• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

China thinks it can defeat America in battle

apdst said:
I fancy leaders who prefer peace, but aren't afraid to fight, if the need arises. Our current chump-in-charge is a ****ing coward.
Click to expand...

That's just not true apdst, stop hating.
 
If its any comfort, The North Koreans believe they can kick our ass as well....
 
Peter Grimm said:
I'm not against new technology, but testing something against drones and proving something out in the heat of battle are two different things. I think we would see these new weapons, but we would be fools to plan military victory around them.

Even "the bomb" didn't win WW2 for us. We were already knocking on Japan's door and that was via conventional means, we only tested our fancy new weapon right at the end and, as it happened, it worked so well it probably shortened the war by a few months.
Click to expand...


It's a addition to an already large and varried inventory.

An addition that I'm sure was vetted in terms of its practicality and effectiveness.

Its a weapon that has the potential to reach out and disable communications at light speed.
 
shrubnose said:
The bad news first. The Peoples Republic of China now believes that it can successfully prevent the United States from intervening in the event of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan or some other military assault by Beijing.
Click to expand...

Uh, that is because it can do just that. Note that it does not claim China believes it can defeat the U.S. in a war, only that it can deploy sufficient resources in a short enough period of time that America will simply have no choice but to let events play out rather than directly intervening. In that respect I certainly do believe China has the military capacity to achieve a rapid series of successes against Taiwanese forces. They could easily take out Taiwan's fleet, which is mostly crap save for the Kidd destroyers, and their air force is pretty decrepit as well. Compared to China, which has most of the latest bobs and whistles, Taiwan is like Iraq going up against the United States. I imagine the Chinese have studied the implications of conflicts like the Persian Gulf War for an attack on Taiwan very closely. Taiwan would find itself unable to defend its waters and airspace within a day. A rapid series of airstrikes using an array of precision-guided munitions could wipe out most of Taiwan's air defense structure in 24 hours and its navy would be even easier to dispense with than that. From that moment on, China can erect a total air and naval blockade over the main island and seize the smaller islands with ease. A land invasion would be the trickiest part, but exactly how much will the people of Taiwan will have to resist is uncertain. If they realize the U.S. is not coming to save them, many may prefer preventing the economic devastation and loss of life that would result from a lengthy resistance campaign and see if they can instead negotiate favorable terms for reunification.

Peter Grimm said:
Newsflash #2.... North Korea could conquer South Korea and annihilate the US presence there as well.
Click to expand...

Um, no, actually. I do think North Korea could cause massive destruction to South Korea through a variety of military measures if it strikes first, but the ROK's military capabilities are far greater than North Korea's. They would have to use nukes to stand a chance and I am not even sure that would make a difference, but they will not be able to prevent international intervention if they try such a thing. China will take care of Pyongyang itself in that scenario.

Paxaeon said:
`
Question: What kind of amphibious landing capabilities do the Chinese have?
Click to expand...

They have three modern LPDs each capable of carrying over 500 troops at a time with several more being built, dozens of older and lower tech LSTs that could each carry a few hundred troops, and they have several Zubr-class air-cushioned landing crafts that are fully capable of making a round trip from one side of the Strait to another with fuel to spare in just four hours and can carry as many as 500 troops. You then have to consider their ability to deploy paratroopers, which as far back as 1988 was said to be capable of deploying 10,000 troops to any part of China in a matter of days. Exactly how many troops they could deploy in a matter of days with all their resources in play is unclear, though it is likely they could get at least 20,000 soldiers on Taiwan in the first 48 hours, most likely more as with total air and naval dominance in this age it would be much easier to establish a beachhead and from that point they can just use any means at their disposal to reinforce their position on the main island. Mind you, all the little islands would likely be taken in this initial period of conflict, including the Penghu islands.

One potential source of conflict in the event of a war with Taiwan are the current holdings they have in the South China Sea. I have no doubt the PRC would be looking to take Taiping island in the Spratly Island chain and it would be quite the prize to have for any power in the region. Vietnam and the Philippines would not be pleased with that result, though.
 
Montecresto said:
Your kidding right!! Please say that you don't think that the Pentagons historically bloated budget has kept the US out of war!!
Click to expand...

Would you pick on the biggest, baddest kid in the yard?

If other people know you can probably beat them up, they won't be quick to pick a fight with you. And that leads to peace.

The reluctance to fight leads to massive battles like WW2.
 
Fenton said:
It's a addition to an already large and varried inventory.

An addition that I'm sure was vetted in terms of its practicality and effectiveness.

Its a weapon that has the potential to reach out and disable communications at light speed.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of that.
 
Nobody will win a war with China. If they are sufficiently motivated, only nukes will stop them. If we use enough nukes to win, the whole planet will be screwed.
 
Hard Truth said:
Nobody will win a war with China. If they are sufficiently motivated, only nukes will stop them. If we use enough nukes to win, the whole planet will be screwed.
Click to expand...

The Chinese weren't able to defeat us in Korea.
 
Deuce said:
They weren't nearly the manufacturing superpower then.
Click to expand...

I'm refuting the idea that numbers alone make the difference. Read back and catch up.
 
Hard Truth said:
Nobody will win a war with China. If they are sufficiently motivated, only nukes will stop them. If we use enough nukes to win, the whole planet will be screwed.
Click to expand...

nah, it wouldn't take nukes

conventional weapons would do the trick just fine.
 
Peter Grimm said:
I wonder if they really believe that, or if it's just bs propaganda to keep their people in line.
Click to expand...

I think they believe it...because they lack the access to know better.
 
Manc Skipper said:
How will a submarine, nuclear or otherwise, prevent an invasion over a 100-mile strait?
Click to expand...

They are at the pinnacle of difficult to find and stop. Bordering on impossible. They can function as an attack sub as well as a missile sub. Meaning any navy crossing that strait might find itself at their mercy.
 
Peter Grimm said:
I didn't say that. My point was just that the MAD argument is a byproduct of Cold War hysteria, and most likely overstated.

That said, there is no doubt that nuclear weapons are the most powerful and destructive weapons man has ever built. I wouldn't support using them unless we had a really, really good reason.

The argument, though, that because China have nukes and the US have nukes and therefore any war between the two countries would result in mutually assured destruction is bullcrap.
Click to expand...

Depends on what you call destruction, I guess. A nuclear war is winnable, in a last-man-standing kind of way, but it'd be tough to sell the idea to people who live in a target city. Those pictures you posted took a generation of recovery. No doubt you've also seen pictures of Hiroshima days after the bomb- that's how LA and Seattle and Honolulu would look.
It'd take grim determination on the part of a Commander-in-Chief to accept that degree of destruction in America for the sake of honouring a treaty with Taiwan.
 
Thrilla said:
numbers don't mean ****... unless you are fighting hand to hand
Click to expand...

I misfired on that one. I meant to say, even then, number do not replace tactics.
 
I think China is correct given that very specific scenario. Taiwan is just too close to such a large nation for America to project total control over a prolonged period. Although America maintains technical superiority to some degree, just the sheer proximity means low-tech assaults on US naval forces would be effective. (and one wonders how much of our technological advantage still exists these days. China probably has stolen or bought half the designs in our inventory) A large enough barrage of land-based missiles can overwhelm any naval defense of the island, and even of the carrier groups themselves. Leave American ships out of reach of land-based missiles and you've just given up an enormous gap in reaction times. China also just has a far larger base of resources to work with. Having quadruple the population has advantages. In any case, the costs to China would be severe. They'd lose a lot of troop transports and aircraft to carrier-based US fighters and our subs.

The scenario makes some assumptions, though: that nuclear weapons are off the table and America is attempting to minimize collateral damage in Taiwan. If nukes come out, the entire discussion of navies and invasions is purely academic, and if America is willing to flatten a country there's nobody that can stop us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom