Who wins? Please be as indepth as you can
China doesn't have allies.
>>29712745
>Please be as indepth as you can
You first. An in-depth analysis requires an in-depth scenario to analyze. Tell us what China wants, and why, and we'll see.
>>29712745
I'll ask the Chinese lady who jacks me off after a nice backrub.
What do you think?
>>29712745
1- where?
2- define goals? SOuth China sea? A proxy in Africa?
3- define allies. NATO is pretty cut and dry. But define China's. SCO? They don't have real allies, just acquiantences.
4- define time period. China in 10 years will look differently than today,which looks very different from 10 years ago.
At any rate America probably wins by default.
Remove Kung pao
>>29712823
>>29712847
South China Sea
>>29712745
USA.
China has no allies, and can't into power projection.
We can hit them but they can't hit us.
Can we occupy and fight land battles there? Nah. Do we have to? Also, nah.
>>29712915
Why?
>>29712943
A lot of trade goes through there is my guess to why they're acting so aggressive
>>29712943
China has claimed a portion of the Philippines.
US, Australia, Britain and Japan win.
>YFW China doesn't get to bring friends
>>29712954
No they are trying to secure a large and stable network of airbases and submarine depots so they can harrass Taiwan and other small island nations in the area.
China will grow larger wasn't just a quote from a videogame
america wins, and here's why;
china;
>no allies
>outdated shitty equipment
>meh military
>small nuclear force
>small(ish) navy
US:
>all of nato as allies
>new equipment
>4 branches of fuck you
>massive nuclear force
>massive navy
>>29712980
Is this a troll post? Why would China be pushing without any endgame other than to harass small nations?
America would anally rape China, it wouldn't be close.
>>29712796
Nice meme
China wins. They own 1.2 trillion in US debt.
>>29713010
Prove it Chang.
>inb4 Best Korea
>>29712954
Not nearly in-depth enough. You need to give a compelling reason for China to provoke a war over that trad, and a compelling reason for the US to accept that provocation and go to war over it.
>>29712957
So? Claiming doesn't mean shit. Are you proposing that China *invades* the Philippines?
In that case, they lose, hands down. They don't have the sealift to invade over that distance, and they couldn't do it secretly anyway. Without secrecy, they'd be fucked before they even finished gathering their invasion forces at their port of departure.
>>29713019
>China's wealth is based on being owed money by their enemies.
You haven't really thought this through, have you, anon?
>>29713019
>go to war with China
>"Ha ha! You pay nao!"
>"What'll you do if we don't go to war with us?"
>China's face when
>>29712957
?
And vice versa then.
>>29712988
Shit analysis
>>29713027
Laos and NK.
No inb4 for your own post newfag
All the USA and friends have to do is blockade China and spam cruise missiles at key infrastructure and energy import points.
It is up to China to break the blockade. get trade flowing into the country again, and defense against having their energy and fuel sectors crippled.
>>29713158
With what forces?
>>29713171
which side?
USA or China?
>>29712745
US wins because NUTS. All China's artificial islands, mainland batteries, naval bases, supply depots, nuclear missile launch facilities, and communications centers are destroyed. China does not retaliate because it doesn't have the arsenal to escalate to MAD. So China loses.
China is in that awkward position where it's strong enough that in a real war the US would have to treat it as a peer power, and smite it accordingly. But it's not strong enough to actually have a chance against the US peer-to-peer.
So China will settle for an unending parade of low-level douchebaggery, basically dumpster-diving around the edges of American global hegemony.
>>29713059
>>29713067
All I mean is war will never happen or at least it will be a proxy war because China can blow up the dollar on a whim. You don't piss off your bank nor does the bank want to kiss off it's patrons so we hold a tenuous "friendship" for both our convenience. Yeah it sucks the bank foreclosed that old ladies house but as long as I get good interest rates I kinda ignore it.
>>29713173
The USA?
In 2016 China will lose of course, but you make it sound like China doesn't have a huge navy to respond to America's rather limited forces in the Pacific.
>>29713152
>North Korea
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-and-china-agree-to-oppose-north-korea-nuclear-programme-a6962901.html
http://m.sputniknews.com/asia/20160421/1038361385/china-north-korea-pyongyang-nukes.html
http://m.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/1934185/north-korea-has-become-increasing-threat-china
>>29713191
they don't
>>29713191
11 aircraft carrier battle groups
50 someting nuclear attack submarines
4 SSGN submarines
plus the British, Japanese, and French navies.
>>29713193
The US didn't let West Germany build its own nukes in 1945-1990. And it most definitely was an ally.
An ally can be a threat to your nation. Remember 1941-1945 with the Soviets?
>>29713228
>Straw: The Grasping
>>29713205
The Chinese do. They have the second most destroyers, the most frigates and corvettes, and 90% of their ships were made after 1990.
They have the second most powerful navy in the world. And it is huge.
>>29713221
How many of those are near China? Britain would not get involved militarily. Neither would the French. Not like they'd matter.
You really think the Chinese don't have MAD capability? They have 150+ MIRV equipped ICBM's with the range to hit anywhere in America.
Enough to give a serious hurting to anyone.
>>29712745
>GBU-57A three gorges, Siluodu, Wudongde, and Baihetan dams
>hit power stations for Qinshan, Ling Ao, Yangjiang, and Ningde Nuclear Power Plants
>bottom any container ships in Shanghai, Shenzhen, Hong Kong, Ningbo-Zhoushan, Quingdao, and Guanzhou
>blockade Dalian, Xiamen, Lianyungang
>repeat as necessary
>wait sixteen months until they sue for peace
>>29713247
>I have no argument: the post
>>29713272
Great way to get America nuked.
>>29713279
they wouldn't nuke us, not even after that.
because whatever they could dish out would only produce a minor dent in our forces and we would retaliate full force will everything we had, as would the rest of NATO
>>29713271
´T-34 comes to mind. Just because they're modern and look good on paper don't mean they're in good hands or well maintained.
>>29713279
China wouldn't dare to nuke the US as NATO is the only world power with a First Strike capability.
>>29713271
Nuclear weapons are practically a non threat. No one would actually use their unless they have been invaded and under threat of losing completely.
China's navy is seriously undermanned and inexperienced. A huge amount of their new small ships are sitting in mothball. Simply because they do not have the manpower to put them to sea.
article 5 of NATO. as long as the US isn't the one starting shit. NATO nations are obligated to help us. France has territory in the region so they have interest in pushing back China. UK commonwealth nations are in region and enemies of China.
>>29713279
>source is state run media
>North Korea has become an increasing threat to China, according to an online commentary by the state-run People’s Daily overseas edition, which compared the Korean peninsula’s instability with Syria’s political turmoil.
An online opinion piece by the Daily yesterday said it was time for North Korea to rethink its nuclear weapon strategy as it might eventually jeopardise Pyongyang’s stability. The piece was later deleted.
It also said ties between both countries had worsened, especially since China’s Ministry of Commerce rolled out sanctions supporting the United Nation’s call to stop imports of coal, iron ore, gold, titanium and rare earths, and exports of a range of products, including jet fuel, to North Korea. These moves are likely to have an impact on Pyongyang within six months to a year.
>>29713178
>China can blow up the dollar on a whim
>19.74% of U.S. debt actually owned by China
>China effectively loses a half trillion dollars in U.S. trade if things get belligerent
>Their number 2 trade partner is Hong Kong
If Japan and South Korea side with us they lose another half trillion in trade.
Then that ignores the possibility of the U.S. deciding to restructure our currency, either way the Yuan ends up tumbling.
>>29713346
yes, but the overall position of China with regards to North Korea hasn't changed.
They're shooting themselves in the foot by holding onto their out of control Nork dog.
Still, the long history and the strategic position of DPKR means that China will attempt to hold onto their Nork dog for as long as possible.
http://thediplomat.com/2016/03/why-china-north-korea-relations-cant-be-broken/
TLDR: they'll reapproach if DPKR calms down with the nuclear saber rattling every so often.
Though there are conflicting reports that China has amassed troops on the China-DPKR border. Chinese media denies it with western sources claiming that there is a possible troop build up.
>>29713019
Not how that works. There is no real mechanism for forcing national debt payments from a major nation. Further China is more reliant on American consumerism.
The EU can do it to Greece because they share a currency.
The question isn't who wins, but how long it takes for China to balkanize.
>>29713444
>fucking this
Trips confirms the thrust of Chinese history
>>29713019
that isn't how that works.
buying a bond is a contract. you give the bond issuer money. In agreement to get a certain amount back at a predetermined time.
the worst they could do is sell their US bonds to a third party at a deep discount.
>>29713452
>>29713452
depends what you mean by balkanize.
HK, Xinjiang & Taiwan will declare independence if given the chance. Other than that, worst case scenario is that China remains "unified" but under control of various generals/warlords.
Corruption in the PLA (as well as PLAAF & PLAN) is huge and the Panama papers reveals this. Their biggest threat is not from the US, but from the potential dangers of having rouge generals and admirals
>>29713444
Based on what >>29713272 proposes
less than sixteen months
>>29713496
taiwan is already independent
>panama papers
lol
>rouge
The US is more apt to balkanize than China, how can you talk about china when the US has tens of millions of fifth column sorts
>>29712745
>America always needs allies.
Why is this country a power again?
>>29713496
>worst case scenario is that China remains "unified" but under control of various generals/warlords.
Yeah, but we got a historically recent view of how this turned out under the KMT. Central authority was nominal and basically hinged on their ability to bribe the regional governors/generals/warlords into playing ball, at best it was little more than lip service to the central government.
>>29713509
inb4 50cent payment
>>29713509
yes/no
if China balkanizes it would give Taiwan the ability to become recognized as an independent country by almost the entire international community, not just by its core allies.
>Panama papers
Guo Boxiong and his family are alleged to have extracted million of dollars in bribes from, among others, PLA officers desperate for promotion. The former general’s scalp is just one of hundreds of thousands collected in President Xi Jinping’s continuing crackdown on corruption.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-corruption-idUSKCN0Q704I20150802
yes its reuters, but its quoting a Chinese army Newspaper ;)
US has fifth column sorts, but few of them are in high positions within the US armed forces or government. Even then they adhere to obeying their superiors before obeying their beliefs.
>>29713152
>Laos
>North Korea
>Valuable allies
You're kidding, right.
>>29713271
>You really think the Chinese don't have MAD capability? They have 150+ MIRV equipped ICBM's with the range to hit anywhere in America.
>Enough to give a serious hurting to anyone.
A serious hurting is not the same as MAD.
>>29713575
DPKR is a key ally because it constrains the US without being able to blame the Chinese for ramping up tensions or threats.
Laos is at most a roadbump that can be taken care of by one Viet division and the Cambodian/Thai armies while the rest of the Vietnamese army pushes into Southern China (just a scenario, not saying this will happen)
>>29713337
>Nuclear weapons are practically a non threat. No one would actually use their unless they have been invaded and under threat of losing completely.
Bitch doesn't know about my Nuclear Utilization Target Selection.
>>29712745
>China and allies
What allies? Everyone they border hates them (including NK)
>>29713580
>Hostilities begin
>China begins fueling up their ICBMs
>receive MIRV shower from C4s and D5s before launch preparations complete
You do realize we, literally, have more more SLBMs that can reach into the Chinese interior than they have launch systems, right?
>>29713595
>DPKR is a key ally because it constrains the US without being able to blame the Chinese for ramping up tensions or threats.
Constrains the US how, exactly? Constrains them from operating freely throughout the region? Constrains them from maintaining strong alliances with South Korea and Japan?
Without being able to blame the Chinese how, exactly? It's not like the US is unaware of the China-NK relationship. It's not like the US doesn't know about China's involvement in NK posturing. It's not like the US doesn't know exactly who to go to, if it ever decides to satisfy its grudge against North Korea.
>>29713621
Of course I realize this. The US could NUTS on China all day, and they would never dare to escalate to MAD. Because they can't. Which is why they won't ever actually start a war.
>>29712745
US Allies: small nations surrounding China that are basically either worthless militarily, or subject to the One-Nuke-Kills-All rule.
China will first create a huge dead-zone of nuclear fire around themselves, wiping out all live in the Asia Pacific, and then face the US head-on, while its nuclear bunkers and tunnel network in the mountainous ranges in central china and Tibet survives US nuclear retaliation. The US will then face Chinese counter-strikes with DF-41 MIRVed ICBMs and WU-14 hypersonic attack vehicles, wiping out all US cities.
China will probably lose a billion of people, but even if a few million of them survive, they will be rulers of Asia - because in the US and their pathetic flat-lands and cities bordering deserts, noone will survive.
>>29713596
why are your nuts important all of the sudden? this is a dick measuring contest.
>>29713648
I responded to the wrong anon here, I meant to post this too >>29713271
>>29713649
>chinkshit fantasy
t. sixteenyearoldposter
>>29713595
Why would we even bother with the norks, though. They're half starved and stick on their little peninsula.
It's not like we would be invading anyway. Knock out the dams like the anon above mentioned and it's all over.
Coma can't project power beyond the south China sea and there's no way we would commit assets there either.
So we're down to strategic strategic bombing, which is dominated by American and western European assets.
>>29713649
>we will ignore the surounding countries with anti missile defense systems and somehow hit the states with most of our arsenal, we will win by survivors alone.
kys, even russia would step in to shoot down these weapons before they could do harm.
>>29713638
its just my take on things, but DPKR does the same thing as the US when it flies or sails next to some of the reclaimed ocean the Chinese have built into naval bases.
But they ramp it up to the point that they threaten to nuke the continental US and divert attention from say the south china sea to themselves. This allows China to continue to expand its naval power while the US is distracted by DPKR. Plus the fact that DPKR is seen as an irrational actor means that the US has to take measures such as possibly sending THAAD to ROK or increasing their troops there when the funds of deploying them could go towards maybe deploying more troops in the Philippines.
China is then able to slap DPKR on the wrists every so often for "escalating the situation" and the continue as if nothing has happened. Granted the deployment of THAAD to ROK was not what they wanted, but it still shifts attention away from their expansion into the South China Sea. Plus the fact that DPKR is a potential military threat that could invade ROK at any point can "appear" more threatening than a few illegal fishermen ramming a cruiser.
>>29713683
DPKR has nukes and could possibly cause millions of civilian casualties on both sides. That's enough to keep the US focusing a large part of their Asian troop concentration on them and not in the South China Sea.
Though the US is expanding its troops presence into Cambodia, Vietnam (both are hosting US supply depots soon) and the Philippines.
>>29713676
We cordially invite you to nuke our mountains in an attempt to take out the glorious Underground Great Wall, while we nuke your flatlands and murderize your people.
We wouldnt even bother with nuclear counterforce. We will aim for your population centers. You can do so as well, but we have enough human material to soak up everything you got and still survive the day after.
>>29713700
If anything, Russia would take the advantage of our little nuclear exchange and double down on you as well, so that they are the undisputed rulers of the World, when both China and the US are no more.
Also, ABM doesnt work. We got enough missiles with regional range (and evasive capabilities) to literally sink Japan and the Philippines.
>>29713711
Your English is too good to be a meow meow. But i'd say its a quality bait considering you appear to be an edgy Chinese armchair general.
>>29713710
>Vietnam is hosting US and Ru military assets at the same time
IMO we just replaced China as their anti-Ru balancer. It's not that big a shift to them.
>>29713711
>we will aim for your population centers
There are 297 U.S. cities with populations over 100,000
>blow your load on body count and not second strike capability and conventional retaliation
While we, in turn, would destroy every vestige of your infrastructure on the off chance you did get first strike
>can't into Hu Huanyong line
Seriously, the riceniggers should require their propagandists to actually research the country some.
>>29713755
The problem with Vietnam is that it relies on Russian help, when Russia is trying to also balance towards the Pacific while allying with China in its disputes. Though a sino-russo split is in the making because Russia's ambitions clash with China's. Russia knows this and is hedging its bets by warming up to Japan and other Asian countries while also militarizing (they've deployed more militarh tech and men into the Kuril islands they've taken) It might not be this or next decade, but it's gonna happen. After all Asia is a one superpower continent and the Chinese proverb is that no two tigers can have one mountain.
Isnt Russia China's ally?
>>29713711
Bullshit
An all out nuke strike by the US would kill over a billion chinks
And all your infrastructure is gone
>>29713711
>>29713728
>send operators into w.china launch complex
>they launch nukes at tehran
>mfw
>>29713279
China would be turned into a glowing crater the moment they start lobbing nukes around when they start losing.
>>29713710
Best Korea is not that much of a distraction, anon. It took you, what, two minutes? Two minutes with an Internet map and your anonymous brain, to look at DPRK and SCS at the same time, and think about them at the same time?
How many scenarios, with how many different variations, do you think that US war planners might be considering all the time?
You think it never occurred to them that an escalation by Best Korea might be the opening gambit in a Chinese play? You think they haven't thought long and hard about what it would look like if China decided to invade South Korea and Taiwan at the same time, or any of a dozen other complicated scenarios?
The US has fought two simultaneous wars on opposites sides of the planet. Even today, it maintains multiple Navies and Armies, operating in every corner of the globe.
>>29712745
>Who wins?
moot question, with no practical solution if nuclear weapons fly, because nobody wins.
As much of a numerical advantage in nukes the American have, it doesn't take much to totally fuck up earth (Chernobyl, Fukushima weren't even bombs).
Plus the Russians will just wait for the two sides to screw each other and then move in.
Muh big bomb posts by tiny dick fags notwithstanding.
China has the geographical advantage in Asia, since their firepower is concentrated there (The British almost lost to the Argentina in the Falklands playing long distance warfare).
>>29714260
>Chernobyl
Literally already reclaimed by nature and teaming with life
>>29713152
People can Inb4 their own post, newfag. OP isn't suppost to. You don't /thread your own post.
>>29714260
>He thinks bomb fallout is worse than Chernobyl
>He doesn't know that you can literally take tours to Chernobyl and it's overrun with wildlife.
I bet you believe in nuclear winter too.
>>29713858
wwwwwwwwwwwwww
>>29713858
Yeah.
Russia is also the US's ally.
Neither alliance means anything.
>>29714283
>>29714319
I think the Ukrainians and Japanese will be quite happy to accept your vacation hard currency.
>>29714225
>Best Korea is not that much of a distraction
i'd beg to differ. US has more troops and equipment in the vicinity of DPKR than it does in SCS. Despite the security pacts with ROK and Japan, the men in these two countries and the accompanying equipment could be deployed near the SCS in order to set up a tripwire against China.
The biggest problem the US faces is spreading out far too thin. While their armed forces are powerful, the fact that they need to be in the ME, Europe and Asia leaves them at a disadvantage, whereas China just needs to worry about Asia. And the fact that they split them up even more within Asia due to DPKR's temper tantrums is why it serves as a useful distraction.
Again, this is just my opinion. I don't claim to be some Asia-pacific armchair general (though its funny because that's my area of specialization for Canadian/international defense studies) so any comments as to why i am wrong or mistaken is welcome as long as its not shitposting
>>29714441
>Radiation from a nuclear detonation is worse and more persistent than aerosolized nuclear reaction mass
Literally, no.
>You should vacation there
If both governments didn't control access...
>Who wins
Nobody
If Iraq and Afghanistan drained our coffers dry 5x then open warfare with any country will leave our economy majorly fucked even if we strategically win the war
>>29713596
>doesn't know that most Chinese warheads are not MIRVs and are still heavily, HEAVILY outnumbered by American Triad assets
Fuck, if China decided to have a "limited nuclear war" we would "limit" their number of military assets and bases to exactly 0.
>>29714612
To be fair at least some of them are MIRV equipped anon
>[spoilers]but not all of them[/spoilers]
>>29713649
>pathetic flatlands
>food and oil apparently are useless resources
>>29714568
Open warefare is where the US excels though.
US already has advantage on chess board against China. Not only that, it also has far greater logistics and technology. Chinese sharingan with all it's power has yet to catch up.
I am waiting for a war with China to prove to everyone shitty one party China masks and hides just how shit their military actually is.
>>29713580
You need to read up on what MAD is.
150 MIRV = 600 nuclear weapons hitting American cities.
The difference between 600 and 6000 nuclear strikes isn't that important when 600 nuclear strikes could take out 90% of our population.
>>29713700
BMD is meaningless and Russia's BDM systems are more likely to kill them than work successfully.
The Russians would have no reason to help out and risk American/Chinese nukes.
The Chinese navy doesn't matter that much.
-They're building up to 3 carrier battlegroups, US already has 3 stationed near China
-Their destroyers are numerous but aren't totally in use and they have limited roles compared to US destroyers.
-US has capable allies with navies to compliment their navy.
-Chinese carriers pretty much have to be based from China's shoreline because lack of naval bases. Bases that they do have are in important areas but are not far from China
-Chinese carriers rely on shorebased aircraft for support
-Because of the above two, the carriers are basically only useful directly near the Chinese shore, Vietnam, or the Philippines. Could maybe be useful in the Sea of Japan, too
-Carriers have a fraction of the aircraft capacity as US carriers and carrier launched J-15s have limited payload capacity
-New Chinese SSGNs are as loud as late Soviet subs
I don't think anybody thinks their army is super important being as the US is going to go for strategic warfare in the first place, without a lot of direct confrontation on land.
>>29713710
>Though the US is expanding its troops presence into Cambodia, Vietnam (both are hosting US supply depots soon)
No armed US troops. Just contractors setting up supply dumps.
Flips are letting us back into a few bases, but we've put nothing there yet. It's not the same as before 1992.
>>29713825
You're talking out of your ass about Russia warming up to other nations to counterbalance China. There's been no such thing.
Ever since Crimea 2014, Russia and China have only been drawing closer. One out of necessity and the other out of convenience.
>>29714685
>90% of the population
360 million Americans don't even live in or near the 297 cities with a population over 100,000 in the United States.
Considering the number of delivery systems available to the Chinese they would only be able to pick half of them to ensure high percentage death or incantation in those. They'd have to lob approximately 5+ delivery systems at the New York City, Chicago, Philadelphia, Houston, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Atlanta, and Dallas/Fort Worth metropolitan areas alone. That's over a fifth to a fourth of their delivery systems capable of reaching CONUS right there alone.
>>29714071
The threat of them doing that is what would stop a war.
It's also why no US/China war has broken out, and will not break out.
>>29714564
>Radiation from a nuclear detonation is worse and more persistent than aerosolized nuclear reaction mass
You fucking idiot, I was trying to keep the Chinks from targeting nukes facilities...go fuck yourself Benedict Arnold.
>>29714283
After 36 years.
It's a bad analogy anyways. 5 mt nuclear strikes would fuck up and radiate entire cities.
>>29714721
its gonna be light supply bases in Cambodia/Vietnam. Sure it might be contractors running the place, but the possibility for a permanent US presence in Vietnam since the second Indochina War is possible. Plus the US army has been increasing its training programs with the Cambodians.
Could you sauce me on how you know its contractors? Im not calling you out im just curious where yo got it from. Because I got mine from the Diplomat but it was fairly vague as to what would happen in Cambodia/Vietnam.
>>29714748
>360 million Americans don't even live in or near the 297 cities with a population over 100,000 in the United States.
lol America doesn't even have 360 million people.
And yes, the majority live in cities.
Jesus just hitting LA, NYC, Chicago, and anything else above a million would be devastating.
>>29714757
>They would have had no idea about that ahead of time
I'd be a lot more concerned about them targeting our reactors with Massive Ordnance Penetrators than nuclear weapons honestly. Reactors are airburst and EMP hardened.
Philippines is China sleeper agent they will betray America. Philippine American War for revenge of Bataan Dead March. Philippine President is Chinese. They rattle tin cans so America will notice and spread thin resources for nothing.
>>29714507
You are correct and he is using a poor argument.
NK is our biggest Asia concern.
>>29714784
>Bataan Death March
>American
are the Japanese really this good at dodging war crimes, or are you retarded?
>>29714788
eh, I like differing opinions as long as they bring something to the conversation.
>>29714795
But fifty cents were deposited to his account...
>>29714805
Well that ain't happening, NK is loud and dangerous, regardless of how ass backwards they are or how badly they'd eventually lose any war with anybody.
Chinese is more resilient than American. When economic war happens Chinese will grit teeth and live. American lgbt and black people will riot because they cannot take change in lifestyle. America will plunge into anarchy for defying China.
>>29714748
Did you just say that there are 360 mil Americans who live in rural areas or cities smaller than 100,000?
>>29714820
We'd probably make joint strikes against Pyongyang at the same time we were hitting China's power generation infrastructure and dams
>>29714635
The new ones are.
They are also building up their arsenal at the fastest pace ever. Probably a smart idea if they are going to start flexing their muscles.
>>29713514
America doesn't need allies, but it has them
>>29714671
That's like pointing at the Iraq war and claiming America is shit because of it.
It's a bad measurement. The last time we saw China fight (1979), it was still a Maoist shithole.
>29714834
No, I was saying that the 297 cities we have with a population over 100,000 doesn't come out to 90% of the population
>>29714748
Sorry dude. I want to respond correctly to you but your whole post is U wot m8?
>>29714888
>incantation
Yeah, that was supposed to be incapacitation
China has ~150 delivery systems that can reach CONUS from their mainland, for major metropolitan centers you'd need more than one delivery system to even kill a high percentage of the people there and that's with zero early warning.
>>29714773
I've seen no official acknowledgement from Vietnam. Cambodia only talked about training. Diplomat and a couple others are mostly going off rumors.
Overall it's pretty meaningless. I actually think the supply depots will just be for training operations we'll do with their ground forces.
Viets and Cambodians said no permanent US presence is allowed. They made that clear enough.
Sauce? Every time this happened in the buildup to Afghanistan and Iraq it was done by contractors. There'd be no good reason why that process would be different now.
>>29714814
People that think that Chinese government shills come to /k/ on 4chan are delusional. They are chasing a boogeyman.
"50 cents" is the new "downvote" and just leads to more shitposting.
>>29714991
>not marginalizing shitposts
>4chan
Pick one
>>29714837
That would precipitate retalitory nuclear strikes.
You shill this strategy way too often. It's just no gonna happen on a large scale.
Once you start purposefully killing millions of Chinese, the nukes come out.
>>29714943
You said America has 360 million people.
You high?
>>29715004
In every China thread I falseflag as a 50center and get tons of sweet sweet (you)'s.
>>29714955
the supply depots are mostly for a mix of quick deployment and humanitarian disaster response according to the Diplomant. Breaking Defense quotes General Dennis Via that the supply depots will be located in Vietnam and Cambodia.
Despite what the governments state, the Vietnamese and Cambodians are warming up to the US (especially the Vietnamese). I know quoting a Vietnamese poster here is awful, but they said their government is even looking at acquiring F16's or other Western equipment now that the weapons embargo is lifted.
The issue is not angering China too much by openly allowing heavy US equipment near the Chinese border. These countries will try to juggle appeasing China with securing their borders until one policy overwhelms the other, be it appeasement or defense against China. So yeah I can see why they wouldn't be quick to accept a US military base with troops there anytime soon
>>29715007
>the nukes come out
Right, so...their strategy is to start an exchanged they will, in no way, get the better of. They either target our much much larger strategic capability at the expense of hitting our production and infrastructure which means they blow their load on making sure we don't nuke them back [spoilers]we would, we still have 14 SSBNs[/spoilers] or they try to get as a big a body count as they can figuring in for system failure and systems we knock down with SM-3s and our much much larger nuclear capability hits them back. Then there's the fact they're still mostly toting around unfueled delivery systems that have to be set up and fueled prior to launch which will, probably, be enough time for satellite surveillance, which would [spoilers again]be looking VERY hard for them[/spoilers again] would be able to pick up at least in part and we'd attack those systems prior to utilization. The strongest strategy they have against us would be to just plonk the absolute bajeezus out of Worst Korea and Japan with SRBMs and IRBMs to try us to get us to back down because "muh alliez".
The nuclear first strike/retaliation scenarios people fall back on where conceptualized when Russia still had as many or more warheads and delivery systems than us. China, for all it's efforts, still does not have a nuclear strike capability against the CONUS that is greater than that couldn't be matched but just our navy alone.
Either way they decide to pop their wad would end up with a China that is basically in the iron age all over again.
>>29712745
>implying the USA could ever loose a war, ever
>mfw 1/10th of our Navy is better than most of the rest of the worlds combined.
>>29715027
Are you, we have 360million+
>>29715152
No we don't, there are no estimates that high.
There's also lots of really obvious problems with your statements. Chicago only has a few million people, but it also has many more in the suburbs directly adjacent to it. A nuke will kill both.
>>29715175
[citation needed]
Anon, you're looking at recorded citizens from the census, that does not include illegal/legal immigrants.
>>29715200
Yes the census does include illegal immigrants.
And no, we don't really citations to prove that a bomb with a blast radius can kill people inside its blast radius.
You're really bad at this.
>>29715152
Your about 40 million people high.
>>29715119
Here is what I don't understand. Any country on the face of the earth that initiates a Nuclear Strike will become an instant pariah in international community and most likely not just be facing incoming US retaliation strikes. Even if they could somehow spin justification for their actions, it would be completely horrific and uncalled for in the international community.
Also I find it funny that from flow of this conversation, the only hope China has of winning currently is with a Nuclear Strike. What's better is that even WITH that nuclear strike we still acknowledge that they lose end game with retalitory strike from surviving assets.
>>29712823
They want all our tiger dongs having hunted their own tigers to extinction. Since they aren't really native here. They're going after our zoos
>>29714869
>China is still a Maoist shithole
>>29715119
The US has just as many dams and infrastructures the Chinese can destroy without nuclear weapons, starting with ALL the American allies in Asia (hence most allies would likely assume the neutral position (except probably Americucks Japanese)).
In which scenario you have two sides with comparable capabilities firing cruise missiles at each other.
>>29715427
You left out South Korea for some reason.
Y'know, the other cuck-nation in East Asia.
>>29712745
>Who wins in a nuclear war
No one
>>29713337
>China
>they do not have the manpower
I don't doubt the truth of it, it's just funny to see that written out. I assume the reason is because they are building ships faster than they can train crews for them?
>>29715427
>The US has just as many dams and infrastructures the Chinese can destroy without nuclear weapons
Literally bullshit, they lack strategic bombers with the range necessary in the numbers necessary to negate NORAD. Even if they managed to get a few through they lack the payloads necessary to cause a catastrophic failure of the dams and flying over the Arctic Circle would require both Russia and Canada to say "Okay, you can fly through our airspace with payloads bound for the U.S. making us de facto enemies of the United States and (possibly) the rest of NATO."
>ALL of American allies in Asia
Which would bring more nations into the fray against China OR free us from an ROE that eliminated civilian targets as possible objectives for non-nuclear strategic bombing and put the Norks on the table as another country to gut and flood China with refugees.
>cruise missiles
Which can't reach CONUS from China but our fleet most certainly can lob at targets east of the Hu Huanyong line.
You keep following this weird ricenigger logic where all thing are considered equal...they're not, they're demonstrably tipped in the favor the U.S. and its allies.
>>29713444
>>29713452
Time to paint us a balkanized China.
>>29714777
You don't use nukes to hit cities unless it's a countervalue strike, and China doesn't have enough missiles to actually make a comprehensive countervalue attack, most of those missiles would be directed at American assets in the Asian sphere.
Also, not all missiles are MIRVs. Probably not even half.
>>29716137
You could make an entire thread on this alone
>>29713710
North Korea is closer to white noise than a diversion.
>>29713728
I honestly wouldn't be shocked if Russia started lobbing nukes around when they see ICBMs in the skies. Peer pressure is rough.
>>29713649
>The US will then face Chinese counter-strikes with DF-41 MIRVed ICBMs and WU-14 hypersonic attack vehicles, wiping out all US cities.
>he thinks those things actually exist, and the ones that do are more than vaporware
>>29714756
A US/China war hasn't broken out because there's no reason to fight one.
>>29716210
I wouldn't be surprised if Russia carved out a nice big chunk of Xinjiang, Nei Mongol, Heilongjiang, Mongolia and Kazakhstan, then be like; "What is of always here, you must proofs!"
The Kazakhs would shrug and just take a bigger chunk out of Xinjiang to make up for the lost territory and the Mongols would, frankly, not realize it had even happened.
>>29715238
No it doesn't, get good, theres and additional 40 million.
>>29713247
I love you. <#
>>29714823
I wish that didn't sound so plausible. Current American political culture is absolute garbage. I feel like the left half of this country wouldn't even want to respond to a Chinese attack because muh fragile peace.
>>29716277
It also excludes non-permanent resident aliens, people who just didn't complete the census forms as there was no mechanism to force them to do so short of annoying them, itinerant people, the homeless, foreign students in the U.S., and a whole host of other individuals who fell through the bureaucratic cracks.
it's a bad idea to go in a land war in china
just put murrican troops on allies,arm some bombers and then pound them into the stone age
What is the likelihood of India aiding the US in a war against China? Is staring down Pakistan enough to keep them out of the fight or do they not have grievance enough with China to bother? I would assume the latter.
>>29713649
>Do not take this statement lightly, for I have trod /k/, the weapons board on 4chan. For all its recent pretensions, the board originated as a place for anime dweebs to argue over katanas versus kunai in Naruto. These are people who would equip the Air Force with Extra 300s, using open cockpits so the pilots could fire 1911s. There's an F-35 argument bingo chart in circulation. Unironically quoting Pierre Sprey is the fucking free space. I've listened to them wank over diesel subs, over supercavitating torpedoes, over Russian Aquaman - and nothing, but nothing has fed these retards more than the god-damned Ding Dong.
> When I see the message log recording Tomahawks impacting those hateful pillars of jingoism and Communist aggression, bald eagles explode from my pants in a fountain of patriotism as I weep a single tear of joy.
>>29712745
The US military would slaughter the chinese military, assuming you just want force comparison.
Who "wins" is another question all together.
The USA could've steamrolled vietnam in a comparison of raw power. The ultimate point of a war is a political struggle, and ultimately that is what decides the victor.
>>29716428
>if this isn't pasta it should be
Well played anon, well played
>>29716456
Planefag's SHARKNADO scenario in CMANO should be required reading on how bad of a steamroll the US would give China in a straight up fight.
>>29712999
Slow infestation. Remember China operates over hundreds of years, unlike western democratic 4-8 year election cycles.
Of course, they are fighting against time recently, as their population is getting a feel for their own individual worth, rather than subservience to the state. This is a relatively new challenge for China in the grand scheme of things.
Honestly all we need is a chinese version of towelheads and nignogs to rot their country from within. No idea how to let them catch hold however
>>29716517
Western China does have towelheads that like to stir up trouble, but there aren't enough for them to sweat over.
Is this a serious question? America wins and the Chinese navy gets absolutely trashed but it's not like China wants war with America. That's a nice clapper pipe dream.
>>29714225
> The ground forces deployed in South Korea could be deployed in the South China Sea instead.
My apologies. I said you had looked at a map. Clearly you haven't. Protip: The blue parts are water.
>America puts sanctions on China
>They park their navy on their trade routes
>Force allied countries to also put sanctions on China
China would literally go full COLLAPSING
well, best korea just posted 300 mlrs vehicles on the border.
>http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2016/04/24/0200000000AEN20160424001100315.html
we may find out real soon
>>29716695
Congratulations, they've added 300 more JDAM targets and a grand total of 30 extra seconds of sustained artillery fire.
>>29716716
it would take weeks to defeat their mig 21 wings
by which s. korea would be overrun. this is all part of the plan as i understand it from the US military perspective of withdrawal from s. korea and returning in force from japan
>>29716760
>it would take weeks to defeat their mig 21 wings
>>29712745
Okay, so If China militarily ceases a few islands from other countries in the South China Sea and somehow gets the US involved, here's what I think, would happen.
>China vs US becomes China vs US/Vietnam/Japan/South Korea/Phillipines/Australia/New Zealand.
>China gets help from Russia, but not very heavy militaristic help. Maybe some Intel equipment or radar or something. Otherwise, no other country gets involved militarily
>Same goes for the US however. Most of the Nations that sign on do not commit military units to battles, rather, they provide intel/logistical support.
>Should Chinese and US navies actually meet in battle, US wins, but with some bad losses. US Air Force in Japan and South Korea bust China's balls, but with losses as well.
>The rest of the 'war' leaves China practically landlocked, with the US hitting targets in China with missiles and bombs (If they get past Chinese AA)
>The Economic damage to the world is immeasurable.
>>29716760
Negative. The plan is to bomb their shit and kill all of their soldiers by the time they get to Seol.
It would take days to turn it into a COIN operation.
>>29716816
>AA
anon pls
>>29716816
Read Planefag's Sharknado scenario.
>USN is tasked to take Woody Island from PLAN
>Goal is to force the Chinese forces to fight.
>USN shreks the PLAN so hard they loose 36 ships and subs in a single battle with at least a few dozen aircraft lost.
>US losses are two aircraft. An F18 and one F35
>>29716854
Link, and reason behind the name?
>>29716854
Sounds about right
>>29716878
>>29716882
>>29716933
Is there a part 2 where we see the timeline and results of the scenario?
>>29717299
SIDE: USN/USMC
LOSSES:
1x F/A-18A+ Hornet
1x F-35B Lightning II
SIDE: PLAN
LOSSES:
16x C-802 Triple
12x DF-21D ASBM TEL [CSS-5 Mod-4]
8x H-6D Badger
4x HQ-16A TELAR
10x J-15 Flying Shark [Su-33 Copy]
12x J-16 Flying Shark [Su-30MK2 Copy]
32x J-8F Finback B [J-8II]
18x JH-7A Flounder
13x Ka-28 Helix A
1x Radar (China YLC-8)
6x SA-15b Gauntlet [9A331] TELAR
3x SA-16 Gimlet [9K310 Igla-1] MANPADS
4x SA-20a Gargoyle [5P85SE] TEL
6x Su-30MKK2 Flanker G
13x Type 022 Houbei
3x Type 035B Ming
4x Type 035G Ming
2x Type 039G1 Song
1x Type 041 Yuan
2x Type 052B Luyang I [168 Guangzhou]
1x Type 052D Luyang III [172 Kunming]
4x Type 053H3 Jiangwei II [564 Yichang]
6x Type 054A Jiangkai II [530 Xuzhou]
3x Vehicle (China Type 352 Square Tie)
1x Vehicle (Clam Shell [5N66])
1x Vehicle (HQ-16A FCR)
1x Vehicle (Tombstone [30N6])
2x Y-8J Cub
2x Y-8JB Cub [High New 2]
3x Y-8W Cub [High New 5, KJ-200 Balance Beam]
8x Z-9C Dauphin 2
SIDE: Neutral (whales)
LOSSES:
3x False Contact (Medium)
5x False Contact (Small)
>>29717317
>mfw
>>29717317
>SIDE: Neutral (whales)
>LOSSES:
>3x False Contact (Medium)
>5x False Contact (Small)
>my sides didn't ask for this
>>29712971
>China
>Friends
Pick one and only one.
>>29717317
>SIDE: Neutral (whales)
>LOSSES:
>3x False Contact (Medium)
>5x False Contact (Small)
>>29713460
Losing tons (literally, tons) of money in the process. possibly destabilizing their currency and, likely, ours. Guess what happens when the USD goes haywire? All oil exporting nations get fucked. China's economy gets fucked, since our currency will depreciate faster than theirs, and their whole economy is currently built around a weak yuan/strong dollar.
What they can do, that does make sense, and is possibly why they parked $1.2t in USD, is devalue their own currency. As their currency decreases, the relative value of the dollars they're owed goes up. Instant profit. Though, I don't think that's what their thinking with the recent devaluations. Has more to do with monetary policy, since they don't have a free floating currency. Although, it's a nice little ancillary benefit.
>>29712796
Pakistan
>>29718310
they have to worry about India
>>29713676
>implying any thread related to China isn't Amerishit fantasy and wrong information most of the time
The US nuclear navy is first and foremost the reason why China could never really have a chance..
It has been theorized that the US could potentially defend its waters from an attack by every other country on the globe combined. Not sure if I agree, but this kind of thinking makes us understand the kind of naval power we are talking about
Sure the US could be defeated on land by sheer numbers, and yeah they could probably have their air superiority at least contested, but when it comes to the sea.. No one else comes anywhere fucking close.
It's so one sided that its ridiculous to even ask that question in the first place
>>29713509
OK Chang tell us more
>>29718384
Not really. And the Pakis are pretty cozy with the burgers.
>>29712745
>China sends 100 000 000 of Chinese to surrender on the front lines
>logistics are gone
>false peace talks while US tries to figure out what the fuck to do with millions upon millions of Chinese that want to surrender and be moved away
>Chinese are shipped all over to pow camps
>they are hungry, thirsty, cold
>you cant kill them all
>you cant even feed them all, not to mention where to put them all
>some of them are infected with sars and other magic
>humanitarian disaster
>real chinese are grouping and preparing
>50 000 000 more surrender and want to be shipped to USA soil
>the entire world chings and chongs, kills with sars and swarms everything and everyone
>China strikes the weakest part
>>29718310
Finaly someone mentioned it...
But im still not sure if they are so much friends that pakistan would join the party
>NK
The only positive effect would be, that chinas enemy could get low in ammo
>Laos
seriously?
>>29719434
They do,
India may not say it but ever since the fall of the wall they've been in the USA camp firmly
If Pakis help out Chinks then Indians will escalate
Rest of the world.
>>29718492
US Army is defeated on land by closed terrain & their inability to comprehend how to fight in it
Or develop vehicles suited for it
>>29712745
Scenario 1:
China invades Taiwan
>NATO responds with military help to ROC. It then sends land troops.
>China declares war on NATO after increased tensions and skirmishes between NATO and China units.
>After war is declared, NATO begins conventional-armed missile strike on continental China (Tomahawks), and starts planning an incursion with land troops.
>NATO strikes objectives in China from NATO bases in Pakistan. China responds with limited Conventional-tipped missile attack in Pakistan's NATO bases.
>NATO incursion starts, China goes mad.
>China launches theatre-sized nuclear missile on NATO positions on continental China.
This marks the start of nuclear war. From now on, NATO won't want to strike with nuclear weapons unless further provoked, but China is already considering and preparing for a full-blown strike on continental US, Britain, and other NATO-involved nations (France, Turkey, etc.).
>NATO responds with conventional-tipped attacks on Quanzhou.
>China goes madder and launches a limited nuclear strike on NATO bases in Afghanistan and South Korea.
>NATO begins nuclear strike on China nuclear bases.
>China begins nuclear strike on Great Britain and the East Coast of USA.
>US and Britain strike back with nuclear forces.
I still can't figure how will Russia respond at all this. Maybe it will recognize it is its time to start advancing on Ukraine and other ex-soviet countries. Maybe NATO then will have two fronts. That could possibly mark a temporary alliance between China and Russia.
>>29722386
>China invades Taiwan
Never.Taiwan's economy will more and more dependent to China.China will just wait until Taiwan become Hongkong 2.0
>>29716428
why does planefag hate the eurofighter?
>>29716271
>you will never see a US-Russia alliance beat up China.
>And the saudis, fuck the saudis.
>>29725675
Russia stands to gain too much by staying out of it as long as possible then watching their national prestige shoot through the fucking roof when they mediate peace talks and provide the manpower for the U.N. efforts to bring aid and rebuild China.
