"U.S. cannot defeat China in a War"

The Best way for the United States to avoid a War with the Super Power, Peoples Republic of China, is to pull all Troops out of South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Mongolia, India, Afghanistan etc.

Its good to know that someone is finally able to stand up to George the Second and the Theocracy which is our Government.

There isn't a war that the US can't win, even if the war is made up and we didn't actually win.

I love Wag the Dog!

Ok, so, Whats to say we can't defeat anyone? I think people are forgetting about WW2. I think if the people were roused enough to do it, like if our livlihoods were at steak, then I think its entirely plausible to say we can win against anything.

The will is all we need.

Wow. Totally unbiased assessment.

I don't think you know what you're talking about* in this post at all.


*If you are a citizen of the former Soviet Union, and by "we" you mean comrades from there, than I wholeheartedly apologize and you do know what you're talking about.

Blah blah blah blah blah. How high on the soap box can we get?

Yes, it's a well-known fact that the Chinese people have no respect for life, have no objections to dying in droves in suicide charges, are in fact immune to the effects of radiation and therefore actually want to use nuclear weaponry, smell like peanut butter, have an inordinate affection for chocolate bon-bons, and are all perfect size 6s.

The analysis given in that article is what we rational folks would call 'deeply flawed'. The Chinese government is no more likely than any other superpower to pop open the nuke-launchin' six-pack... no matter what political ideals they express, at the highest levels of government in any major nation everything becomes a risk-profit analysis. 'What do we get if we open the silos?' 'Earth is a cinder.' 'Okay, let's try something else.' Strongarm dictators (particularly very short ones who have the first name 'Kim') worry me a lot more.

Given the latent manufacturing prowess of the US, we absolutely still can obliterate anyone off the face of the earth.

Instantly? No.

But if anyone (including China) tried getting all invadey on us, they would eventually be wiped off and pushed into a corner and shot at until they surrendered.

There's a huge military advantage to having an economy that is 10 times larger than your opponent, and 3 times larger than anyone else in the world (US GDP: 10 trillion dollars. Japan's GDP, #2: 3 trillion dollars. China's GDP: 1 trillion dollars.)

Also given our gigantic military-industrial infrastructure, our robust communications networks, and our powerful allies, I don't really think China would want to mess with us on a bad day.

The US military is still the most lethal and effective military the world has ever seen. China has lots of people; great. We have a lot of chemical, biological, nuclear, and other lovely toys to kill their billion people with. End result: They lose. A lot.

The Chinese Government also thought damming the Yangtze River would produce a beautiful artificial lake with surrounding park as opposed to a giant, poison cesspool.

What's your definition of "win"? Obviously in any all-out war, both the U.S. and China (especially their people) would lose. Badly.

What makes me curious is the Japanese governor's motivation in pointing this out. Does he secretly dream of taking back the Japanese Empire?

When this whole "war on terror" thing started I said that we should cut a deal with mainland china.

They back off on Taiwan and we turn a blind eye as they put the smack down in Afghanistan. Their track record at supression of religion is much better than the US and they are already next door, which saves the whole "negotiate for forward base locations" problem.

Did anyone listen to me? No, of course not, because the whole idea was stuipd.

And thanks for the sig.

awww, but there's no banner pictures in it

Can't win a military war with China?

Come now. They stop paying our bills, we're screwed.

Superman can't defeat Batman in a war.

Discuss.

First off...

(1) We would bomb China until their million man army was severely reduced

(2) China's ballistic missile technology is vulnerable to U.S. air-to-air strike interceptions by anyone of the half-doze U.S. cruisers and destroyers between China and the continunental united states (CONUS).

(3) China has -no way- of fighting a convential war on another country separated from them by water.

(4) China has a very weak navy consisting off old crusiers, retired russian subs, and ahh yes, NO Aircraft carrier.

(5) China lacks the supply-side logistics to keep a million man army fed and ready for combat in the field.

(6) In the end, both sides considered equal, China would still lose the war of attrition, as would Russia. We have the facilities to crank out new battle hardware faster than any country in the world and we also have nearly 350 mothballed naval war vessels.

(7) China's air-force is Russian trained and consists of outdated Mig's and older SU-27's.


The list goes on....

There is no country on this planet that can defeat the United States of America in a convential war. Period.

Briana Dawson

Screw conventional war! I say we have an unconventional war! Maybe one of those Japanese style endurance challenges. Ya know, lay the American and Chinese troops in a giant vat of eels and the last one left in wins.

Far more fun to televise too.

But what if China whips out a giant Batarang?

Or all jump up and down at the same time?

I can't believe what I am reading in this thread. Very worrying lol.

No one EVER wins in war. The politicians fight and the innocent die, its a no win situation.

If politicians think a war must be fought, then the politicians should face off in an arena w. knives and put it on PPV. To the victor goes the spoils.

Ah we have a secret weapon here in the states known as Chuck Norris. So China will not be winning anytime soon.

This is entirely possible, but that would be assuming they are all marching around in Teianeman (sp?) Square. At the same time, again not getting into nuclear war, if we were to invade their land, I'm sure quite a few of the 1,306,313,812 of them would not make our war efforts easy



It would be interesting to see this played out.....



Very true. However, you're also misreading the title of the post. The title isn't, "China can beat the US in a war." The title is "US can't beat China in a war" Same principle as Vietnam. You don't have to win. You just have to not lose.



Quoted from Wikipedia:

The PRC has embarked on a massive modernization program for its military. The PRC has been actively purchasing state of the art fighters such as Su-27, Su-30 and has also been producing its own relatively modern fighters. A comprehensive effort is also been undertaken to modernise the Air defense after the effects of Air superiority in Iraq were observed by the PRC military. The Air defence revolves around the ultra modern S-300 Surface to Air missile which is objectively considered the best system in terms of intercepting aircraft in the world. The PRC is also rapidly improving and upgrading its armoured forces by upgrading their electronics and targeting capabilities. However, the PLA claims that this is in no way aimed at any particular country, and that military modernization is a natural part of a country's development.



And you think the US has enough resources left to sustain a long three-theater war going on? The military is only designed to fight a two theater war as is, and this is already pushing the financial limit of the nation.



To my thought above, all those cranking out costs money. I don't think you'd find the country right now willing to finance another war. At the same time, PRC can literally nationalize industry if it needs to, so it can "crank out new battle hardware" and not have to worry about the cost.



See above thought on PRC's recent upgrading of their military.



I will almost give you that, however, I'll also say that right now, the United States can not wage conventional war with another "superpower" nation and expect to win without losing the fight either in Afghanistan or Iraq ir both.

Don't get me wrong. I served. I know our guys have the best intentions, but I've also seen the gear that is used, and when the standard issue is a gun that clogs if any dirt/sand/etc touches the barrel, and just enough body protection to save your torso (so they have at least one large body part to send home) that is only rated protection against a single grenade at 15 meters (anything closer than that and you might as well be wearing butter), and couple all of that with convincing the large population of America that it is in our best interest to fight and to pay for that fight regardless of our standard of living, and
you have a different story.

Wow.....where did that come from?