• 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!

Theoretically: Chinese military VS Japanese military. Who would win?

But we spent years prior to that perfecting and equiping out Amphibious Warfare forces. We had hundreds of Amphibious Warfare ships either off the shores of Okinawa, or enroute there for the Invasion of Japan when the surrender came.

To give an idea, we had 117 Haskell class ships, 32 Gilliam class ships, 116 Attack Transports of various classes, 34 Bayfield class, 140 High Speed Transports, and so on and so on and so on. The number of ships to be involved is simply staggering.

And China has absolutley nothing even remotely like that. They lack the amphibious capability to even attack Taiwan.

Do some research, do not just make things up.

Now show us a list of a similar number of Chinese Amphibious Warfare ships.

Amphibious warfare ships[14]

Amphibious Transport Dock (LPD)

Yuzhao class (Type 071) - 2 in service (more under construction)
Landing Ship Tank (LST) - unknown

Yukan class (Type 072) - 7 in service
Yuting I class (Type 072II) - 11 in service
Yuting II class (Type 072III) - 12 in service (more under construction)
total - 30

Landing Ship Medium (LSM)

Yudeng III class (Type 073) - 1 in service
Yudao II class (Type 073) - 1 in service
Yunshu IV class (Type 073) - 11? in service
Yuhai class (Type 074) - 20 in service
Yuliang/Yuling class (Type 079) - 25 in service
total - 58

Troop Transports & Hospital Ships

Qiongsha class - 6 in service
Amphibious warfare craft[14]

Landing Craft (LC)

Yunnan class (Type 067) - 200 in reserve
Yuch'in class (Type 068) - 30 in reserve
Yupen class (Type 271) - 100? in service
Type 724 LCAC - 30 in service
Yubei class LCU 10+? in service
total - 140 + 230 in reserve
 
But we spent years prior to that perfecting and equiping out Amphibious Warfare forces. *We had hundreds of Amphibious Warfare ships either off the shores of Okinawa, or enroute there for the Invasion of Japan when the surrender came.

To give an idea, we had 117 Haskell class ships, 32 Gilliam class ships, 116 Attack Transports of various classes, 34 Bayfield class, 140 High Speed Transports, and so on and so on and so on. *The number of ships to be involved is simply staggering.

And China has absolutley nothing even remotely like that. *They lack the amphibious capability to even attack Taiwan.

Do some research, do not just make things up.

Now show us a list of a similar number of Chinese Amphibious Warfare ships.

Also Type 722II,*Type 724 Hovercraft for troops and Russian designed Zubr Class tank carriers are being developed.

People's Liberation Army Navy

The Chinese military exercised frequently with large civilian ships. These civilian types include Roll-on/Roll-off ships, freighters, ferries, vehicle transports and various logistical assets. Therefore if they could effectively utilize all these transports, the actual sea lift capacity of the Chinese sea forces is significantly higher. Helicopters and air dropped troops/vehicles in any amphibious operation will also greatly increase the number of troops in a sea lift. Although this combined military lift is very impressive and the second largest sea lift capability in the world, it is distributed across three different fleets.
 
Actually that is not hard to find at all:

http://www.dtra.mil/documents/ntpr/factsheets/Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki_Occupation_Forces.pdf

Once again, this is called "research" my friend. With it you can find some absolutely amazing things, and not just make them up.

Hiroshima was occupied by 1 Infantry Regiment, which is only a few thousand soldiers. The total number to have occupied it is around 40,000, from the beginning to the end of the occupation. This is not at any one time, but over years.

In Nagasaki, the numbers are a bit different for other reasons. This was the main port which US servicemen came to and from Japan, including all repatriated POWs. Here it is estimated that the numbers are in the hundreds of thousands.

But either way, much less then the millions that would have been involved in an invasion.

You're so far off my point that it's laughable. A late friend of mine was in Nagasaki in Sept 1945. The point was, that after the bombing, we sent troops in.
 
But we spent years prior to that perfecting and equiping out Amphibious Warfare forces. We had hundreds of Amphibious Warfare ships either off the shores of Okinawa, or enroute there for the Invasion of Japan when the surrender came.

To give an idea, we had 117 Haskell class ships, 32 Gilliam class ships, 116 Attack Transports of various classes, 34 Bayfield class, 140 High Speed Transports, and so on and so on and so on. The number of ships to be involved is simply staggering.

And China has absolutley nothing even remotely like that. They lack the amphibious capability to even attack Taiwan.

Do some research, do not just make things up.

Now show us a list of a similar number of Chinese Amphibious Warfare ships.




International Assessment and Strategy Center > Research > China’s New Large Amphibious Assault Ship
On December 20, Shanghai’s Hudong Zhonghua Shipyard launched the PLAN’s largest indigenously designed combat ship to date, known as the Type 071 "amphibious landing dock" (LPD) amphibious assault ship. This decade has witnessed the results of China’s most profound investment in naval power—perhaps since the legendary Muslim eunuch from the former state of Nanzhao, Zheng He, built and led his fleet on ocean-going junks in the early 15th Century on a mission whose purpose has never been clear. Since 1996 China has launched or purchased 29 new conventional and nuclear submarines, 10 modern air defense destroyers, 20+ new medium size amphibious assault ships, three new large underway supply ship, and has taken its initial steps toward building aircraft carriers.
Like the aircraft carrier, the new large LPD amphibious assault ship marks an important step toward building a navy that can project "hard" and "soft" power far from China’s East Asian littoral. Large amphibious assault ships such as these carry Marine or Army troops, plus their associated armored, mechanized and transport vehicles, artillery, plus a small number of transport or attack helicopters.

China at Sea | Hoover Institution
China’s first unilateral marine assault, when it comes, stands to be an enormous geopolitical irritant that may push the United States and China toward conflict. In Washington, however, where old-fashioned amphibious assault is out of favor, defense policy makers are ignoring the dangers posed by a large, modern Chinese amphibious fleet. Those Chinese forces are growing; in time they will support the deployment of marines well beyond the narrow confines of the first island chain. Managing the wary coexistence of two independent-minded blue-water amphibious forces, Chinese and American, presents an underestimated strategic challenge.

Now, what was that you said about research?
 
Also Type 722II,*Type 724 Hovercraft for troops and Russian designed Zubr Class tank carriers are being developed.

Trust me when I say I am very familiar with the amphibious capabilities of the PLAN. This is something I have discussed in here a great many times over the years.

The vast majority of Chinese Amphibious assets are in Landing Craft (LC). These are all shallow water vessels, capable of holding a single tank, or around 1 platoon of Infantry. These are simply updated versions of what the US used on Normandy, or on the islands in the Pacific. Not capable of crossing open ocean, not capable of operating on their own. These have to be brought along in the holds of the amphibious or other ships.

This is what a Type 067 Landing Craft looks like:

type067_yunan_01.jpg


A nice, big, slow moving target, first built in 1964 (and only 130-135 were built).

Then the type 271, a bit bigger then the Type 067:

PLAN-Type067-1.jpg


These numbers and ships may sound impressive to you, but to me they are not much of a threat at all.

And hovercraft are nice and good and all, I have traveled on them myself. But they have to be taken close in, they are not launched from Mainland China and then sent to Japan with their cargo.

And yes, I am familiar with the claims of the use of civilian ships. But these are not amphibious warfare ships. These are not well protected, have very large RADAR signatures, and have no defenses. I have seen war games with these in use, and it is expected that 1/2 to 2/3 of them will be sitting on the botton of the sea long before they get close enough to launch their cargos. And they are designed to offload containers by cranes, not large numbers of troops and military equipment.

Same with the civilian ROROs. These are designed to offload civilian cargos at a friendly harbor. The kind of RORO that the military uses is far different then that civilian shipping lines use.

Do not confuse sea lift capability with amphibious assault capability. That is like comparing civilian airlift capability with an Air Force that can penetrate a hostile air zone. 2 totally different things. FedEx has an impressive airlift capability, but that does not mean they can invade anybody.
 
You're so far off my point that it's laughable. A late friend of mine was in Nagasaki in Sept 1945. The point was, that after the bombing, we sent troops in.

And once again, you fail to grasp the difference between a hostile invasion and occupation forces.


I am familiar with the Type 071. Do you know how many of these ships they have?

3

That's right, 3. Each one carries roughly 1 Marine Battalion. That means that with all of the Type 071 ships, they can't even move a single Regiment.

Probably the closest ship in the US inventory is the Whidbey Island class. These inclide the LSD-41 USS Whidbey Island, a ship I have served on myself. The US has 8 of these, enough of this one ship class to move 2 Marine Regiments.

Yes, I know quite a bit about these ships and their capability. And let me give you my background just so you know why I know so much.

For 10 years I was a Marine, Infantry, and specialized in both Jungle Warfare and Amphibious Warfare. I do not just look at lists of equipment then pick and choose, I consider all aspects involved when making these discussions.

Now let's carry this a bit farther, shall we? In order to get the ships and their troops to the zone of conflict, they are going to have to cross open water. And guess what is probably the weakest part of the PLAN?

Yep, that's right. Both their experience in operating as a "Blue Water Navy", and the types of ships that would be required to protect these slow moving tubs we call Amphibious Warfare Ships. In fact, China barely has enough destroyers to protect their one and only Aircraft Carrier (without aircraft), let alone a fleet of Amphibs. Their largest combat ships are destroyers, of which they have 25 (half of them Vietnam War era [1971] Type 051).

And their Frigates are not much better. Their leading class is the Type 053 (based on the Soviet Riga class circa 1952). The Type 054 is only recently starting to pass the older 053 in numbers.

But no parts of the PLAN is really experienced in "Blue Water Operations", and spends most of it's time tied up alongside the docks, or patroling their coastal waters.

And let's compare the numbers, shall we? The PLAN has 25 destroyers of all classes, the US has 61 destroyers of just a single class (the Arleigh Burke). The PLAN has 47 frigates, the US has 71 of just a single class (Oliver Perry).

So the numbers of Destroyers and Frigates actually does not impress me at all, because I am familiar with the ships they have, and most are similar to classes the US retired decades ago. Even the Soviet ships they were based on were retired decades ago.

Japan will know within hours of this fleet leaving the warfs, and I would be surprised if more then a handfull got within shouting distance of making an assault. And even then, they simply lack the capability, training, and equipment needed to force their way onto a contested beach.

So please tell me I am wrong. This is an example of an amateur trying to tell a professional about his job. To you this is simply looking up web pages. To me, this is my profession and has been for decades.
 
And once again, you fail to grasp the difference between a hostile invasion and occupation forces.



I am familiar with the Type 071. Do you know how many of these ships they have?

3

That's right, 3. Each one carries roughly 1 Marine Battalion. That means that with all of the Type 071 ships, they can't even move a single Regiment.

Probably the closest ship in the US inventory is the Whidbey Island class. These inclide the LSD-41 USS Whidbey Island, a ship I have served on myself. The US has 8 of these, enough of this one ship class to move 2 Marine Regiments.

Yes, I know quite a bit about these ships and their capability. And let me give you my background just so you know why I know so much.

For 10 years I was a Marine, Infantry, and specialized in both Jungle Warfare and Amphibious Warfare. I do not just look at lists of equipment then pick and choose, I consider all aspects involved when making these discussions.

Now let's carry this a bit farther, shall we? In order to get the ships and their troops to the zone of conflict, they are going to have to cross open water. And guess what is probably the weakest part of the PLAN?

Yep, that's right. Both their experience in operating as a "Blue Water Navy", and the types of ships that would be required to protect these slow moving tubs we call Amphibious Warfare Ships. In fact, China barely has enough destroyers to protect their one and only Aircraft Carrier (without aircraft), let alone a fleet of Amphibs. Their largest combat ships are destroyers, of which they have 25 (half of them Vietnam War era [1971] Type 051).

And their Frigates are not much better. Their leading class is the Type 053 (based on the Soviet Riga class circa 1952). The Type 054 is only recently starting to pass the older 053 in numbers.

But no parts of the PLAN is really experienced in "Blue Water Operations", and spends most of it's time tied up alongside the docks, or patroling their coastal waters.

And let's compare the numbers, shall we? The PLAN has 25 destroyers of all classes, the US has 61 destroyers of just a single class (the Arleigh Burke). The PLAN has 47 frigates, the US has 71 of just a single class (Oliver Perry).

So the numbers of Destroyers and Frigates actually does not impress me at all, because I am familiar with the ships they have, and most are similar to classes the US retired decades ago. Even the Soviet ships they were based on were retired decades ago.

Japan will know within hours of this fleet leaving the warfs, and I would be surprised if more then a handfull got within shouting distance of making an assault. And even then, they simply lack the capability, training, and equipment needed to force their way onto a contested beach.

So please tell me I am wrong. This is an example of an amateur trying to tell a professional about his job. To you this is simply looking up web pages. To me, this is my profession and has been for decades.



Once again; you deflect a simple hypothetical. I've already shown you that China can in fact pull off an invasion and that they have 10 times more people than Japan with which to do it.

And now you're going to split the hairs all the ay down in order to make me wrong somehow?

(chuckle)

dude
 
Once again; you deflect a simple hypothetical. I've already shown you that China can in fact pull off an invasion and that they have 10 times more people than Japan with which to do it.

And now you're going to split the hairs all the ay down in order to make me wrong somehow?

(chuckle)

dude

*sigh*

And how are they going to get there, march?

Yes, I will grant you that they can pull it off. If their invasion is 100% completely unopposed, and Japan does not fight in any way.

Otherwise, not a chance. And I am not splitting hairs. China simply totally lacks the kinds of assets needed to pull off an amphibious assault against a hostile nation.

Real military operations are not like playing video games boy.
 
*sigh*

And how are they going to get there, march?

Yes, I will grant you that they can pull it off. If their invasion is 100% completely unopposed, and Japan does not fight in any way.

Otherwise, not a chance. And I am not splitting hairs. China simply totally lacks the kinds of assets needed to pull off an amphibious assault against a hostile nation.

Real military operations are not like playing video games boy.

Video games? Boy??

Do you know why we have nuclear weapons in this world? Does it occurr to you that the reason is because nobody could win a convential war with the Chinese?

But, you admit that I was right about them being able to invade Japan.

That's enough.
 
Video games? Boy??

Do you know why we have nuclear weapons in this world? Does it occurr to you that the reason is because nobody could win a convential war with the Chinese?

But, you admit that I was right about them being able to invade Japan.

That's enough.

Oozlefinch is quite right in what he says. In order to pull off an invasion of that magnitude, (think Normandy) will require surprise on several levels. If they dont get it, their invasion, if they can get a foothold, will be VERY expensive in terms of equipment and resources. That does not include manpower as I am going to assume they have an infinite supply of TRAINED men that they are not afraid of throwing into the meat grinder. Militaries require logistics which is what I did in Iraq. It aint easy or simple. And Mr.Murphy is always gunning for ya. He will get you at THE WORST possible moment. Count on it.
 
Oozlefinch is quite right in what he says. In order to pull off an invasion of that magnitude, (think Normandy) will require surprise on several levels. If they dont get it, their invasion, if they can get a foothold, will be VERY expensive in terms of equipment and resources. That does not include manpower as I am going to assume they have an infinite supply of TRAINED men that they are not afraid of throwing into the meat grinder. Militaries require logistics which is what I did in Iraq. It aint easy or simple. And Mr.Murphy is always gunning for ya. He will get you at THE WORST possible moment. Count on it.

Yeah, and if war broke out between China and Japan, what makes you think that the Chinese wouldn't be ready?
 
Yeah, and if war broke out between China and Japan, what makes you think that the Chinese wouldn't be ready?

I presume you know Murphy's Law? "What can go wrong, will go wrong, at the worst possible instant." There is a collery to that law, O'Neils collery to be excact. "Murphy was an optomist." A great many things would have to come though for the Chinease to achieve complete surprise on all levels. If they can get it, then with the current levels of equipment and matierials it would be unlikely they could succeed with an invasion without VERY significant cost. The butchers bill in money time and blood would be exceptionally costly. Could they accomplish an invasion? Yes. The question is not wheteher they can accomplish the invasion, its whether they can or wish to afford it.

The Chinease are ready now with what they have. The question comes down to will. Are they willing to do what it will take? The cost as I see it would be prohibitive. Further it would be in the long run counter to their long term objectives. Just because you can, doesnt mean you should. Remember China is the birth place of Sun Tzu, they are not strategic dummies.
 
Video games? Boy??

Do you know why we have nuclear weapons in this world? Does it occurr to you that the reason is because nobody could win a convential war with the Chinese?

But, you admit that I was right about them being able to invade Japan.

That's enough.

You have yet to explain why it would be impossible to win a war with China in the northern Pacific. The reason no one is interested in discussing Chinese troop numbers is because it is irrelevant to the scenario being posed. If you think otherwise, please substantively explain why.
 
Video games? Boy??

Do you know why we have nuclear weapons in this world? Does it occurr to you that the reason is because nobody could win a convential war with the Chinese?

But, you admit that I was right about them being able to invade Japan.

That's enough.

Wasn't his point that China only has the capacity to move a few battalions of marine infantry at a time, and that anything else relies upon securing a deep water port and the utilization of commercial freighters? An invasion is very unlikely, and not really part of the realistic discussion.
 
Part of Japan's new constitution following the Second World War is that they dissolved their military forces. They have an unstructured civilian defensive force that isn't capable of conducting military operations.

That the Japanese military is called the Japanese Self Defense Forces (JSDF) is misleading, it is one of the most powerful and well equipped fighting forces in the world today. It consists of more than 70 major combat vessels, several hundred front line fighter and combat aircraft, and a well developed technical infrastructure to support both the naval and aerial arms.
 
That the Japanese military is called the Japanese Self Defense Forces (JSDF) is misleading, it is one of the most powerful and well equipped fighting forces in the world today. It consists of more than 70 major combat vessels, several hundred front line fighter and combat aircraft, and a well developed technical infrastructure to support both the naval and aerial arms.

They have just under 240,000 personnel. They aren't even in the top 20 of military powers.
 
They have just under 240,000 personnel. They aren't even in the top 20 of military powers.

They are certainly in the top 20 powers, and likely in the upper tiers of the top 10. Military power is not derived from how many bodies you slap into a uniform, its 2012 not 1914. Japan has a extremely technically sophisticated military, and maintains one of the largest actively maintained and technically equipped surface and aerial combat fleets on the planet. The JMSDF is the fifth largest in the world, and its ships are extremely advanced and well integrated with Japanese electronic warfare stations and operational battle command posts. It has the 6th highest rate of military spending in the world today, and has a massive domestic military industrial complex.
 
They are certainly in the top 20 powers, and likely in the upper tiers of the top 10. Military power is not derived from how many bodies you slap into a uniform, its 2012 not 1914. Japan has a extremely technically sophisticated military, and maintains one of the largest actively maintained and technically equipped surface and aerial combat fleets on the planet. The JMSDF is the fifth largest in the world, and its ships are extremely advanced and well integrated with Japanese electronic warfare stations and operational battle command posts. It has the 6th highest rate of military spending in the world today, and has a massive domestic military industrial complex.

I hate to burst your bubble, but technology doesn't mean **** if you don't have the boots on the ground to back it.
 
I hate to burst your bubble, but technology doesn't mean **** if you don't have the boots on the ground to back it.

Boots on the Pacific Ocean? Ground troops are not really relevant to this scenario or the kind of war that China and Japan would become involved in.
 
Boots on the Pacific Ocean? Ground troops are not really relevant to this scenario or the kind of war that China and Japan would become involved in.

It's an expression meaning manpower. Japan doesn't have enough of it to win a war against China without allied assistance.
 
It's an expression meaning manpower. Japan doesn't have enough of it to win a war against China without allied assistance.

It has more than enough 'manpower' for a modern conflict. Japanese defensive priorities will revolve around maintaining control if its littoral, its islet holdings, and of course contesting control of the air with an aim to winning control. It is well placed to accomplish these objectives. Manpower has nothing to do with it whatsoever.
 
It has more than enough 'manpower' for a modern conflict. Japanese defensive priorities will revolve around maintaining control if its littoral, its islet holdings, and of course contesting control of the air with an aim to winning control. It is well placed to accomplish these objectives. Manpower has nothing to do with it whatsoever.

Manpower has everything to do with it. You say modern warfare like somehow location, manpower, and logistics magically don't apply anymore.
 
Back
Top Bottom