- This topic has 9 voices and 49 replies.
-
Posts
-
In an armed conflict between the US and China, the US would win hands down. The only question is whether the war would last weeks or months.
Based on what?
In an armed conflict between the US and China, the US would win hands down. The only question is whether the war would last weeks or months.
I'm not so sure about that... if anything I would imagine it being the other way around. Furthermore, I wouldn't want to see such a war in my lifetime.The US has had bases perpetually in Japan since WWII, notably Okinawa; proposals for upgrading the bases have always been a hot topic there and elsewhere in Japan and lately with the new president who is anti-US base along with probably much of the Okinawans will make it difficult in the future. Right now this base is key to the US pacific because it is within striking distance of many places around mainland Asia, and the proposed upgrades are to accommodate VTOL aircraft with nuclear capability and ~3,000km striking distance iirc. If the Japanese government is successful in defying the US the balance of power can shift very quickly.My opinion is that the US technically CAN defend Japan if a war were to break out with China (which I don't find very likely at all in the first place). Whether it would or would not I think the answer would be yes.
In an armed conflict between the US and China, the US would win hands down. The only question is whether the war would last weeks or months.
Any land war with China would be a long drawn out affair. Just killing all the chinese is a lot of bullets and it is not like every bullet strikes home. The figure for rounds fired per kill in Vietnam was something like 20,000 rounds of small arms per kill. I dont think it would be much better against China, they have a lot of troops. There is also the fact that the US supply line would be long and subject to crippling attacks. The US merchant marine is not as huge as it once was and just a few successful convoy interceptions could be game-changing. The Chinese have also invested heavily in submarines. Just because the Germans failed at it does not mean it cannot be done, the US brought Japan to its kness with attacks on merchant shipping in WWII.
Facing the US in a war, China would try to draw North Korea and Russia into the conflict. This could easily turn into east vs west. The whole thing could become the most historically significant war ever fought.
Facing the US in a war, China would try to draw North Korea and Russia into the conflict. This could easily turn into east vs west. The whole thing could become the most historically significant war ever fought.
What do you base this on
I base this on several factors regarding political patterns and balance of power in the world. First of all, we all know the attitude that North Korea has towards America. They?ve never gotten over the Korean war, conduct extreme anti-American propaganda in their schools, news, and military, and they know the only thing that prevents them from taking over South Korea is the US. Secondly, China is well aware of the North Korean arsenal. Seeing North Korea as its sole undisputed ally, it only makes military sense to seek help in what they might see as a war that directly affects their mutual interests. China would probably point out that if the US won, North Korea would be very vulnerable without its Chinese ally. It seems pretty likely that NK would join the battle. Then we come to the question of Russia. We?ve seen how Russia and China contradict the US when it comes to Iran, Venezuela and North Korea. Russia doesn?t necessarily support these countries, but it wants to shift power in the world more in their favor and against the US. It would be harder for the Chinese to convince the Russians to get involved, but a promise of sharing the spoils and the prospect of bringing down the US might do it. The recent cutbacks in the British and French militaries might also influence the Russians to join. As for the Middle East, I think the best thing to do is to promise them a piece of China and get them on our side. I think they?re the most unpredictable. Still, deep down they might be aware that the west will whip the east, so that will determine what they do.
Do you seriously think Russia would ally with China? I can buy NK but not Russia. NK and China are fellow travelers of a sort and NK would have no choice but to join a war if China asked. The Russians however, have some serious disputes with China. Just for starters they have plenty of border issues and I think the Russians would realize that in the long run there interests align more with the west than China. We could easily keep Russia out of an allliance with China by guaranteeing their European Frontier because if Russia allied with China it would be game on and we could splitnter them by promising independence to their multitude of ethnic minorites. Think of every two-bit ethnicity in Russia going the way of the Chechens. That would at a minimum keep Russia from providing any significant aid to China and we could encourage the minorities at very little cost to ourselves.
I think those are some of the very factors that would influence the Russians. They know that with us out of the way they can basically do whatever they want and nobody can stop them. Without the US, all the republics that broke away would have no choice but to take their place under Russian dominance, and all their minorities would lose power. Think about what Russia would do in the Arctic Ocean if it didn?t have to contend with America. Canada certainly couldn?t stop them from claiming all the resources there. True, they don?t see eye to eye with the Chinese on many factors, but they feel they can handle them and not us.
That line of reasoning supposes that the Russians believe the Chinese would either defeat us with their help or the war would end with American power diminished to such an extent that we would be powerless to do anything to counter moves they would make. I highly doubt that is a reasonable gamble to take. The odds on favorite in any confrontation between the US and China is the US if for no other reason than that the US has the capability of projecting power and China does not. The only method of significant force projection China has is if they go nuclear and that is a losers wager for both parties.
TMYHO A war isn't won on battlefields only; just like during WWII; if you cut strategical supplies (oil, raw materials, etc) you slowly suffocate the enemy's strength. The major problem with a war against China would be the occupation/control of its territory, just like the current war in Afghanistan: impossible with a limited army force. Infrastructures, communication tools, energy sources, external supplies would be the main targets that should be primarily anihilated before even thinking of a “classical” decisive victory.
That is true to a point. The US is in a much better position to engage in strategic interdiction against China than vice-versa. That also gets to the point of how ruthless opponents are wiling to be in a war. WWII was pretty brutal not only on the battlefield but off it as well as entire enemy populations were seen as legitimate targets. That tendency is not as great anymore but that could rapidly change if one side or the other feels they are in an existential struggle. We are currently living in an era of limited war much like most of the 19th century. I would guess that any serious war with China would rapidly see a return to totality in war aims as well as war methods.The problem with modern war is how victory is defined. Anymore victory does not necessarily mean that one side capitulates or is occupied. In the contemporary world victory is defined by sometimes nebulous, even changing war goals. As we are seeing in Iraq and Afghanistan victory criteria can be a moving target. This greatly complicates efforts to extricate nations from war and also to even have a base to negotiate from.
China is already playing solo, rejecting any western involvement, thus …http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11671516
And, why is Russia claiming islands from Japan, now? http://www.takepart.com/news/2010/11/02/high-seas-drama-russia-and-japan-stake-island-claims
And, why is Russia claiming islands from Japan, now?
One reason could be that Russia took control of the islands at the end of WWII, and by 1949 it had deported all residents to Japan. Russia and Japan have not yet signed a peace treaty to end World War II.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-11664434
