numbers don’t mean that much when a us f-22 carries 6 missles and shoots down 1 chinaman for each missle.
out of all the outdated migs, a minority are modern su-27 flankers and su-30s
Who exactly said that the Chinese miltary was inferior?
Sometimes you have to think outside the box.
Im not sure of the details but…there was “that fire” at the Chinese nuclear plant a few years back it was the Chinese that had to tell the Americans that it was a nuclear plant and not a Chemical refinery. We are slowly becoming more and more aware of the deficits in Western Intelligence.
Bacofoil Bowler firmly in place because im a bastard!
You are also tell then chinese have poor army and old tanks and plains
The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) is the world’s largest armed force with a total strength of 2.5 million men and women serving in four arms—ground forces, air force, navy, and strategic missile force. The ground forces along total some 2 million troops and support personnel, or 80% of the PLA’s total manpower. This force also deploys 8,000 tanks, 4,000 armoured vehicles, and 25,000 artillery guns and multiple rocket launchers (MRLs). In time of crisis, this force can be reinforced by a large reserve-militia force numbering more than 1.5 million personnel and the one-million-man People’s Armed Police (PAP).
The structure of the PLA ground force before the mid-1980s reflected operational concepts which envision large numbers of divisions being employed in conjunction with vast paramilitary forces in the defence of China against an all-out attack. The force predominantly consisted of lightly equipped infantry soldiers, supported by tank, artillery, anti-tank, antiaircraft, and engineer units. Their organisations, doctrines and training copied Soviet models.
yep, i am also saying that. their professional army core isn’t very large. the vast majoity are peasant conscripts/volunteers that do a couple year’s service and leave.
their tanks are obsolete compared to the m1 abrams, leoperd II, and the challenger.
of course, fighting such a large population would be vastly difficult and close to impossible to conquer.
but china doesn’t have the ability to project her power.
yep, i am also saying that. their professional army core isn’t very large. the vast majoity are peasant conscripts/volunteers that do a couple year’s service and leave.
their tanks are obsolete compared to the m1 abrams, leoperd II, and the challenger.
of course, fighting such a large population would be vastly difficult and close to impossible to conquer.
but china doesn’t have the ability to project her power.[/quote]
Yes you are right in there ,maybe not for 5 years but for 10 or 20 years china will be power country they power now ,they have nukes ,they send rocket in space ,and :lol: :lol: :lol: which countru can fight against 2.5 millions soldiers :lol: :lol: :lol:
this is heading to a “what if” thread
Well, let’s see.
In 1776 you had 13 “states”, sovereign nations if you like.
By the 1960’s you had 50.
I’d call that pretty expansionist, wouldnt you?
And that’s without considering those places which have been under American rule previously, such as Puerto Rico and the Phillipines etc.
As for huge countries not expanding their territories, Tibet might give you an argument on that score (China), not to mention Uzbekistan, and several eastern European countries, now ex-Soviet satellites.
numbers don’t mean that much when a us f-22 carries 6 missles and shoots down 1 chinaman for each missle.
out of all the outdated migs, a minority are modern su-27 flankers and su-30s[/quote]
What US F-22? How many are there in service? Er none. Please dont assume that because we dominated the air war in the Gulf that it will always be so.
China has nuclear weapons, therefore it is immune from conquest. It can be destroyed (roughly 10% of the US arsenal would kill 90% of the Chinese population, virtually all of their industry and destroy China as a society - what grew back would not be Chinese in any recognisable way).
The same is true for all nuclear powers - they can be destroyed, but not defeated.
Surely this all depends on where and how the battle is fought?
if it is a break through the Border in Korea it will be very different to if it is a Volley for Volley exchange between ICBM batteries on opposing sides of the Pacific.
can we have some Clarifying terms?
I’m not saying it will turn nuclear, just that it would turn nuclear at some stage before China was occupied. That rather limits you to either border skirmishing (and yes a hot war in Korea would count as this, at least to China) or a full-blown nuclear laydown. What you have in between (world war/Napoleonic type) is what is ruled out by the possession of nuclear weapons.
But surely a War with China would not involve occupation of one anothers territory, what possible advantage is there to us having the RGBW dashing about around Beijing when a victory cuold be just as convincing without hte presenceo of ground troops.
Cant we have a nice “cold war” scenario where we play out our global power struggle in some smaller places, i.e. Korea, Taiwan, etc etc
A ground war ultimately serves as a means to destory one anothers forces and leave a victor, but contests for “valued ground” are becoming fewer and fewer. Belgium is not exactly a valuable nation (apologies :oops: ) but it has provided a great venue for some wars over a great many years.
What I was referring to was the difference between a war that destroys an army but leaves the government intact (e.g. 1991 Gulf War) and one that destroys an army and topples a government (2003 Gulf War). The second would not happen to a nuclear weapons power (at least IMOH) due to the risk of them using their weapons. Hence, you dashing around Korea would irritate the Chinese, but dashing around Beijing would quite possibly scare them enough to press some very big red buttons…
I concur.
so, in the event of a hot conflict, which do you think it would be? Do you imagine a War in which we try to topple Beijjing or one where we merely slap their wrists for looking rather too keenly at the demilitarised Zone in Korea?
At a guess it’ll either be a case of no land units (well, maybe the odd irregular one) landing on mainland China with most of the fighting in the sea/air (Taiwan) or the Chinese units involved being “Volunteers” as a face-saving measure to prevent China officially becoming involved in the war (Korea again). I can’t imagine a war to topple the government in Beijing simply because they have nukes, making it far too dangerous. On the other hand, nukes do make people think very long and hard about going to war - there are very few cases indeed of a nuclear power starting a war, and those that are (Iraq et al) are often continuations of earlier wars started by the non-nuclear power.
(as an aside )
I thought that IRAQ did have nuclear weapons and that was why we “must” attack them.
(please ignore)
So far as I’m concerned the fact that the guy is a genocidal scumbag is enough. I can think of quite a few other places that would also benefit from “Regime Change” - are you listening Mr. Mugabe?
Sorry Im on a line from Zimbabwe I cant quite here you, Im breaking up, I would get the telephone man in to repair the line but unfortunately he had an education and was friendly with the Whitemen so I had him killed and gave his car to a farmer. Yes I know the farmer isnt a Farmer and burnt down a barn full of seed grain. But we will get money off Bob Geldof it will all be OK.
numbers don’t mean that much when a us f-22 carries 6 missles and shoots down 1 chinaman for each missle.
out of all the outdated migs, a minority are modern su-27 flankers and su-30s[/quote]
What US F-22? How many are there in service? Er none. Please dont assume that because we dominated the air war in the Gulf that it will always be so.[/quote]
what? f-22s are in service. anyway, the chinese don’t have anything(numbers of su-27,su-30) close to the numbers of f-16,f18s, that we have now. their aviation industry still needs to modernize.
when the average chinese earns a lot more then 6,250 dollars per capita they earn now then maybe they could catch up.
but not in the near future. perhaps when we are old,gray, or dead.
All of that i find on page and thers adress ,i dont know when that been and we here not talking who is stronger now ,topic is who is the next world power you and nobody can denide ,for some years china will have a military power in world ,maybe they not have now but they will ,and why USA so scare china ,they want attack corea ,why did not attack china becouse and china have nukes ,thats all politics i think ,destroy weaknes ,and the stronger countryes will hava all power ,correct me if i wrong mate. :lol: :lol: 