This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

China vs. USA: Why a military conflict may happen and military might compared

Jump to new

basilio

Joined
30 June 2008
Posts
15,590
Reactions
7,468
Just a bit of perspective about war and devastation.

I just finished watching a doco on SBS. It was the final of a 3 part series on the German blitz on Liverpool in May 1941. Seven nights of hellish bombing that killed thousands of people and destroyed tens of thousands of homes and buildings. The suffering and tenacity of those people ..

The doco highlighted the seven days through the lives of a handful of people. Makes one feel very, very fortunate to have skipped that period (Let's pray we don't have a reprise.)

The Blitz: Britain On Fire | Documentary

Presented by Michael Buerk, Angellica Bell and Rob Bell, this three part stripped event focuses on eight critical days in May 1941, when Britain, and Liverpool in particular, was subjected to one of the most intense bombardments of the Blitz . Using eyewitness accounts and recollections from...
www.sbs.com.au
 
First, Taiwan is internationally recognised as part of China so the idea that China needs to or will invade it any time soon is somewhat misguided.
Second, as it stands today, if a military option for Taiwan was to play out, no country is in a position to outgun China: just look at a map of the world.
Third, in the improbable event a stoush occurred it would be due to America's persistent interference: We don't see China holding navy exercises in the Gulf of Mexico or off California's coast.
Finally, long-dated US bonds might not be as sound an investment as you might think. China's economy will be bigger than the USA's in 7-8 years time, and even India's will be bigger than the USA in 25 years.
 

I think you've spent too much time in China, Rob.
 
The Chinese could enjoy a few good movies before anything arrived from Australia.
Anyway, China's missile system means they could ward off any unwelcome craft without needing to launch a ship or or take to the skies:
 
On his way out the door, Donald Trump green-lit any American political leader, any diplomat, can visit Taiwan in their official capacity as an American representative, which is a bee's dick from formal recognition as a country.

Biden then reaffirmed it:



And sent two aircraft carriers into the south china sea ostensibly for "naval exercises" but in reality to do nothing other than send a message by outright taunting the Chinese:





The United States has 11 supercarrier battle groups. The rest of the world combined has zero. China also has zero.

The Americans are literally taunting them over this.



China is also completely dependent on the most vulnerable energy supply route in the entire world:




The question is not whether America could beat China in a war, it's not even a question - declared on friday, it would be over before the weekend was out. The question is whether America cares enough to do so.

The only real reason it would is because of how reliant they/the world is on Taiwan's microchip manufacturing capacity, but even that is being shifted on-shore in the largest microchip investments in history:



Considering that the united states did literally nothing when Iran seized an oil tanker destined for the only other country the U.S is dependent on for anything (microchips from south korea on account of samsung):



Then any actual U.S military action appears unlikely.



It's not that they can't, it's that they no longer care to. There is a reason why countries like South Korea and Japan, countries which really, REALLY don't like each other and have a very long history of really, really not liking each other, are now doing things like forming alliances:



They have (correctly) realised that they are now on their own.


So yes, you're right, but not for the reasons you think. America could absolutely mop the floor with China if they wanted to. China would never even land a single boot on Taiwanese soil. The air war, necessary to win before even thinking about a seaborne invasion, would be desert storm 2.0.
 
over9k said:
So yes, you're right, but not for the reasons you think. America could absolutely mop the floor with China if they wanted to. China would never even land a single boot on Taiwanese soil.
Click to expand...
There is a gulf between your ideas and reality.
First, any unwelcome overtures will be pinpointed quickly. That will occur easily enough as China has advanced satellite surveillance systems.
Secondly, for all intents and purposes any forces hoping to support Taiwan will effectively be trying that on Chinese soil. That's a recipe for disaster as Australia learned at Gallipoli. Expeditionary forces would be grossly outnumbered and their supply lines easy targets.
Finally, regarding oil supply issues, China's strategic reserve runs to almost 85 days. But as their ships and planes would hardly be leaving their bases, it's not an issue .

Anyway, you need to ask yourself why American provocation is occurring, as there seems no sensible reason for instigating conflict.
 
I have said this before, Chinese soldiers, commanders and whole army has never engaged in any real combat. 0 hours, beat a few Indian soldiers with sticks at best.

Since ww2 Usa has been constantly in battle, real world experience is invaluable compared to China's scare tactics and teens with wooden rifles

USA would wipe the floor with china, don't buy into the ccp propaganda and sabre rattling
 
Tried to find the quote, which is about 25 years old, but couldn't ... It was along the lines of "China could march the PLA over a cliff at the rate of 30,000 a day and it wouldn't affect their ability to replenish their forces".

That's no longer the case: probably only be able to do 20k nowadays.. but from the people that brought you 'suicide waves' in Korea, they'd be likely to give it another go.
 
There's not a gulf at all. Think about this for a second: If china dominates the south china sea, sending two entire aircraft carrier battle groups into it would be the height of stupidity no?

So either the americans are galactically stupid and near as makes no difference trying to get their carriers sunk, or they know full well that the chinese can't do ****.

I'm not trying to be awful here man but you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. People just do not understand just how much long range firepower projection the yanks actually have. In desert storm, they ran a squadron of B52's on a 35 hour long mission to bomb iraq directly from a takeoff in the united states just to let the rest of the world know they could do it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Senior_Surprise

Again, the question is not whether they could secure taiwan, the question is whether they care to. Their response to iran's actions against korea should tell you a lot.
 
China want to take Taiwan with some sort of deal with the USA. Now the previous Potus has gone, there isn't much hope of that.

The USA know that they will take losses also if there is a war, especially the wealthy with their manufacturing facilities in China and companies like Caterpillar who export into China.
 
That is not very adept analysis.
This would be a conflict fought a matter of minutes off the Chinese coast. Expeditionary forces would have to run a gauntlet of missiles that will be guided electronically, just to get close enough to be any threat whatsoever.

Your notion of "battle" is at odds with the fact that China has the world's largest navy, and to get to Taiwan any US/allied forces would need to traverse a minimum of 400km across the ocean.

As to "sabre rattling", it's the USA calling the shots. Why aren't you asking why they are so provocative?
 
China has the largest number of ships. By tonnage, their navy is about a third of america's.

They also have zero aircraft carriers, whilst the yanks are actively waving theirs in front of them well within range of their coastal defences. Tons are not all created equal.

The yanks aren't doing this because they're scared of them. Gunboat diplomacy is not a new concept.


Again, we are all focused on the wrong question here.
 
China has no intention of dominating anything. It has a land border of some 22000km which it shares with another 14 countries. It has enough on its plate without needing to worry about Taiwan.

As to the US actions with their battle group exercises I am 99.9% sure they would have stood no chance against a Chinese missile attack, so yes, their provocations are not particularly clever.

Your idea that I have no idea what I am talking about is based on what you think as distinct from what I know. You and others here are overlooking the fact that China is a first world military adversary with a satellite defence system superior to Russia's. The USA has never had a modern war against a country with any might.

Irrespective of military might, the overarching issue is what would be gained? Why is the US so keen to drive a wedge between Taiwan and China? The population of Taiwan are CHINESE, not American.
 
rederob said:
Why is the US so keen to drive a wedge between Taiwan and China? The population of Taiwan are CHINESE, not American.
Click to expand...

But they are increasingly seeing themselves as Taiwanese and according to the Pew Research Center only a third of the adult population of Taiwan has a favourable view of mainland China, while 68% have a favourable view of the USA. That's a very telling statistic.

Among those 18-29, 89% support closer economic ties with the USA, while only 39% support closer economic ties to mainland China.

It is becoming increasingly clear that Taiwan does not want to be a part of mainland China any longer, and with the Taiwanese youth feeling even more strongly about this, that sentiment is only going to become stronger in the future. 83% of Taiwanese aged 18-29 see themselves as solely Taiwanese, while only 13% see themselves as Taiwanese and Chinese.

Taiwanese independence is coming, whether mainland China likes it or not.
 
You might want to keep that opinion open. As I see it, making Taiwan Chinese politically is close to the major policy objective of the chinese government. It may be that Xi's continued health depends on achieving it.
 

Alright cancel the thread guys, we're dealing with a real intellectual heavyweight here. I don't even know why the yanks have dozens of generals, admirals etc with decades of experience and knowledge in military operations deploying multi billion dollar carrier fleets, they should just sack the lot of them and put this guy in charge.
 
Why you think a nation that was unsuccessful in the Korean War, Vietnam War and in Afghanistan - just to name a few - would fare better against China beggars belief. US military commanders have a pathetic track record and their field troops are only ever successful when they can bring greater fire power to a situation.
You even promoted the idea that America has more fleet tonnage than China so is superior. Really!
And this from you; "They also have zero aircraft carriers...." Is also at odds with reality:

Here's your weakest case:
over9k said:
You don't place two aircraft carrier battle groups in the south china sea within spitting distance of the chinese coastline without reason. I would have thought that would go without saying, but apparently not.
Click to expand...
Yes you do. It's called "provocation".
That US fleet could have been blown out of the water in no time by China but for some reason you think you know better.

Can you claim to have visited every army, navy, and air force base in your State to write official Defence Department Reports? I can!
So stump up with substance rather than make believe.

It's true that China is many years behind in microchip fabrication technology and America has used its bullying tactics to keep it that way. If you are as clever as you think you are, then you can tell us what that last sentence of mine was about. Because that's the issue that very few people get to hear about, and shows the USA to be nothing more than international thugs.
 
Last edited:

Or you could check out the war gaming results of US/China conflict the US Generals had to ponder last year. Wasn't good news

Also a small gunboat with a decent anti ship missile system system can cripple a carrier.
A small fleet of such boats would make this outcome inevitable. Which takes us back to the war gaming outcome.

Type 22 missile boat - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...