• 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!

Is China battle ready?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree... outside of the region, The Chinese military can not compete with the USA.

But within the South China sea and first island china it can put up a hell of a fight. It would not win, but the conflict would be very long, costly and bloody.

There would be no ground war... a complete non-starter.
 
Oozlefinch said:
This is why I am glad I read through the other responses. The initial question interested me, but it is obvious the poster has no real interest in the topic at all, but wants to ramble on about political matters.


.
Click to expand...

Really! Dismissing a silly comment by joG is talking politics?

What are you actually saying that is not also just politics? Your arguments of untried and untested so therefore not worthy are merely political statements of how you hope things will turn out. It is politics to be making these suggestions of superiority.

If one thing vietnam should have taught americans which according to yours and other responses seems not to be the case, is that technological superiority does not always win a war.

It is quite laughable. I started this thread noting some hubris on the part of americans only to have that same hubris revealed throughout this thread.


The whole concept behind americans thinking here is that because china has not had the experience they therefore will not be good at it. It is the hubris of projecting a weakness on your enemy without bothering to find out if it really is a weakness.
 
soylentgreen said:
Really! Dismissing a silly comment by joG is talking politics?

What are you actually saying that is not also just politics? Your arguments of untried and untested so therefore not worthy are merely political statements of how you hope things will turn out. It is politics to be making these suggestions of superiority.

If one thing vietnam should have taught americans which according to yours and other responses seems not to be the case, is that technological superiority does not always win a war.

It is quite laughable. I started this thread noting some hubris on the part of americans only to have that same hubris revealed throughout this thread.


The whole concept behind americans thinking here is that because china has not had the experience they therefore will not be good at it. It is the hubris of projecting a weakness on your enemy without bothering to find out if it really is a weakness.
Click to expand...
Hell, more recent wars confirm that.
 
jbi said:
I agree... outside of the region, The Chinese military can not compete with the USA.

But within the South China sea and first island china it can put up a hell of a fight. It would not win, but the conflict would be very long, costly and bloody.

There would be no ground war... a complete non-starter.
Click to expand...

But they have a plan to get there, and tenacity.
 
With no morals.... The U.S. would be able to do it easily, with very little loss.

a preemptive nuclear strike on all of China's biggest and best targets...with a complete hacking freeze on all government hardware and weapon systems.
Poison China's rice fields....this would be very easy... You can either do this with nukes, gas/chemicals, and there is supposedly a poison the U.S. has made where you poured one drop in the water supply it would wipe out a whole city.

and back away....

China would be done...never to rise again. There population would starve; it's completely dependent on foreign food and rice.


but.... unfortunately/fortunately for Vietnam, the U.S. has morals... and is willing to lose for them... unless China puts the U.S. in a live or die situation.
 
Last edited:
jbi said:
I agree... outside of the region, The Chinese military can not compete with the USA.

But within the South China sea and first island china it can put up a hell of a fight. It would not win, but the conflict would be very long, costly and bloody.

There would be no ground war... a complete non-starter.
Click to expand...

Not really. They lack any serious Naval capability in those areas, just a handful of destroyers.

soylentgreen said:
If one thing vietnam should have taught americans which according to yours and other responses seems not to be the case, is that technological superiority does not always win a war.
Click to expand...

Are you aware that the US and South Vietnam won the Vietnam War? The Paris Peace Accords were signed in 1973, in which North Vietnam agreed to withdraw all forces from South Vietnam and relinquish all claims against that government.

The 1975 invasion was 2 years after the war ended. A war which North Vietnam lost.

Fact, check it out for yourself though.
 
soylentgreen said:
Your arguments of untried and untested so therefore not worthy are merely political statements of how you hope things will turn out. It is politics to be making these suggestions of superiority.

It is quite laughable. I started this thread noting some hubris on the part of americans only to have that same hubris revealed throughout this thread.

The whole concept behind americans thinking here is that because china has not had the experience they therefore will not be good at it. It is the hubris of projecting a weakness on your enemy without bothering to find out if it really is a weakness.
Click to expand...

Here is the meat of what you specifically said though that is important. Now let me school you a bit.

For one, I am not political. I am however a professional military analyst. I look at things military completely neutral and try to make estimates based on what information I can find that is open to the public domain. In other words, ignoring anything I might know that is classified.

And you are also making some huge claims here, which are quite wrong. On ground in either China or a neighboring country, China is damned near unstoppable. The Korean War and the Sino-Vietnam War are perfect examples of exactly that. Damage China and reduce their capabilities, completely within the capabilities of the US. Invade and "take out" China? Not a prayer in hell of that happening.

Nowhere have I said that China is weak. However, their military capabilities are rather shallow, lacking force projection and sustainability capabilities. Something the US has excelled in for over 3/4 of a century.

Fact, they have some really good Destroyers.
Fact, these Destroyers and a single Aircraft Carrying Guided Missile Cruiser are the most powerful ships in their navy.
Fact, they have never seriously trained and operated for an extended period of time afloat.
Fact, they are barely recognized as a "blue water navy".
Fact, they have no aircraft carriers (look above for what the ship actually is).
Fact, they have never staged large long term combined fleet operations.
Fact, they have never operated as part of a multi-national fleet in large operations.

Those are all facts, and weigh heavily in my estimation of the naval capabilities of China. Feel free to challenge me on these, but bring facts along with you.

Oh, and final fact, China has never held a large UNREP operation to keep their ships in service.
 
Oozlefinch said:
Here is the meat of what you specifically said though that is important. Now let me school you a bit.

For one, I am not political. I am however a professional military analyst. I look at things military completely neutral and try to make estimates based on what information I can find that is open to the public domain. In other words, ignoring anything I might know that is classified.

And you are also making some huge claims here, which are quite wrong. On ground in either China or a neighboring country, China is damned near unstoppable. The Korean War and the Sino-Vietnam War are perfect examples of exactly that. Damage China and reduce their capabilities, completely within the capabilities of the US. Invade and "take out" China? Not a prayer in hell of that happening.

Nowhere have I said that China is weak. However, their military capabilities are rather shallow, lacking force projection and sustainability capabilities. Something the US has excelled in for over 3/4 of a century.

Fact, they have some really good Destroyers.
Fact, these Destroyers and a single Aircraft Carrying Guided Missile Cruiser are the most powerful ships in their navy.
Fact, they have never seriously trained and operated for an extended period of time afloat.
Fact, they are barely recognized as a "blue water navy".
Fact, they have no aircraft carriers (look above for what the ship actually is).
Fact, they have never staged large long term combined fleet operations.
Fact, they have never operated as part of a multi-national fleet in large operations.

Those are all facts, and weigh heavily in my estimation of the naval capabilities of China. Feel free to challenge me on these, but bring facts along with you.

Oh, and final fact, China has never held a large UNREP operation to keep their ships in service.
Click to expand...
Friendly tip: Pretty much everyone will tune you out when you say stuff like this.
 
Oozlefinch said:
Here is the meat of what you specifically said though that is important. Now let me school you a bit.

For one, I am not political. I am however a professional military analyst. I look at things military completely neutral and try to make estimates based on what information I can find that is open to the public domain. In other words, ignoring anything I might know that is classified.

And you are also making some huge claims here, which are quite wrong. On ground in either China or a neighboring country, China is damned near unstoppable. The Korean War and the Sino-Vietnam War are perfect examples of exactly that. Damage China and reduce their capabilities, completely within the capabilities of the US. Invade and "take out" China? Not a prayer in hell of that happening.

Nowhere have I said that China is weak. However, their military capabilities are rather shallow, lacking force projection and sustainability capabilities. Something the US has excelled in for over 3/4 of a century.

Fact, they have some really good Destroyers.
Fact, these Destroyers and a single Aircraft Carrying Guided Missile Cruiser are the most powerful ships in their navy.
Fact, they have never seriously trained and operated for an extended period of time afloat.
Fact, they are barely recognized as a "blue water navy".
Fact, they have no aircraft carriers (look above for what the ship actually is).
Fact, they have never staged large long term combined fleet operations.
Fact, they have never operated as part of a multi-national fleet in large operations.

Those are all facts, and weigh heavily in my estimation of the naval capabilities of China. Feel free to challenge me on these, but bring facts along with you.

Oh, and final fact, China has never held a large UNREP operation to keep their ships in service.
Click to expand...

One thing i have learned from this lesson is that military analysts need to do an english lit. course.
What you quoted of me in your post is not an assertion of chinas ability to win a war. It is an assertion of american arrogance in assuming that victory. It has brought them the deaths of many soldiers and a loss in a war or two. Disasters have happened in every war when one side goes into it with that attitude. Bay of pigs for america, gallipoli for the english.

The purpose of the comments by americans who perpetuate this hubris is political.

Aside from that, while your summary of the american fleet may be correct. Is it not also correct that whatever figure your government is giving of the chinese capability to launch short range missiles is not any where near the real capability. A big navy is great when dispersed over the ocean but becomes a good target when concentrated anywhere within the south china sea.
 
Oozlefinch said:
Are you aware that the US and South Vietnam won the Vietnam War? The Paris Peace Accords were signed in 1973, in which North Vietnam agreed to withdraw all forces from South Vietnam and relinquish all claims against that government.

The 1975 invasion was 2 years after the war ended. A war which North Vietnam lost.

Fact, check it out for yourself though.
Click to expand...

Your putting up the 1973 paris peace accord as a victory for s vietnam is absolutely funny.
Does not the fact that n viet signed the peace accord agreed to everything and then watch the biggest military might stop and remove themselves. leaving n viet the ability to continue and finally over run s viet. It would appear from your point of view that n viet deliberately lost the war with america so that it could conquer the country that it really wanted in the first place.

Which brings me to your last statement
A war which North Vietnam lost.
Click to expand...
The rest i can fact check. That one you will need a little more detail for it to become a fact.
 
soylentgreen said:
OnIs it not also correct that whatever figure your government is giving of the chinese capability to launch short range missiles is not any where near the real capability. A big navy is great when dispersed over the ocean but becomes a good target when concentrated anywhere within the south china sea.
Click to expand...

And what, short range rockets are going to be a threat to ships at sea?

Really? Well, obviously you must be talking about the DF-15 SRBM. A range of around 600 KM, flight times at maximum range of around 8-10 minutes. CEP on a fixed point target of 10-20 meters.

And how exactly is it going to hit a moving target?

Or are you talking about the short range cruise missiles, like the Silkworm series? A range of around 150 KM.

No, what is said of their capability is pretty accurate. Especially most of that public information comes from China itself. However, few take those claims seriously, since China has a long history of proclaiming systems to be "fully operational and deployed", only to have them quietly vanish and never to be heard from again (or replaced with another "best ever" system, which is then replaced again a year or so later).

And missile defense on ships? Depending on the threat, there is SM-2, SM-3, Rolling Airframe, and CIWS as well as multiple other passive and active countermeasures.

It might help if you were at least a little more clear what you are talking about.
 
Oozlefinch said:
Not really. They lack any serious Naval capability in those areas, just a handful of destroyers.
Click to expand...

If you describe 80+ destroyers and frigates as a "handful of destroyers", than sure.
 
jbi said:
If you describe 80+ destroyers and frigates as a "handful of destroyers", than sure.
Click to expand...

63 destroyers vs. 34 destroyers.

1 aircraft carrying cruiser vs. 22 cruisers and 10 aircraft carriers

Yea, 51 frigates. Across 5 classes.

Let me know in another 15-20 years. I might start to get nervous then.

And remember, I said "Naval capability", not ships. Those are 2 very different things.

Let me know when they start to do long term deployments conducting fleet operations. Let me know when they start to do long term and long range replenishing operations, conducting UNREP and keeping the ships at sea for months at a time.

Because as of this time, they are using them as little more than a glorified Coast Guard.
 
soylentgreen said:
In scrolling through a few threads i have come across comments that hint at hubris by america in any prediction of war between america and china. I have read comments that assume the chinese are poorly equipped or untested. Though when the chinese can call on nearly a billion foot soldiers i am not sure what test is required to pass in order to succeed at becoming cannon fodder.
For those who think china may not be prepared or capable of putting up a fight may be in for a surprise.
U.S. media: PLA Navy to top the world in 2020 - China Military Online


America might just win such a war but then hillary might have also been a president. Things do not always go as planned.
Click to expand...

If it was between the U.S. and only China we smash them. The bigger problem is that we have people that are stupidly pushing Russia into China's arms, when I don't think they want to but are being left with little other choice. A Russian-China block would be hell to deal with as Russia would stomp Europe and take the only ally with a real military, the U.K. out of the picture. That leaves us possibly fighting on two fronts, which we don't have the ability to do anymore. We just don't have the numbers.
 
Fishking said:
If it was between the U.S. and only China we smash them. The bigger problem is that we have people that are stupidly pushing Russia into China's arms, when I don't think they want to but are being left with little other choice. A Russian-China block would be hell to deal with as Russia would stomp Europe and take the only ally with a real military, the U.K. out of the picture. That leaves us possibly fighting on two fronts, which we don't have the ability to do anymore. We just don't have the numbers.
Click to expand...

Perhaps it would be better for all of us if your nation tried getting on a bit better with them instead of wanting a war with them. I'm pretty sure a war with the US is the last thing they would want :(
 
Fishking said:
If it was between the U.S. and only China we smash them. The bigger problem is that we have people that are stupidly pushing Russia into China's arms, when I don't think they want to but are being left with little other choice. A Russian-China block would be hell to deal with as Russia would stomp Europe and take the only ally with a real military, the U.K. out of the picture. That leaves us possibly fighting on two fronts, which we don't have the ability to do anymore. We just don't have the numbers.
Click to expand...
We would have to go back to a draft.

But we don't have the luxury of our industry being safe from attack solely due to location like we did in WW2. Russia especially could bring a war "home" to us.
 
Fishking said:
If it was between the U.S. and only China we smash them. The bigger problem is that we have people that are stupidly pushing Russia into China's arms, when I don't think they want to but are being left with little other choice. A Russian-China block would be hell to deal with as Russia would stomp Europe and take the only ally with a real military, the U.K. out of the picture. That leaves us possibly fighting on two fronts, which we don't have the ability to do anymore. We just don't have the numbers.
Click to expand...

You must be fun to play chess with.

But seriously, how well has that "we will smash"them" ever worked out for america. Especially against china considering they have been conquered but have in the end always assimilated the conquerors.
Your biggest problem is not as in your scenario which i would give good odds on ending with a nuclear wasteland so not a real problem as to who might win.

Your problem is how are you going to provoke china into that war. So far china's strategy of simply making america look foolish with it's rhetorical saber rattling and flag waving is working for them. They now have an empty seat on the world trading table where america once sat. Seems to me, china 1, america 0 so far.

But great planning for a war, that might even help.
 
soylentgreen said:
You must be fun to play chess with.

But seriously, how well has that "we will smash"them" ever worked out for america. Especially against china considering they have been conquered but have in the end always assimilated the conquerors.
Your biggest problem is not as in your scenario which i would give good odds on ending with a nuclear wasteland so not a real problem as to who might win.

Your problem is how are you going to provoke china into that war. So far china's strategy of simply making america look foolish with it's rhetorical saber rattling and flag waving is working for them. They now have an empty seat on the world trading table where america once sat. Seems to me, china 1, america 0 so far.

But great planning for a war, that might even help.
Click to expand...

In a war with China, we don't have to conquer them, just knock them back several decades. Tactical (non-nuclear) strikes on core infrastructure would put China in a hole so deep that no only wouldn't they want to fight us, they wouldn't have the ability to do so. Simply taking out the Seven Gorges Dam would do so much harm to China that that one strike would cripple them. We could turn China into a 3rd world nation within a few days (maybe a couple weeks). That's how we would beat them. Not by trying to make them a vassal state, but by turning them back into subsistence farmers and fishermen and then walking away.
 
flogger said:
Perhaps it would be better for all of us if your nation tried getting on a bit better with them instead of wanting a war with them. I'm pretty sure a war with the US is the last thing they would want :(
Click to expand...

Hey...I don't like it, either. Look what's happening to Trump for trying to improve relations with Russia. There are powers working to ensure that U.S.-Russian relations don't happen.
 
radcen said:
We would have to go back to a draft.

But we don't have the luxury of our industry being safe from attack solely due to location like we did in WW2. Russia especially could bring a war "home" to us.
Click to expand...

Not only that but our actual industry has been shipped overseas. Who would make all the parts? The computer chips? The digital displays? The steel? Ect. ect. ect.
 
soylentgreen said:
You must be fun to play chess with.

But seriously, how well has that "we will smash"them" ever worked out for america. Especially against china considering they have been conquered but have in the end always assimilated the conquerors.
Your biggest problem is not as in your scenario which i would give good odds on ending with a nuclear wasteland so not a real problem as to who might win.

Your problem is how are you going to provoke china into that war. So far china's strategy of simply making america look foolish with it's rhetorical saber rattling and flag waving is working for them. They now have an empty seat on the world trading table where america once sat. Seems to me, china 1, america 0 so far.

But great planning for a war, that might even help.
Click to expand...

You're conflating multiple things. I'm working off of the assumption of a conventional war. If we want to get nukes involved then it's not really an exercise worthy of a discussion.

As far as provocation, China is definitely not innocent in that department. Are you aware that China is building fake islands in order to claim vast swaths of sea zones and arming them? That's a pretty big deal.

Finally, yes...we'd smash them. The only thing that has ever kept us from smashing in all regards is us handicapping ourselves. For example, in Vietnam we stayed out of invading and bombing North Vietnam. With regards to things like Iraq or Afghanistan, that's a police action with an active insurgency. Here we're talking about a war between our militaries. In conventional warfare, China doesn't stand a chance.

One of the huge differences between us and China is experience and training. We have operational experience for both our personnel and our equipment. We also have better maintenance than everyone else as well as training. Buying a fancy sniper rifle doesn't make someone a sniper. You have to have the training, experience, and skill to actually be a sniper.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom