding all the cards right now any way. Look at the USA's trade deficit with China. not to even mention that China is buying up rough guess between 70-80% of all American debt. Sooner than later China will use this as political capital. Not a damn thing America will be able to do. China will own you. Only thing America can try is war, but it won't be in China's interest to go to war so they won't start it. They will be holding all the cards any way. So America would be forced to fight a war on China's soil, that's a war they can't win. Never going to happen! At the rate of spending by this current American administration, we may very well see the extreme decline of the American Empire sooner rather than later.

Personally, I hope it doesn't happen. I would prefer Americans to smarten up and vote a moderate into the Oval office, one that doesn't spend your money like there is no tomorrow. Because that at this rate is going to be your downfall. Just look at the numbers.

Believe me, as much as I'm not too fussy on American foreign policy, I would much rather have them running the show then China, so smarten the f*ck up in 2008 when you vote again.
Yeah, but neither the liberals nor the conservatives will stop spending...But you do forget that the US buys up a significant amount of the Chinese debt as well, and our companies have deeply invested in their country. Plus, we could annihilate their economy simply by placing sanctions; after all, we buy most of their products. Like I said before, its a form of economic MAD.

Japan has giant robots. China has mass-produced consumer goods of at-best poor quality.

Yeah. Japan pwns.

Uhh, never going to happen. Besides, China is holding all the cards right now any way. Look at the USA's trade deficit with China. not to even mention that China is buying up rough guess between 70-80% of all American debt. Sooner than later China will use this as political capital. Not a damn thing America will be able to do. China will own you. Only thing America can try is war, but it won't be in China's interest to go to war so they won't start it. They will be holding all the cards any way. So America would be forced to fight a war on China's soil, that's a war they can't win. Never going to happen! At the rate of spending by this current American administration, we may very well see the extreme decline of the American Empire sooner rather than later.

So I guess all the stuff that America has isn't going to help them sack Beijing eh? Your the one living in a fantasy world Stephistan. If war came, the US will fight it with everything we have short of nuclear arms. Heaven forbid we turn the full might of America's power against someone. That would make for an ugly fight. Couple that with Britain's full might and that of NATO (excluding France and Canada), China will be in hurting status.

Personally, I hope it doesn't happen. I would prefer Americans to smarten up and vote a moderate into the Oval office, one that doesn't spend your money like there is no tomorrow. Because that at this rate is going to be your downfall. Just look at the numbers.

Frankly, I would rather take a President that believes in National Security and Defense.

Believe me, as much as I'm not too fussy on American foreign policy, I would much rather have them running the show then China, so smarten the f*ck up in 2008 when you vote again.

That is for damn sure. If Hillary runs and gets the nod though, I think I'll take the republican candidate over her and that is not partisan hackery either. I don't like Clinton's politics.

They have quantity, not quality. China's air force has never progressed beyond the Cold War standard meaning that although it can dominate the region, the US/NATO have a major advantage due to both stealth technology and AWAC capability. The number of planes you have doesn't necessarily equate to the total strength you have.
but they do have enough to prevent an american air assulat against them

Wrong, China has a 4,000 Megaton Nuclear Bomb, america's biggest is 350 megatons
Are you aware that is not physically possible? When nukes pass certain megaton limits, the energy actually becomes useless.

Wrong, China has a 4,000 Megaton Nuclear Bomb, america's biggest is 350 megatons

I am going to have to call Bullshit on this one.

That's funny, because I seem to recall another militarily inferior East Asian nation doing just that a century and a half ago.

That being Japan? Look how that turned out. They nearly conquered the Pacific but the US over ran them with technology, experience, and numbers.

but they do have enough to prevent an american air assulat against them
Again, not true. The US' air force is the single most advanced air force in the world. Period.

lol, jsut because their planbes are out dated deosn't make it weak, and their land army has the potential to have millions of people

Millions of people that won't be able to go to the bathroom without the US and allies spotting what hole/latrine/barracks he's in.

The planes? They could do damage but they won't win the air war.

but they do have enough to prevent an american air assulat against them

Actually, no they don't! America can still devestate them. Not to mention, they have to see us coming before they can mount any defense. Stealth technology comes in handy.

That being Japan? Look how that turned out. They nearly conquered the Pacific but the US over ran them with technology, experience, and numbers.That had everything to do with them over-stretching themselves and fighting a multi-front war, and absolutely nothing to do with their military technology, which was about equal to ours (the exception being, of course, the atomic bomb).

....Couple that with Britain's full might and that of NATO (excluding France and Canada), China will be in hurting status.Interesting...
What would europe do?
Waht would Russia do?

and why are we taking the Brits for granted...they already said that they dont wanna be sidekicks anymore..not even against Iran.

Again, not true. The US' air force is the single most advanced air force in the world. Period.
Aside from the fact taht this "advanced" air force can't even win their own top gun tournement

A lot of people are forgetting India, which would love to have an excuse to go to war with China. Their military strength might not be enormous, but it would be another thorn in the side of the PRC.

That had everything to do with them over-stretching themselves and fighting a multi-front war, and absolutely nothing to do with their military technology, which was about equal to ours (the exception being, of course, the atomic bomb).

Has everything to do with it actually. Our radar was sharper! Our planes were much better. Our pilots were more experienced. We also had the numbers and the fire suppression technology that helped us save alot of our ships. They didn't and that cost them at Midway and other places.

Besides, Japan would trounce China with giant-super-robot mecha goodness :rolleyes:


But in all seriousness - how many countries does China now have a gripe with? Taiwan? Tibet? North Korea, and now Japan?

Don't forget Mongolia. Beijing claims that The People's Republic of China includes the territory the rest of the world recognizes as Mongolia.

I am going to have to call Bullshit on this one.
http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/nukes/ctbt/read11.html

Interesting...
What would europe do?
Waht would Russia do?

Russia would stay out of it. Eastern Europe would side on the side of Freedom (USA) and against Communism (China)! France will surrender or play both sides against the middle. NATO would get involved and thus China would have a very big mess on its hands.

and why are we taking the Brits for granted...they already said that they dont wanna be sidekicks anymore..not even against Iran.

If NATO gets involved in a war, they are obligated under treaty to use all available forces to end that war. Therefore, yes they will get involved and they will assist in a war against China due to treaty obligations.

A lot of people are forgetting India, which would love to have an excuse to go to war with China. Their military strength might not be enormous, but it would be another thorn in the side of the PRC.

Yep! India will come in from the west to assist because of Tibet.

Russia would stay out of it. Eastern Europe would side on the side of Freedom (USA) and against Communism (China)! France will surrender or play both sides against the middle. NATO would get involved and thus China would have a very big mess on its hands.



If NATO gets involved in a war, they are obligated under treaty to use all available forces to end that war. Therefore, yes they will get involved and they will assist in a war against China due to treaty obligations.

How do you know the USSR won't reform and ally witth China (yeha i know it's unlikely)

http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/nukes/ctbt/read11.html

Greenpeace is your source?

HAHAHA!!! Laughable. Show me a more credible site and not from an anti-nuclear website. They have a tendency to over exaggerate the powerfulness of the bombs nations own to get them banned.

should they? Yea! They should but frankly, I don't want to get rid of ours if other nations have them.

How do you know the USSR won't reform and ally witth China (yeha i know it's unlikely)

Because the USSR doesn't exist.

Why does this keep reminding me of .... John Titor (http://johntitor.com)? No matter how outlandish the story is (of John), it seems to fit this world quite nicely. Read what's in the link to understand.

Has everything to do with it actually. Our radar was sharper! Our planes were much better. Our pilots were more experienced. We also had the numbers and the fire suppression technology that helped us save alot of our ships. They didn't and that cost them at Midway and other places.
Not really. For most of the war the Japanese Zero was easily superior to any American aircraft, it was only later in the war that we gained superior aircract. Our pilots experience wasn't really any different than the Japanese up until late in the war when they had to start throwing raw recruits into the air, like they did at Okinawa. What won the Pacific for us was three things.

1) The inherent weaknesses of Japan. No oil, little money, small quantity of elite soldiers, no ability to truly upgrade their forces technology.

2) Radar! The advantages of American radar cannot be understated, and were probably the winning factor in many battles.

3) Cryptography. Remember, America cracked Purple and Ultra before war with Japan even broke out. Midway wasn't won because America got lucky. Midway was won because American code-breakers granted us the capability to know exactly what Japan was going to do, and where they were going to do it. As such, when an opportunity like Midway came around, we were able to take it. The reason for this was because the Japanese simply believed that Purple and Ultra were unbreakable, and so long as we did not over-use our knowledge of what they were going to do, we could sporadically use it for huge gains. In the end it all comes down to numbers, if it became obvious the codes were broken, they'd be changed and thereby we'd lose the advantage to make huge gains when they become options.

Wrong, China has a 4,000 Megaton Nuclear Bomb, america's biggest is 350 megatons

You are an idiot.

The USSR created the largest nuclear bomb ever which was 100 megatons. There is no 4,000 Megaton bomb.

Uhh, never going to happen. Besides, China is holding all the cards right now any way. Look at the USA's trade deficit with China. not to even mention that China is buying up rough guess between 70-80% of all American debt. Sooner than later China will use this as political capital. Not a damn thing America will be able to do. China will own you. Only thing America can try is war, but it won't be in China's interest to go to war so they won't start it. They will be holding all the cards any way. So America would be forced to fight a war on China's soil, that's a war they can't win. Never going to happen! At the rate of spending by this current American administration, we may very well see the extreme decline of the American Empire sooner rather than later.

Personally, I hope it doesn't happen. I would prefer Americans to smarten up and vote a moderate into the Oval office, one that doesn't spend your money like there is no tomorrow. Because that at this rate is going to be your downfall. Just look at the numbers.

Believe me, as much as I'm not too fussy on American foreign policy, I would much rather have them running the show then China, so smarten the f*ck up in 2008 when you vote again.

There's no such thing as a war America can't win if it wants too. If the US goes to war with China it will bomb the piss out of it the same way it bombed the hell out of Japan and Germany.

Not really. For most of the war the Japanese Zero was easily superior to any American aircraft, it was only later in the war that we gained superior aircract. Our pilots experience wasn't really any different than the Japanese up until late in the war when they had to start throwing raw recruits into the air, like they did at Okinawa. What won the Pacific for us was three things.

Superior Aircraft! Technology helped us with that.

1) The inherent weaknesses of Japan. No oil, little money, small quantity of elite soldiers, no ability to truly upgrade their forces technology.

That is accurate! That was why they went to war in the first place. We strangled them thanks to submarines.

2) Radar! The advantages of American radar cannot be understated, and were probably the winning factor in many battles.

Radar is technology.

3) Cryptography. Remember, America cracked Purple and Ultra before war with Japan even broke out. Midway wasn't won because America got lucky. Midway was won because American code-breakers granted us the capability to know exactly what Japan was going to do, and where they were going to do it. As such, when an opportunity like Midway came around, we were able to take it. The reason for this was because the Japanese simply believed that Purple and Ultra were unbreakable, and so long as we did not over-use our knowledge of what they were going to do, we could sporadically use it for huge gains. In the end it all comes down to numbers, if it became obvious the codes were broken, they'd be changed and thereby we'd lose the advantage to make huge gains when they become options.

Cryptography is technology too. We got better cryptographical technology which helped us read their mail better and better as the war moved on.

You are an idiot.

The USSR created the largest nuclear bomb ever which was 100 megatons. There is no 4,000 Megaton bomb.

Yes, it was to be the Tsara Bomba, and its shockwave would cover about a 60 mile radius, they never used it though because they thought it would contaminate the Earth's atmosphere too much.

A lot of people are forgetting India, which would love to have an excuse to go to war with China. Their military strength might not be enormous, but it would be another thorn in the side of the PRC.

If you recall the Sino-Indian war of 1968(?) the Indian army was slaughtered by the chinese, but this small war did lead to the advance of the technology of the Indian Army, but I still think the Indians wouldn't stand much of a chance, they might end up holing up in Tibet, due to the less chinese forces in the area, but the Chinese would easily take it back, if the Himalayas didn't keep them back though.

That is for damn sure. If Hillary runs and gets the nod though, I think I'll take the republican candidate over her and that is not partisan hackery either. I don't like Clinton's politics.

Ya. Prosperity, diplomacy, and economic expansion all suck ass. Gimmie a president who flips off the whole world flushes our money and lives down the toilet and wipes with the constitution any day.

Why does this keep reminding me of .... John Titor (http://johntitor.com)? No matter how outlandish the story is (of John), it seems to fit this world quite nicely. Read what's in the link to understand.

LMFAO :D


If there really were a war between China and the U.S. it would definately escalate into WWIII. Think about it, you have Communism on one hand and Democracy on the other... I think the world would get involved. Either that, or everyone is sitting in a dark hole with the French.

As a Hawaii resident, war in the East scares the $h!t out of me. Too damn close, I tell ya. :eek:

This would be very bad for all nations involved. China has no chance of really winning, if they are on the offensive. They might do some damage to Japan and South Korea will be overrun in little time, but beyond that they will not be able to extend themselves due to superior American technology.

However, a true invasion of China is next to impossible. Even with superior technology, just a few determined people can really make a mess, as Iraq proves. China is a whole lot bigger than Iraq. If they lost in traditional warfare, they'd resort to guerilla warfare, and any invaders would have to simply pull out after a while, leaving China basically in a state of anarchy, which would have an unpredicatable outcome.

In short, millions would die, China would be devastated, the world economy would be completely trashed, and every country involved would suffer horrible casualties.

Well, the thing is, the reason we have so much choas in Iraq is because we play the nice guy. We won WW2 because we had no mercy, and could conquer and stabilize China with a large alliance and ruthless tactics. Of course, by conquer I mean take temporary control and begin a democracy. Not integrate into US. That would be impossible and immoral.

No, I think it is very overconfident to say that we could stabilize the country. It's huge, and has more than a billion people who wouldn't like being conquered. It would be another Vietnam. Technology will get you so far, but Japan, which during WWII was enormousely technologically superior to China, was having a tough time conquering the place even before they went to war with us. And that was when the Chinese were fighting each other, too. Toppling their government we could do, in fact, it wouldn't be too hard, however, maintaining security would be difficult at best. All the enemy would need would be guns and bullets, and they could just keep killing troops until the occupying countries got sick of the whole damn thing and left.

No one seems to mention that Japan broke it's pacifist stance by sending troops to Iraq, is a world class leader in technology and robotics, and is re building it's navy.

Put this with the now claiming of islands (no matter how small), Japan may be getting Imperial ideas, and move into areas before China does.

And we all know what happened last time when Japan started claiming islands as their territory...

Yeah well don't forget China has by far the largest army in the world, twice as large as the US', and that's just the standing army. Imagine if China calls upon the draft... Let's hope the tensions, if they ever break out into war, stay localized and not expand to engulf the rest of the pacific.
China's army isn't worth a damn unless we choose to fight on the Chinese mainland. They don't have the ability to project force anywhere in the world.

You're all forgetting China also has Nukes of the same power or close to that the US has, yet nothing has been done about them because the US is too scared to act because it knows that would simply provoke China into war.
That's why the US is going after North Korea; its a much easier target than China is.
China's nukes are less accurate, and the US has some missile defense capability now. Nukes carried by subs would be destroyed very early in the conflict because the US has the best attack subs on earth. Nukes carried by planes would be shot down shortly after takeoff, if they ever even make it off the ground. Our air power is just that good. China's nuclear threat is laughable.

Haha! Yeah, everything says "Made in China" on it. If the US corporations brought all their business back into the US in the case of a war, there would be millions of Chinese left jobbless.
And millions of Americans, Mexicans, Phillipinos, Indians, and Indonesians with more job opportunities and the ability to bargain for higher wages.

And leave Americans with a severe lack of goods, for a while. And Chinese investment in US companies would dissappear...
Boo Hoo, we can't buy new lawn furniture this year.

Reality.. all those nations plus Canada and (others I can't recall)went up against N.Korea and couldn't even win. Why? Because China got involved and we pulled out. Look at China's population. They have every thing as far as military goes as the Americans. There is no chance in hell America, the UK and S. Korea could beat China on their own soil. You just don't have the man power.

You want to talk nukes? Yeah, they have lots too. But to most of us, any thing that ends in a Nuclear winter is not a win any way.


Nope, no way, no how could America beat China on their own soil. Might be different if China tried to invade America. I stress might be. But nope, nadda, China would kick any one's ass on their own soil. No question.
Because it was under UN command and the UN didn't want a truly major war on the scale of WWII to take place again. We could have wiped the floor with them.

Oh, I'm not saying we don't have the advantage now. We certainly do. But they're trying their hardest to catch up. And, assuming they keep spending at the rate they are, they will catch up eventually.

And good luck trying to get the Chinese involved with the War on Terror. They're probably loving this, seeing our troops spread out across the globe, our resources being spent elsewhere.
That assumes our military spending will stay the same or decline. This is the USA you're talking about. We always increase our military spending.

Japan and China fighting would definitely be a conflict on the scale of the World Wars..... my guess, in military terms, even without direct US involvement, the Japanese would sweep the seas of Chinese shipping and bring about an end to their economic miracle for the duration of that conflict. Japan has one of the largest and probably the second or third most effective navy around, an exceedingly powerful air defense system, and a lot more money and technology advantage that is very high.

But it wouldn't stop there. China would push North Korea to side with it and move into South Korea, China might also move into Southeast Asia (against Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Thailand, Malaysia) to deal with the conflicting claims over the Spratley islands. Chinese control over Singapore (which they could do be overland invasion through Indochina) would close off the direct route of oil from the Mideast to Japan and is the only way short of nuclear attack the Chinese could seriously damage Japan.

The US would have to side with Japan due to a military alliance, and Australia and New Zealand would probably sit it out unless the Chinese moved into Southeast Asia although might join in on the Japanese side if China or North Korea moved on South Korea. Japan would instantly recognize Taiwan as independent, and probably the US would too.... something China would have a great reason to fear.

and then we look at the nuclear situation.

The Chinese have a couple hundred medium range missiles with nuclear warheads that can easily reach Japan, as well as South Korea, US bases in Okinawa, and anywhere in Indochina. They also have a couple of dozen ICBMs that can reach the US northeast (including Washington and New York). Now attacking the US directly with nuclear is an excellent way to committ suicide but wars are not waged by logical or sometimes even rational people, and even when carefully thought out, misperceptions and miscalculations can bring disaster too.

Lets all hope the Chinese decide to just yell a lot instead of doing something risky.

correction navies rank in this order

britain
u.s
germay
france(large sub fleet)
then japan

japan wouldnt stand a chance in another world war espacially against china
considereing china has nearly acomplished what japan has in half the time.
also due to the aliance between the u.k and china it would mean that the u.k would be on chinas side
also take into consideration how close we and the U.S have been reacently
it all points to the U.S, the british commonwealth and china giving japan a well deserved arse kiking :sniper: :mp5:

China's nukes are less accurate, and the US has some missile defense capability now. Nukes carried by subs would be destroyed very early in the conflict because the US has the best attack subs on earth. Nukes carried by planes would be shot down shortly after takeoff, if they ever even make it off the ground. Our air power is just that good. China's nuclear threat is laughable.

Well, would I hope that you get them all, however assuming that you could shoot down all of their ICBM's in transit is - I think - unlikely. They have an estimated 20 DF-5's, several DF-4s, plus an unknow number of mobile DF-31's which can reach the west coast of the US. If they all launched at once....well, I don't know that I'd stick around LA....

The Chinese have a couple hundred medium range missiles with nuclear warheads that can easily reach Japan, as well as South Korea, US bases in Okinawa, and anywhere in Indochina. They also have a couple of dozen ICBMs that can reach the US northeast (including Washington and New York). Now attacking the US directly with nuclear is an excellent way to committ suicide but wars are not waged by logical or sometimes even rational people, and even when carefully thought out, misperceptions and miscalculations can bring disaster too.

Lets all hope the Chinese decide to just yell a lot instead of doing something risky

i can see the logic but the u.s (correct me if i am rong) would would side with britain who would be with china.
if the u.s didnt and events rolled to points i cant fathom then eventually it could lead to a u.s and japan Vs europe and most of the far east war :sniper:

correction navies rank in this order

ok?

britain
u.s
germay
france(large sub fleet)
then japan

US's fleet is larger and better equipped than the British fleet. Looking at your nation, I'm guessing that your a brit so I'll assume prejudice in this matter. I do not know Germany's naval status but the French? Their sub fleet is the butt of jokes. The Japanese fleet though is good.

japan wouldnt stand a chance in another world war espacially against china
considereing china has nearly acomplished what japan has in half the time.
also due to the aliance between the u.k and china it would mean that the u.k would be on chinas side
also take into consideration how close we and the U.S have been reacently
it all points to the U.S, the british commonwealth and china giving japan a well deserved arse kiking :sniper: :mp5:

No! UK will not be on China's side if the US gets involved. US and company will come to the aide of Japan because of treaty obligations. Not to mention that South Korea will also join the fray and you still have the Philippines, Taiwan, Vietnam, India and a few other neighbors of China.

Uhh, never going to happen. Besides, China is holding all the cards right now any way. Look at the USA's trade deficit with China. not to even mention that China is buying up rough guess between 70-80% of all American debt. Sooner than later China will use this as political capital. Not a damn thing America will be able to do. China will own you. Only thing America can try is war, but it won't be in China's interest to go to war so they won't start it. They will be holding all the cards any way. So America would be forced to fight a war on China's soil, that's a war they can't win. Never going to happen! At the rate of spending by this current American administration, we may very well see the extreme decline of the American Empire sooner rather than later.

Personally, I hope it doesn't happen. I would prefer Americans to smarten up and vote a moderate into the Oval office, one that doesn't spend your money like there is no tomorrow. Because that at this rate is going to be your downfall. Just look at the numbers.

Believe me, as much as I'm not too fussy on American foreign policy, I would much rather have them running the show then China, so smarten the f*ck up in 2008 when you vote again.
The US trade deficit with China means we have them by the balls. If we stop buying their goods, a huge chunk of their GDP evaporates.

Wrong, China has a 4,000 Megaton Nuclear Bomb, america's biggest is 350 megatons
4000 megaton? Are you on drugs? Can I have some?

Well, would I hope that you get them all, however assuming that you could shoot down all of their ICBM's in transit is - I think - unlikely. They have an estimated 20 DF-5's, several DF-4s, plus an unknow number of mobile DF-31's which can reach the west coast of the US. If they all launched at once....well, I don't know that I'd stick around LA....

actually france has the best sub force in the world
the u.s navy is mostly aircraft carriers (which is good) and destroyers
the british navy is mostly stuff likie h.m.s norway (sub hunters) :sniper:

but they do have enough to prevent an american air assulat against them
No, they don't. Nobody on earth does at this point. Stealth planes can knock out enemy air defenses quite effectively with little risk. Then US warplanes can hit targets over the horizon with their missiles. The Chinese airforce would be lucky to get a quarter of their planes in the air before being shot down.

ok?



US's fleet is larger and better equipped than the British fleet. Looking at your nation, I'm guessing that your a brit so I'll assume prejudice in this matter. I do not know Germany's naval status but the French? Their sub fleet is the butt of jokes. The Japanese fleet though is good.



No! UK will not be on China's side if the US gets involved. US and company will come to the aide of Japan because of treaty obligations. Not to mention that South Korea will also join the fray and you still have the Philippines, Taiwan, Vietnam, India and a few other neighbors of China.

the u.s fleet is still remorsing over pearl harbour
the british fleet (mostly stuff you gus gave us (and thanks) ) :sniper: is not under equiped and size is not everything

i can see the logic but the u.s (correct me if i am rong) would would side with britain who would be with china.

I'll correct you now! Japan is an ally on of the USA! Britain is an ally of the USA. If China goes to war against Japan, the US will come on the side of Japan. Britain will follow the US on the side of Japan. Unless they want to remain neutral.

if the u.s didnt and events rolled to points i cant fathom then eventually it could lead to a u.s and japan Vs europe and most of the far east war :sniper:

mmmmm no! Europe would come in on the side of the US because China is Communist. Eastern Europe will definitely side with the US against China for that very reason. NATO nations (probably with the exception of France) will come in on the side of the US. China is screwed either which way.

the u.s fleet is still remorsing over pearl harbour
the british fleet (mostly stuff you gus gave us (and thanks) ) :sniper: is not under equiped and size is not everything

plus france3s sub fleet is not the butt of jokes (the rest of it is) :sniper:

actually france has the best sub force in the world

Talk to submariners. They are very very noisey

the u.s navy is mostly aircraft carriers (which is good) and destroyers
the british navy is mostly stuff likie h.m.s norway (sub hunters) :sniper:

I guess you have counted out our submarine force as well as our p-3 sub planes and all over our other anti-submarine warfare ships and gizmos that we have.

Trying to do a bit of math here as far as those who say that China could be conquered and held - even for a brief period.

Currently there are around 150,000 soldiers occupying Iraq and having a tough time keeping the nation secure and quelling the insurgency.

And Iraq has around 23 million people.


Now China, on the other hand, has around 1.286 BILLION people, so if we do the math and assume a similar percentage of required occupying soldiers to civillians - we take 1286 / 23 * 150000 and find that we need 8,386,956 fully trained and equipped soldiers to provide the same level of security now found in Iraq....


And going in, instead of being able to stage from a neighbouring country while facing virtually no threat of reprisal (given that Iraq had no air force and few remaining missiles) to provide a good starting kick-off point, where exactly do you do that for China? Securing supply lines is a huge part of a battle plan, and for IRaq that means lines stretching thousands of miles.

Going into IRaq there was no opposing air force, and almost no current AA missile technology. Going into China you have to contend with an airforce that has been modernizing to Su-27 and SU30s, plus some of their own technology, plus a pretty good array of surface-to-air missiles. And enough short-range missiles to potentially cause some havoc with an approaching fleet.


Would you be able to beat back the Chinese military? Probably. Would it be as easy as some here are suggesting? I think not. Would you ever be able to occupy and pacify China? Not a chance.

This is NOT a war any sane person would WANT to fight, and so I sure as hell hope that it does not become neccessary to do so.

the u.s fleet is still remorsing over pearl harbour

How are we still remorsing over Pearl Harbor? We're not. We settled that in 1945 when Japan surrendered on the deck of the USS Missouri to General MacArther.

the british fleet (mostly stuff you gus gave us (and thanks) ) :sniper: is not under equiped and size is not everything

Our navy is the most advanced in the world. Your navy is not. The British Navy is very good. I like them but the US Navy is better by far.

:sniper: I'll correct you now! Japan is an ally on of the USA! Britain is an ally of the USA. If China goes to war against Japan, the US will come on the side of Japan. Britain will follow the US on the side of Japan. Unless they want to remain neutral.



mmmmm no! Europe would come in on the side of the US because China is Communist. Eastern Europe will definitely side with the US against China for that very reason. NATO nations (probably with the exception of France) will come in on the side of the US. China is screwed either which way.

china is not comunist anymore anyway

plus france3s sub fleet is not the butt of jokes (the rest of it is) :sniper:

Actually they are.

How are we still remorsing over Pearl Harbor? We're not. We settled that in 1945 when Japan surrendered on the deck of the USS Missouri to General MacArther.



Our navy is the most advanced in the world. Your navy is not. The British Navy is very good. I like them but the US Navy is better by far.

because i have run outy of political ammo and all i got left is ww2 stuff (sorry)

:sniper:

china is not comunist anymore anyway

They still are. Unless they had full democratic elections that failed to make the news that involve more than one party.

That had everything to do with them over-stretching themselves and fighting a multi-front war, and absolutely nothing to do with their military technology, which was about equal to ours (the exception being, of course, the atomic bomb).
Please, the fucking Zeros didn't even have self-sealing fuel tanks. Japan's technology was inferior. Plus the US was fighting in Europe, and had lost it's Pacific fleet due to a surprise attack. And we still won.

because i have run outy of political ammo and all i got left is ww2 stuff (sorry)

Don't entangle with me then on WWII! Correct me if I'm wrong but the vaunted British navy was pretty much hammered by the Japanese in 1941! That pretty much left the Pacific Ocean to the US Navy to reclaim the Pacific.

http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/nukes/ctbt/read11.html
I didn't see anything there that had a 4000 Megaton yeild. Probably because such a weapon would be inefficient and send most of it's explosive force into space.

Don't entangle with me then on WWII! Correct me if I'm wrong but the vaunted British navy was pretty much hammered by the Japanese in 1941! That pretty much left the Pacific Ocean to the US Navy to reclaim the Pacific.

considering you didnt even take part untill 44 because germany looked to tough i guess your right, thanks for sending in the marines in 42 to help the 39 indipendant indian division ( seriously thanks for the jeep and the dukw)
and its you eho should not entangle me with ww2. im a crap polotition but one good historian :sniper:

Well, would I hope that you get them all, however assuming that you could shoot down all of their ICBM's in transit is - I think - unlikely. They have an estimated 20 DF-5's, several DF-4s, plus an unknow number of mobile DF-31's which can reach the west coast of the US. If they all launched at once....well, I don't know that I'd stick around LA....
I'm not saying a (very) few wouldn't get through, but most wouldn't. And the nuclear retaliation from the US would almost completely depopulate China.

actually france has the best sub force in the world
the u.s navy is mostly aircraft carriers (which is good) and destroyers
the british navy is mostly stuff likie h.m.s norway (sub hunters) :sniper:
How do you figure? US subs are faster and quieter.

Trying to do a bit of math here as far as those who say that China could be conquered and held - even for a brief period.

I didn't say conquer it. And it could be though. You have a lot of areas that can be reached by many nations. They could hold down their sections with their forces.

Currently there are around 150,000 soldiers occupying Iraq and having a tough time keeping the nation secure and quelling the insurgency.

And the insurgency, though the attacks have become massively violent, is on its last legs. They are doing all they can to destablize it and they are failing.

And Iraq has around 23 million people.

Point?

Now China, on the other hand, has around 1.286 BILLION people, so if we do the math and assume a similar percentage of required occupying soldiers to civillians - we take 1286 / 23 * 150000 and find that we need 8,386,956 fully trained and equipped soldiers to provide the same level of security now found in Iraq....

And hence why other nations will take sections of the country so that we all can bring stability to China. We did the samething in WWII with Germany.

And going in, instead of being able to stage from a neighbouring country while facing virtually no threat of reprisal (given that Iraq had no air force and few remaining missiles) to provide a good starting kick-off point, where exactly do you do that for China? Securing supply lines is a huge part of a battle plan, and for IRaq that means lines stretching thousands of miles.

Our sea lines are secured. We'll launch from Japan, the Philippines, Vienam, India and what ever nation decides to join the fight that surrounds China. China can't take on the whole world.

Going into IRaq there was no opposing air force, and almost no current AA missile technology. Going into China you have to contend with an airforce that has been modernizing to Su-27 and SU30s, plus some of their own technology, plus a pretty good array of surface-to-air missiles. And enough short-range missiles to potentially cause some havoc with an approaching fleet.

They have to spot us coming. Your doing the samething your wife did, discounting stealth technology. Our stealth bombers and planes can do alot of damage without being seen.

Would you be able to beat back the Chinese military? Probably. Would it be as easy as some here are suggesting? I think not. Would you ever be able to occupy and pacify China? Not a chance.

Troops can't move without being seen by Satellites and AWACS. When seen, the bombers come in and take them out. Whoever survives will have to either fight off our or coalition troops or surrender.

This is NOT a war any sane person would WANT to fight, and so I sure as hell hope that it does not become neccessary to do so.

I agree wholeheartedly.

Please, the fucking Zeros didn't even have self-sealing fuel tanks. Japan's technology was inferior. Plus the US was fighting in Europe, and had lost it's Pacific fleet due to a surprise attack. And we still won.

the only allied plane capable to catch up with zekes were
p51
p32
spitfire mk15
the hawker tempest :sniper:

How do you figure? US subs are faster and quieter.

us subs are good ( we all know that) ther about the best
but france has about the sam amount and more disciplined crew

considering you didnt even take part untill 44 because germany looked to tough i guess your right, thanks for sending in the marines in 42 to help the 39 indipendant indian division ( seriously thanks for the jeep and the dukw)

Oh brother. General Patton in West Africa driving the Krauts Eastward. Monty on the east and pinched Rommel in the middle. Italy in 1943 I think it was. Patton took Sicily and helped in Italy. Then on June 6, 1944 did ALLIED forces land at Normandy. As for not participating till 1944, we've been fighting in the Pacific since December 1941.

and its you eho should not entangle me with ww2. im a crap polotition but one good historian :sniper:

I am too :sniper: :mp5:

I didn't say conquer it. And it could be though. You have a lot of areas that can be reached by many nations. They could hold down their sections with their forces.



And the insurgency, though the attacks have become massively violent, is on its last legs. They are doing all they can to destablize it and they are failing.



Point?



And hence why other nations will take sections of the country so that we all can bring stability to China. We did the samething in WWII with Germany.



Our sea lines are secured. We'll launch from Japan, the Philippines, Vienam, India and what ever nation decides to join the fight that surrounds China. China can't take on the whole world.



They have to spot us coming. Your doing the samething your wife did, discounting stealth technology. Our stealth bombers and planes can do alot of damage without being seen.



Troops can't move without being seen by Satellites and AWACS. When seen, the bombers come in and take them out. Whoever survives will have to either fight off our or coalition troops or surrender.



I agree wholeheartedly.

i agree china is
the fastest growing economy in the world

us subs are good ( we all know that) ther about the best
but france has about the sam amount and more disciplined crew
More disciplined crew? Now you're just making things up. Plus it doesn't matter how many you have if we can find them and they can't find us. Noisy subs are dead subs. The US has plenty of subs. Remember, we were practicing to win a nuclear war that would, in part, be fought by submarines.

the only allied plane capable to catch up with zekes were
p51
p32
spitfire mk15
the hawker tempest :sniper:
Yet we ruined Japan even after our Pacific fleet was destroyed by a surprise attack, and we had to fight a war in Europe at the same time. Go figure.

the only allied plane capable to catch up with zekes were
p51
p32
spitfire mk15
the hawker tempest :sniper:

Check your states again Britania. A Zeke was a JAPANESE PLANE! The Brits were pretty much driven from the Pacific Ocean. Now check your carrier planes again and you will see that you are wrong.

Oh brother. General Patton in West Africa driving the Krauts Eastward. Monty on the east and pinched Rommel in the middle. Italy in 1943 I think it was. Patton took Sicily and helped in Italy. Then on June 6, 1944 did ALLIED forces land at Normandy. As for not participating till 1944, we've been fighting in the Pacific since December 1941.



I am too :sniper: :mp5:

well i have to take my 2 badged beret off to you
but dont forget the problems the U.S and the brits encounterd in korea and the balls up of nam,

us subs are good ( we all know that) ther about the best
but france has about the sam amount and more disciplined crew

HAHA!!! I haven't had a good laugh like that in days.

well i have to take my 2 badged beret off to you
but dont forget the problems the U.S and the brits encounterd in korea and the balls up of nam,

That is what happens when the UN handcuffs military operations as well as micromanaging presidents who don't have a clue as to how to run a war.

Check your states again Britania. A Zeke was a JAPANESE PLANE! The Brits were pretty much driven from the Pacific Ocean. Now check your carrier planes again and you will see that you are wrong.

i did not say that there were british planes there i said that perfromence wise the hawker was as good if not better. true the two never fought,and i am sorry i forgot about devastators (my spelling is awfull)

That is what happens when the UN handcuffs military operations as well as micromanaging presidents who don't have a clue as to how to run a war.

i agree. what do you think of the suis crisis? :sniper:

HAHA!!! I haven't had a good laugh like that in days.

alright i guess i was to optimistic most of the time the french are rat arsed (drunk)

i did not say that there were british planes there i said that perfromence wise the hawker was as good if not better. true the two never fought,and i am sorry i forgot about devastators (my spelling is awfull)

Spitfire IS a british plane.

i agree. what do you think of the suis crisis? :sniper:

The Suez crisis? Where Egypt shut down the suez canal? I have no opinion because I haven't researched it.

Please, the fucking Zeros didn't even have self-sealing fuel tanks. Japan's technology was inferior. Plus the US was fighting in Europe, and had lost it's Pacific fleet due to a surprise attack. And we still won.The population of the United States was significantly larger than that of Japan. Us fighting a two-front war (with many allies) is easier than trying to occupy all of the South Pacific, China, and the Korean peninsula all by one's lonesome. The attack on Pearl Harbor failed to take out the most important targets, our aircraft carriers. And how did we rebuild our Pacific fleet? With the raw materials that Japan never had access to.

You're making it seem like the US and Japan were evenly matched, and it was only our superior technology that won the day. I think it's a testament to the relative quality of Japanese WWII technology that they could even put up any sort of fight against us.

I don't even know why we're arguing this. My original point was that it was possible for a nation to catch up with another in terms of technology, which Japan managed to do well before WWII.

The Suez crisis? Where Egypt shut down the suez canal? I have no opinion because I haven't researched it.

o ok but surely tou must have an opinion on why the u.s didnt want us and the french to invade egypt
do you mind me talking to you because your intresting to talk to
what else have you researched

The population of the United States was significantly larger than that of Japan. Us fighting a two-front war (with many allies) is easier than trying to occupy all of the South Pacific, China, and the Korean peninsula all by one's lonesome. The attack on Pearl Harbor failed to take out the most important targets, our aircraft carriers. And how did we rebuild our Pacific fleet? With the raw materials that Japan never had access to.

Your also forgetting about the fuel supply at Pearl Harbor too. If they had hit that then we would've been in hurting status. As for the Carriers, thank God they were not in port.

You're making it seem like the US and Japan were evenly matched, and it was only our superior technology that won the day. I think it's a testament to the relative quality of Japanese WWII technology that they could even put up any sort of fight against us.

Oh they actually had one of the best navies in the world Stormforge. Just that they have overextended themselves and our technology got better.

I don't even know why we're arguing this. My original point was that it was possible for a nation to catch up with another in terms of technology, which Japan managed to do well before WWII.

Yep they did but you have to have the defense budget to do it.

The population of the United States was significantly larger than that of Japan. Us fighting a two-front war (with many allies) is easier than trying to occupy all of the South Pacific, China, and the Korean peninsula all by one's lonesome. The attack on Pearl Harbor failed to take out the most important targets, our aircraft carriers. And how did we rebuild our Pacific fleet? With the raw materials that Japan never had access to.

You're making it seem like the US and Japan were evenly matched, and it was only our superior technology that won the day. I think it's a testament to the relative quality of Japanese WWII technology that they could even put up any sort of fight against us.

I don't even know why we're arguing this. My original point was that it was possible for a nation to catch up with another in terms of technology, which Japan managed to do well before WWII.
Ok, back to your original point then. Catching up nowadays is much harder. It costs more to develop new technology. Plus the US spends more than any other nation on new weapons technology. If China wants to catch up they had better spend virtually all of their GDP on their military.

o ok but surely tou must have an opinion on why the u.s didnt want us and the french to invade egypt
do you mind me talking to you because your intresting to talk to
what else have you researched

If you have AIM or MSN you can contact me there. I don't have my yahoo Instant messeging there.

As to what else I've researched. Basically any war that the US has fought in.

Spitfire IS a british plane.

look you seem to misunderstand
what i mean to say is that the zeke was bloody fast
and that our british planes,performance wise wre not as fast until we made the mk15 and the tempest

Your also forgetting about the fuel supply at Pearl Harbor too. If they had hit that then we would've been in hurting status. As for the Carriers, thank God they were not in port.



Oh they actually had one of the best navies in the world Stormforge. Just that they have overextended themselves and our technology got better.



Yep they did but you have to have the defense budget to do it.

if the fleet hadnt turned their radar off for lunch the japs wouldnt have even hit a fishing boat

Ok, back to your original point then. Catching up nowadays is much harder. It costs more to develop new technology. Plus the US spends more than any other nation on new weapons technology. If China wants to catch up they had better spend virtually all of their GDP on their military.

no they neednt because of there allies

if the fleet hadnt turned their radar off for lunch the japs wouldnt have even hit a fishing boat

Hmmmm no! If the people at the info desk that the radar people reported the contacts too, followed up, We might've had one nasty air battle between the air forces. The Navy would've been at battle stations and would've been moving. Then again, sink a big enough ship in the channel and we're still screwed.

no they neednt because of there allies

Cuba? Please....

On the original discussion, i haven't heard Russia mentioned all that much, If Japan attacked China, Russian would allie itself with the Chinese as tensions are also rising over islands inbetween Russian and Japan. Australia and New Zealand would try to be peacemakers rather than taking sides. The US would use it as an excuse to put an end to North Korea. This kind of conflict would cause wider conflict, Inda and Pakistan would have chance to fight in the Jammar - Kasmir region and nobody would be able to unoppose these military actions. What ever happens there is a good chance that there will be huge conflicts on the scale of world wars in the future, their always will be as smaller nations grow they will want more world power, it is enevitable.
As to who would win, that would depend on the alliances but one on one, China would win with sheer number advantage.

On the original discussion, i haven't heard Russia mentioned all that much, If Japan attacked China, Russian would allie itself with the Chinese as tensions are also rising over islands inbetween Russian and Japan. Australia and New Zealand would try to be peacemakers rather than taking sides. The US would use it as an excuse to put an end to North Korea. This kind of conflict would cause wider conflict, Inda and Pakistan would have chance to fight in the Jammar - Kasmir region and nobody would be able to unoppose these military actions. What ever happens there is a good chance that there will be huge conflicts on the scale of world wars in the future, their always will be as smaller nations grow they will want more world power, it is enevitable.
As to who would win, that would depend on the alliances but one on one, China would win with sheer number advantage.
What good are those numbers when China can't get them off of the mainland? When China can't protect them from being bombed around the clock, every day?

no they neednt because of there allies
What are China's allies going to do for them in terms of improving Chinese military technology?

Japan simplely dont have the power to bomb China into submission and China's missile capeiblities could end Japan air and naval domination before it had started on the first day of war.

Japan simplely dont have the power to bomb China into submission and China's missile capeiblities could end Japan air and naval domination before it had started on the first day of war.
Japan has the US backing it up. China doesn't want to pick a fight it can't win.

How do you figure? US subs are ...It dont matter what our Subs are....

In a War vs France...the US would be destroyed...

France would become a radioactive desert and the US would suffer some 100-50 million dead...and the rest would suffer radioactive famine...

the French subs are what makes Europe a hands off place for the US...

The only other country with such a power is Russia...

It dont matter what our Subs are....

In a War vs France...the US would be destroyed...

France would become a radioactive desert and the US would run some 50 million dead...and the rest would suffer radioactive famine...

the French subs are what makes Europe a hands off place for the US...

The only other country with such a power is Russia...
Yeah, right. France's noisy subs are a match for our attack subs and ASW assets. Sure. And Santa Claus is real. And Russia's sub fleet is in perfect shape. Just as good as ever.

It dont matter what our Subs are....

Does matter

In a War vs France...the US would be destroyed...

HAHA!!! A second good laugh I've had today.

France would become a radioactive desert and the US would run some 50 million dead...and the rest would suffer radioactive famine...

ok?

the French subs are what makes Europe a hands off place for the US...

They suck ass.

The only other country with such a power is Russia...

BS!

That is true, China knows it can't defeat the US, but with an Chinese-Russian alliance the US would be the underdog.

Why would the USA want to go into Europe even if the French didn't have their subs, it would be in affect attacking 25 nation with some of the worlds biggest super powers?

if the fleet hadnt turned their radar off for lunch the japs wouldnt have even hit a fishing boat
Besides the fact that Japan had both quantitative and qualitative superiority, the U.S. DID see the planes coming on radar, they just didn't trust the new technology.

Yeah, right. France's noisy subs are a match for our attack subs and ASW assets. Sure. And Santa Claus is real. And Russia's sub fleet is in perfect shape. Just as good as ever.
Russia payBack power is not about the subs, its more about the number of war heads...they have a lot.

BTW France does also have land nukes...but the subs are more to worry about

That is true, China knows it can't defeat the US, but with an Chinese-Russian alliance the US would be the underdog.

Why would the USA want to go into Europe even if the French didn't have their subs, it would be in affect attacking 25 nation with some of the worlds biggest super powers?
Their combined nuclear arsenal would dwarf the USA's, and the Russian sub fleet, if it was restored to it's former glory, would be a serious threat. Yeah, That would be a tough fight.

That is true, China knows it can't defeat the US, but with an Chinese-Russian alliance the US would be the underdog.

Why would the USA want to go into Europe even if the French didn't have their subs, it would be in affect attacking 25 nation with some of the worlds biggest super powers?

There is only ONE superpower and that is the United States.

Besides the fact that Japan had both quantitative and qualitative superiority, the U.S. DID see the planes coming on radar, they just didn't trust the new technology.

Wrong!

It was reported but the people at the desk that took the call thought it was the B-17s coming in from the states.

Russia payBack power is not about the subs, its more about the number of war heads...they have a lot.

BTW France does also have multiple land nukes...
We were talking about subs before. You just switched the subject. Yes, Russia has more warheads. No doubt about that. They also have better subs than France, just that they're not being maintained properly. Still, France would be no match for the US if it came down to war.

you all are sick. if x atacks y then z atacks x.. then my army is bigger than yours so we win.. dont u understand that of x atacks y ,z will atack the one with more interest for his country?
so forget the alliances you got now. every country capacble of getting some advatage of this "war" will go to the oposite side of the country they have a problem with.
thats what a world war means. rearanging teritories.
but it wont get to that.
someone said earlier in this thread.. us navy would kill chinese navy and we win.. you sure think like an american. :rolleyes:

you all are sick. if x atacks y then z atacks x.. then my army is bigger than yours so we win.. dont u understand that of x atacks y ,z will atack the one with more interest for his country?
so forget the alliances you got now. every country capacble of getting some advatage of this "war" will go to the oposite side of the country they have a problem with.
thats what a world war means. rearanging teritories.
but it wont get to that.
someone said earlier in this thread.. us navy would kill chinese navy and we win.. you sure think like an american. :rolleyes:
Well, what do you think? And who do you think like?

Think nothing of it. This should be expected, as both countries are gaining more political weight. I doubt that this will even be the start of a chain reaction that leads to war. The consequences for both sides are far too grave. In fact, the only thing I can think of that may lead to war between the two is if China decides to invade Taiwan, or if Japan starts rebuilding an empire in SE Asia (who don't have weak militaries themselves).

Why would the USA want to go into Europe....it would be in affect attacking 25 nation with some of the worlds biggest super powers?Thers is not 25 superpowers in Europe...

There is one Superpower..and that is the US...

the US cant invade europe even if they wanted too...for the only one reason "France".

Thers is not 25 superpowers in Europe...

There is one Superpower..and that is the US...

the US cant invade europe even if they wanted too...for the only one reason "France".The US doesn't want to invade Europe, but if we did France wouldn't be that big of an obstacle.

The US doesn't want to invade Europe, but if we did France wouldn't be that big of an obstacle.

Yea, Germany showed us how to take it. :D

Japan has the US backing it up. China doesn't want to pick a fight it can't win.

get out your own arse please
america (like britain,rome,carthage,greece the ottoman empire and the assyrians did) is on the way down eastern nations like japan and china are the world powers
first europe
then america
now the far east
it all makes sence think

... They also have better subs than France, just that they're not being maintained properly.
that is 20 years ago Still, France would be no match for the US if it came down to war.100 million American dead...I consider that to lose the War...the same for the French side(all wiped out).

I never said there was 25 superpowers, i was referring to the 25 nations in the EU.
The US are a super power, nobody can argue but that does not mean they are unbeatable or untouchable.
France, Britain, Russia would be too much for the US to win not to mention the other EU countries adding their firepower. :mp5:

is everyone here an american patriot, blinded by the media and mesianic delusions you forget america that if britain joins the e.u and you want to invade it your fucked as it becomes one big superpower :sniper: :sniper: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :sniper:

ah commies girl.. i just saw u ar from us also.. so i understand..
i dont know how american dreams work.. but i sure know mostly of you dont really know what europe means. us would have no chance fighting europe (that if european contries would make an aliance wich im sure it wont happen)
what do you really know of europe? 5 country names wich u heard of on the news and also hears have smaller military powers than US ? well u never though that could be propaganda? that maybe what u hear on the news is just a silly form of manipulation ? (with great efect i must admit)
saddam had the 3rd army in the world? thats just silly. how can u ppl believe all this bullshit ?

is everyone here an american patriot, blinded by the media and mesianic delusions you forget america that if britain joins the e.u and you want to invade it your fucked as it becomes one big superpower :sniper: :sniper: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :sniper:

No! Most of us just know that our technology is better than China's and most of the worlds, if not all of it. The British will come in on the side of the USA and not on the side of China.

:sniper: :mp5:

get out your own arse please
america (like britain,rome,carthage,greece the ottoman empire and the assyrians did) is on the way down eastern nations like japan and china are the world powers
first europe
then america
now the far east
it all makes sence think
We're not done yet. Especially militarily. We are still the biggest dog in the yard.

I never said there was 25 superpowers, i was referring to the 25 nations in the EU.
The US are a super power, nobody can argue but that does not mean they are unbeatable or untouchable.
France, Britain, Russia would be too much for the US to win not to mention the other EU countries adding their firepower. :mp5:

i agree but think if the e.u and america all joined forces under one big agreement think then that it would be untouchable

France wouldn't be that big of an obstacle.
well then be my guest...

maybe we should all e-mail Bush.. and ask him to invade France.

something like "Mr.Bush why are you such a Pussy..why do you keep bullyng litle kids like Panama, Libya, Granada, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc

Why dont you try that with someone who can slap you back...Like France...Why are you such a Pussy uncle Sam?"

is everyone here an american patriot, blinded by the media and mesianic delusions you forget america that if britain joins the e.u and you want to invade it your fucked as it becomes one big superpower :sniper: :sniper: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :mp5: :sniper:
A united Europe's military would be significant, but still inferior to the US military.

Total military manpower of:

United States: 73,597,731

China: 379,524,688

Japan: 29,179,095

United Kingdom: 14,943,016

Just thought all you arguing people could use a few statistics.

(All this is information form the United States CIA Website)

i agree but think if the e.u and america all joined forces under one big agreement think then that it would be untouchable
They are both already untouchable...because of the Nukes.

ah commies girl.. i just saw u ar from us also.. so i understand..
i dont know how american dreams work.. but i sure know mostly of you dont really know what europe means. us would have no chance fighting europe (that if european contries would make an aliance wich im sure it wont happen)
what do you really know of europe? 5 country names wich u heard of on the news and also hears have smaller military powers than US ? well u never though that could be propaganda? that maybe what u hear on the news is just a silly form of manipulation ? (with great efect i must admit)
saddam had the 3rd army in the world? thats just silly. how can u ppl believe all this bullshit ?

Iraq did have the 3rd largest army in the world prior to the 1st gulf war. The army didn't last long. 100 hours and they were destroyed. Period.

I happen to know most of the european countries. Half them are allied to the US (looks over at NATO)! There won't be a US/European War because of this very fact.

We're not done yet. Especially militarily. We are still the biggest dog in the yard.

i give you about 60 to 100 more years (sadly i wont see it) but america (as are all great empires) screwed from the begining)

Total military manpower of:

United States: 73,597,731

China: 379,524,688

Japan: 29,179,095

United Kingdom: 14,943,016

Just thought all you arguing people could use a few statistics.

(All this is information form the United States CIA Website)

Does this include the technological advances of said armies? The US, Britain, and Japan have better technology than the China.

ah commies girl.. i just saw u ar from us also.. so i understand..
i dont know how american dreams work.. but i sure know mostly of you dont really know what europe means. us would have no chance fighting europe (that if european contries would make an aliance wich im sure it wont happen)
what do you really know of europe? 5 country names wich u heard of on the news and also hears have smaller military powers than US ? well u never though that could be propaganda? that maybe what u hear on the news is just a silly form of manipulation ? (with great efect i must admit)
saddam had the 3rd army in the world? thats just silly. how can u ppl believe all this bullshit ?
Well, let's see. US has the world's best Navy. Enough carrier battle groups to outgun several mid sized nations. The US's infantry and armor troops get more realistic training and shoot more rounds in training than troops from any other nation. The US airforce is second to none, and has stealth technology. I'd say we have you outgunned in a conventional war. In a nuclear war, everybody loses.

By the way, I'm a man.

The technology of the US, UK and Japan is superior to China, but it feels very weird when you look at how much bigger China is...

Total military manpower of:

United States: 73,597,731

China: 379,524,688

Japan: 29,179,095

United Kingdom: 14,943,016

Just thought all you arguing people could use a few statistics.

(All this is information form the United States CIA Website)

please note you got that from the U.S site not an indipendant country such as spain or some other non partaker
also the u.k forces are incorect we have a small well trained force of 17,760,932 :sniper:

well then be my guest...

maybe we should all e-mail Bush.. and ask him to invade France.

something like "Mr.Bush why are you such a Pussy..why do you keep bullyng litle kids like Panama, Libya, Granada, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc

Why dont you try that with someone who can slap you back...Like France...Why are you such a Pussy uncle Sam?"
Insult Bush all you want. I don't like that fuck either. Don't insult Uncle Sam. I have been polite about France, I expect civility in return.

I did assume when I got these that come would be incorrect, where did you get your numbers?

Corneliu:
had the 3rd army according to who ? to what u hear on the news?
how can u believe that?
russia china even us have bigger armys .. i just named 3 .. how can iraq have more?

Well, let's see. US has the world's best Navy. Enough carrier battle groups to outgun several mid sized nations. The US's infantry and armor troops get more realistic training and shoot more rounds in training than troops from any other nation. The US airforce is second to none, and has stealth technology. I'd say we have you outgunned in a conventional war. In a nuclear war, everybody loses.

By the way, I'm a man.

of course u.s troops shoot more frigin rounds, there all gun crazed hicks :mp5: the u.s army is a good army but receives inferior training compared to the u.k

Corneliu:
had the 3rd army according to who ? to what u hear on the news?
how can u believe that?
russia china even us have bigger armys .. i just named 3 .. how can iraq have more?

The Russian Army wasn't as big as the Iraqi Army. Notice I said Iraqi army and not the Republican Guard. The Iraqi Army was crap and surrendered when the fighting started. It was the Republican Guard that fought up till the cease-fire and even they were destroyed.

Iraq did have the 3rd largest army in the world prior to the 1st gulf war. The army didn't last long. 100 hours and they were destroyed. Period.

I happen to know most of the european countries. Half them are allied to the US (looks over at NATO)! There won't be a US/European War because of this very fact.

you can tell me if this is right
i heard that turkey has the largest standing army (i think its inpercentage to comparison)

of course u.s troops shoot more frigin rounds, there all gun crazed hicks :mp5: the u.s army is a good army but receives inferior training compared to the u.k

I'll take the US Army over the British one. Didn't we defeat the British Army twice?

Hell we even defeated the Royal Navy too.

Total military manpower of:

United States: 73,597,731

China: 379,524,688

Japan: 29,179,095

United Kingdom: 14,943,016

Just thought all you arguing people could use a few statistics.

(All this is information form the United States CIA Website)
Manpower matters alot less if you can maintain air superiority and bomb the hell out of the enemy's men.

you can tell me if this is right
i heard that turkey has the largest standing army (i think its inpercentage to comparison)

I wouldn't know.

Wrong, China has a 4,000 Megaton Nuclear Bomb, america's biggest is 350 megatons4000 megaton? Are you on drugs? Can I have some?

Well, seeing as the largest nuclear weapon ever was the USSR's Tsara, a 50 MT weapon. (Aside from the fact that Greenpeace is not a reliable source of military data!)

"Tsar Bomba" ("King of Bombs"): The World's Largest Bomb

Time: 30 October 1961
Location: Parachute retarded airburst, 4000 m altitude
Over Novaya Zemlya Island test range (in the Arctic Sea)
Yield: 50 Megatons
Shown here in the Russian Atomic Weapon Museum, the "Tsar Bomba" was the largest nuclear weapon ever constructed or detonated. This three stage weapon was actually a 100 megaton bomb design, but the uranium fusion tamper of the teritiary (and probably secondary) stage(s) was replaced by one made of lead to eliminate fast fission by the fusion neutrons. The result was also the cleanest weapon ever tested with 97% of the energy coming from fusion reactions.
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Russia/Sovwarhead.html

And, frankly, every single post on this subject has been ignorant of the subject (admitedly scanning over it).

Japan and The PRC have been wrangling over these islands for 100+ years. The active wrangling has been stepped up since the 70's. However, the likelyhood of actual military conflict is miniscual.

And I say that as one of the very few posters who would be in immidiate danger of a Japan-PRC war. As a Chinese nationalist once threatened (and I believe it was here) - if we go to war with Japan, you (my adopted city of Osaka) *will* be bombed.

Given the low likelyhood, if a war between the PRC and Japan developed, the results would be highly variable.

Variable include:
What US forces would be immediately available?

This will depend on how much fore-warning there is and the global threats to the US. For example, right this moment, the US would be very hard pressed to commit ground forces. Naval and air assests (which would be more useful) are at a higher availability.

What would be the reaction of the US government and the populace?

Highly variable. How're the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq going right at the instant of the outbreak of Japan-PRC hostilities. If it were to be right this instant, I'd say the government would have trouble re-orienting. The populace would not be overly inclined to support an in-depth engagement.

Both are highly variable.

How exactly would Taiwan, the ROK, the DRPRK, Russia, India, Indonesia, the EU, and other parties react and be involved?

These are all depend on the exact scenario and circumstances.

As thing stand now:
Taiwan would mostly likely opt out, due to being overbalanced by the PRC and underprotected by the US, right now.
The ROK, and DPRK would mostly likely opt out, being occupied with each other.
Russia would opt out due to their economic straits and problems in Central Asia.
Indonesia is too occupied with the tsunami aftermath and their Islamic rebelion.
India is too occupied withg Pakistan.
The US is able to give naval and air support.
China' is not able to project their incipient naval forces effectively against Japan.
Japan doesn't have the experience to fully deflect Chinese incursions.

The result: more of the same. China pushes. Japan runs China away. China can't push hard enough. Stalemate. No major war.

And no nuclear war. No (ROFLMGDHAO) "4000 MT" nuclear weapons. (giggle)

BTW, Grevanda, you are aware that the link you posted to support your claim that the PRC has a single 4000 MT warhead contradicts your claim:
Greenpeace April 1996

China has used its 43 nuclear tests since 1964 to develop the world's fourth largest nuclear weapons arsenal (only the UK's is smaller). It includes approximately 450 nuclear weapons of at least five different types, made up of around 300 strategic weapons that could be fired from land, air and from submarines and around 150 tactical weapons made up of artillery shells and atomic demolition munitions. Together they have a cumulative yield of over 251 megatons or some 17,000 Hiroshima bombs.
http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/nukes/ctbt/read11.html

Hoisted on your own petard! :cool:

The USA are powerful but to think you could win the following
-Europe as a whole, including Russia
-China and Russia
-A far eastern aliance
-An India, China and Pakistan alliance
etc etc

Alone no nation is significantly power, yeah USA could take on say Syria by itself but it couln't take on a strong alliance.

Has history taught you nothing, all great empires and nations were proud and often boastful of their power. This is the reason they fall.
I have already said, maybe not because of the Japan and China issue, but there will be another major conflict and i fear Iran could be the cause of such a conflict.

"The Russian Army wasn't as big as the Iraqi Army."
well i think i dont have to say anything from now on.
im sorry americans are so confused but i blame the US media for that.

I'll take the US Army over the British one. Didn't we defeat the British Army twice?

Hell we even defeated the Royal Navy too.

when? when we had the largest empire in existence?
when we saved ALL the hostages from the iranian embersy?
when we defeated the spanish armada? no? of course it was wwhen we were miles from home and running out of tea

I never argued about how much the size of the military mattered, I just wanted to give you all something else to argue about, or show you some stats.

Insult Bush all you want. I don't like that fuck either. Don't insult Uncle Sam. I have been polite about France, I expect civility in return.Insult France all you want...
Like if i care :rolleyes:

BTW when I say UncleSam Im talking about the US gov.

...and you can put all the Busshites in there too.

The USA are powerful but to think you could win the following
-Europe as a whole, including Russia
-China and Russia
-A far eastern aliance
-An India, China and Pakistan alliance
etc etc

Alone no nation is significantly power, yeah USA could take on say Syria by itself but it couln't take on a strong alliance.

Has history taught you nothing, all great empires and nations were proud and often boastful of their power. This is the reason they fall.
I have already said, maybe not because of the Japan and China issue, but there will be another major conflict and i fear Iran could be the cause of such a conflict.

No iran couldn put up a fight

"The Russian Army wasn't as big as the Iraqi Army."
well i think i dont have to say anything from now on.
im sorry americans are so confused but i blame the US media for that.

i agree the u.s media( like religeon and korea) is brilliant at breinwashing

A united Europe's military would be significant, but still inferior to the US military.
dude, All that matter is the Nukes...its all about the N-U-K-E-S

dude, All that matter is the Nukes...its all about the N-U-K-E-S
In that case we are justified in building a missile defense system.

In that case we are justified in building a missile defense system.

your not the only countrie with such a defence system

and if only nukes matter(says the other guy) then why do the u.s and u.k train an army?

Total military manpower of:

United States: 73,597,731

China: 379,524,688

Japan: 29,179,095

United Kingdom: 14,943,016

Just thought all you arguing people could use a few statistics.

(All this is information form the United States CIA Website)

http://www.php-resource.de/forum/images/smilies/lol.gif

Sorry to burst your bubble, but that sure as hell isn't the available military man power!

In that case we are justified in building a missile defense system.
of course.

how many u.s special forces are their?

China has about 1.5 billion people and they are becoming a world super power, I bet they will be more powerful than the US in a few years if they aren't already now. China is huge and make almost everything that we use in our lives. I don't think this will be a long WW3 if it turns into that. NUKES. However they will settle it in the end. :sniper:

The recent annerversairy of the Iranian Islamic revolution makes me think otherwise plus Israel would get involved as they are threating to do so and then Russia would have an active interest even more so as Iran or Syria if was Syria under attack would be using a lot of Russian weaponary and Russia and Israel are hardly on speaking terms right now.

American media makes out like the USA would just wonder into Iran and win, like in Iraq, this is not the case.
Iran has an airforce, small but usful enough, it has a good missile program and a population willing to fight. It also has the ability to draft terrorists and Islamic fighters from anywhere in the world.

your not the only countrie with such a defence system

and if only nukes matter(says the other guy) then why do the u.s and u.k train an army?for police work...

If we nuke Iraq and Iran...the price of oil would skyrocket

BTW my name is not (the other guy) :mad:

"The Russian Army wasn't as big as the Iraqi Army."
well i think i dont have to say anything from now on.
im sorry americans are so confused but i blame the US media for that.

Dude, the Iraqi Army was the 3rd largest in the world. It is a known fact. I'm sorry that you don't believe it but it is true.

dude, All that matter is the Nukes...its all about the N-U-K-E-S

Not hardly. Not even Mao the Mad thought these islands were worth that. :rolleyes:

actualy US would like every other nation to drop their nuclear projects but they should keep theirs.. :) thats silly again.
ofourse they dont say it with my words.. and they want to get rid of "some" of their nuclear weapons also.. but everybody knows that an one-eyed is a king in the blind crowd.

your not the only countrie with such a defence system

and if only nukes matter(says the other guy) then why do the u.s and u.k train an army?
Actually we are the only country with a missile defense shield.

China has about 1.5 billion people and they are becoming a world super power, I bet they will be more powerful than the US in a few years if they aren't already now. China is huge and make almost everything that we use in our lives. I don't think this will be a long WW3 if it turns into that. NUKES. However they will settle it in the end. :sniper:

your right i agree finally someone who agrees all day i have been trying to prove chinas worth and no allies

your not the only countrie with such a defence system

and if only nukes matter(says the other guy) then why do the u.s and u.k train an army?
I never said only nukes matter. The US and it's allies, Japan, England, and Israel, perhaps a few others, have some level of missile defense.

when? when we had the largest empire in existence?

The Revolutionary War and then again in 1812

when we saved ALL the hostages from the iranian embersy?

They released them the day before Reagan took office. Try again.

when we defeated the spanish armada? no? of course it was wwhen we were miles from home and running out of tea

You defeated the Spanish Armada yea in the 1500s but you lost on the sea in 1812

NUKES. However they will settle it in the end. :sniper:
exactamente

Actually we are the only country with a missile defense shield.

actually japan britain germany france and some other eastern coutrys have national missile defence systems of some sort or other

corneliu:
is a know fact in your country.. ask any other guy from any other nations and he will laugh about it.
but its not your fault..i said it before.

The recent annerversairy of the Iranian Islamic revolution makes me think otherwise plus Israel would get involved as they are threating to do so and then Russia would have an active interest even more so as Iran or Syria if was Syria under attack would be using a lot of Russian weaponary and Russia and Israel are hardly on speaking terms right now.

American media makes out like the USA would just wonder into Iran and win, like in Iraq, this is not the case.
Iran has an airforce, small but usful enough, it has a good missile program and a population willing to fight. It also has the ability to draft terrorists and Islamic fighters from anywhere in the world.
Nobody here plans to invade Iran. Only bomb the hell out of their reactors and military assets.

Actually we are the only country with a missile defense shield.
Israel is helping develop the arrow missile, so they have missile defense as well. I'm not sure, but I think England and Japan have Aegis type systems on their ships.

The Revolutionary War and then again in 1812



They released them the day before Reagan took office. Try again.



You defeated the Spanish Armada yea in the 1500s but you lost on the sea in 1812

agin i remove my double badged beret to your infinate wisdom

:( :( :(

Mao the Mad ...Mao was Brillant...

US media: 95% acurate...

the 5% is when they portrait the adversaries(enemy and others)

the 5% is badly showing in the international Forums like this

actually japan britain germany france and some other eastern coutrys have national missile defence systems of some sort or other

Because they've been following our lead :p

corneliu:
is a know fact in your country.. ask any other guy from any other nations and he will laugh about it.
but its not your fault..i said it before.

dont argue with cornelieu he has words of infinate wisdom and is quit knowledgable

:rolleyes: Because they've been following our lead :p

well you did invent a bombs i suppose we were going to follow you

Israel is helping develop the arrow missile, so they have missile defense as well. I'm not sure, but I think England and Japan have Aegis type systems on their ships.

Japan only recently and got it from the USA. I'll give you Israel though.