>For every American there is 5 Chinese and they can breed like rabbits on command
How would we defeat China in a war, bros
>>52110925
Nukes
>>52110947
Is that America's solution to everything?
>>52110925
Send niggers their way.
>>52110972
Yes.
>defeat
>China
pick one
>>52110925
There's no need. They're already fucking themselves over with pollution and overpopulation.
>>52110925
China will destroy itself. Chinese men are emasculated betas that are too weak and naive to kek anybody and their women are all egocentric inter-racial breeding jews-in-disguise. Due to mass corruption, resource shortages, pollution and economic instability China will fall into a quagmire of civil unrest and skyrocketing mortality rates. Dunno about you, but I'm so happy the Chinks will fall in my lifetime.
>>52111073
t. selfhating betagook
>>52111111
Nice digits familia
>>52111111
maisie
>>52111111
Nice sextuples. Also Taiwan master race.
>>52111111
Chinks are the reason why Gooks, Japs and other Asian groups are disparaged and looked down upon. If the chinks are extinct the world will know that we arr dun rook the same.
>>52111111
truly a waste
>>52111111
Chang BTFO
>>52111111
good on ya m9
>>52111111
wew
we reintroduce opium
Chinese kryptonite
>>52111111
Fugg :DD
>>52111111
good double
there will never be a war between china and america, especially not over some pointless islands no one even lives on, the threat of nuclear escalation is too great
>>52111206
Nice
>>52111111
>>52111073
>Chinese men are emasculated betas that are too weak and naive to kek anybody
not here :^)
>>52111111
>>52111111
check mine
>>52111111
Check my duplicates
>>52111544
Cool dubs kumiko
>>52111544
>>52111111
Muy bien, you got my name out and now everyone knows my true tripcode.
>>52110925
I read a statistic that in a few years China will have 700,000 lung cancer deaths a year. They seem to be doing some of the work for us.
I spent less than two weeks in Beijing and was close to coughing up blood at the end of my stay.
>>52111111
blown the fuck out
China in terms of a military power isn't all that threatening when you look at their track record.
Chinas has 1 shit aircraft carrier and their shitty vertical takeoff tech limits there aircraft range and payload capacity. Wars are waged fought and won by air superiority. If the enemy controls the air is is fully committed (no we are not committed to bombing isis look at the missile targets) the only avenue of combat is guerrilla warfare.
If we got in a war with china we would wreck their military and occupy the country within a month. However then we would face the same situation we faced in vietnam iraq and afghanistan where the civilian population is unwilling to accept us. They would die by the millions but would never stop resisting until we left. The only way to "win" in an occupation is to win over the civilians or terrify the populace mongol style. Both of which are impossible for the American military.
air superiority
attack helicopters
Don't engage China's infantry with US infantry. Blockade their naval trade. Most Chinese live on near the coast, and they rely heavily on naval shipping. When they start to starve, and overthrow their government, the ROC may take the mainland.
>>52111111
Checked lad
>>52110925
For a "superpower," China has a truly pathetic nuclear arsenal. They have some 325 nukes, and only about half of those are capable of hitting the larger part of the continental US. We could literally win in a full scale nuclear exchange.
>White boys denying the power of The Peoples Republc of China
stay mad kkeks
they'll die from lung cancer before they become a threat
>>52111206
Chinks selling designer drugs back to the brits now, lol
And they're those weird experimental ones that usually makes you retarded.
>>52113960
>could win a nuclear exchange
>implying losing your west coast is "winning"
That's why china doesn't bother getting more nukes, because they know you won't risk it.
>>52115945
>implying that China would go for a countervalue strike when they have such a limited supply of ICBMs.
>implying that China would risk a massive retaliatory countervalue strike on major population centers with little to no way to evacuate or get the populace to some sort of shelter.
If you honestly think that the use of nuclear arms is anything other than the logical progression of conventional warfare then you are ignorant.
>>52114081
t. Chong Fang
there probably won't be any more wars, just cold wars, at least until we can be safe in other planets. it's just too easy to make a nuclear bomb and fuck the atmosphere, therefore fucking ourselves.
>>52110947
/thread
>>52115945
>implying losing your west coast is "winning"
Im okay with losing california.
the day EMALS transfer+logistics treaties that are being discussed atm, happen to take effect, the US will have a china's natural nemesis as an ally, granted pakistan is completely disowned by US and PRC gets even more close to it to fill the big daddy power vacuum that keeps pakistan from collapsing .
>>52110925
With pic related.
>>52116050
>implying china cares
They wouldn't. Losing 5 or even 10 chinks per american is well worth it. It's the ultimate spite fuck you. Chinks can survive anything, anyways.
These nukes are simply insurance. China isn't going to use them for anything BUT a counterattack, which is why they have a small stockpile and doesn't bother building more. They will modernize them to make sure they can bypass your missile defense though.
>>52110925
Adopt their girls and pump them full of hot white American semen when they turn 18. I thought this was always the plan.
USA able to defeat north korea ?
>>52111111
Came here just to check this.
>>52111650
It doesn't help that there are 1.4 billion of them just on the mainland.
>>52116413
We rather have Australia than India as an ally. Much more effective.
>>52115945
>losing most of the liberals and sjw's fag queers on the west coast
I'd be fine with that
>>52110972
No, just orientals.
