|
There's a chance that China will become the global superpower sometime this century or next. With their current society we'd best hope it doesn't happen while people we love are still around. If any country is going to break the pattern of succesive hyperpowers becoming more and more benign then it's China. Nukes are keeping things in line now. God forbid they ever have to be used to keep the line. |
Pacific war - how soon? • Page 2
-
Khanivor 44,800 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years ago -
Lutz 48,870 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years agossuellid wrote:
Granted, but the thing is is that China is playing catch up.
They are slowly modernising everything but when you have an army of 2 million and an airforce of half a million it takes time. But they still have a hell of a lot of ex Russian kit and a growing expertise with cutting edge tech from outside investment.
If the Chinese Army modernise itself ENTIRELY within 20 years (Which would be a BIG achievement) how much further will the US have gone then? In 20 years submarines may be made obsolete, or planes, or gawd knows what.
Given enough time China would be very powerful, and they will, more than likly, eventually take over the US as the predominant power in the world. However they need to get there first, and that might be tricky. If they DID invade Taiwan for example, would other countries sit back and twiddle their thumbs? -
Lutz 48,870 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years agoKhanivor wrote:
I have to agree with you completly Khani. I also firmly believe that China (Or the US) are the only countries that could start WW3. I really hoep it doesn't come to that, my life time or not.
There's a chance that China will become the global superpower sometime this century or next. With their current society we'd best hope it doesn't happen while people we love are still around. If any country is going to break the pattern of succesive hyperpowers becoming more and more benign then it's China.
Nukes are keeping things in line now. God forbid they ever have to be used to keep the line. -
ssuellid 19,142 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years agoTechnology has not helped the US in keeping Iraq quiet, or in Vietnam, or the Russians in Afghanistan. Troop numbers are also highly important. -
GrandTheftApu 6,117 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 18 years agoLutz wrote:
ssuellid wrote:
A whole armies worth of stuff? I doubt it. They've probably got a few very well kitted out battalions (or whatever) and a LOT of grunt force.
They own a whole load of top spec Russian kit including various stuff the US turned down as they did not believe it was technically possible from the Russians. SRAM jet anti ship missiles, complete with the missile cruisers. Plus shed loads of subs.
They look at least as modern as the british army IMO. -
ssuellid 19,142 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years agoGrandTheftApu wrote:
They look at least as modern as the british army IMO.
And their stuff probably works. -
Khanivor 44,800 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years agoIf China were to invade Taiwan I think local countries and the US would step in, with the US leading the way thanks to having about the only military capable of defending the island. Expect Brazil to side with China and the EU to quickly send the spec sheets of weapon systems to those who will be doing the fighting, if they have been stupid enough to allow the French to make a quick buck.
If Taiwan is overun then China will most likely push onwards and outwards. Taiwan would help China encircle the Senkaku islands which, imo, are what all this rioting is all about.
There's a damn good reason why Australia has been such a staunch supporter of the war on terror. They fear that at some point in the not-to distant future they are going to be in desperate need of allies. -
Lutz 48,870 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years agoGrandTheftApu wrote:
I disagree. Looking at what was in Iraq it "looked" impressive (You seen those AA cannons?) but they're not that much cop without decent information to back them up with.
They look at least as modern as the british army IMO.
More and more warfare is about information. Hence why in many wars the first thing that's targetted is the information and the power supplies. (Iraq and Kosovo (?) being good examples there)
Up close and personaly, yeah, the Chinese army is a tough and nasty. The bulk of the war would be fought 30,000ft+ above though.
And just to put some raw firepower onto the scale: In terms of TNT, more power was dropped on Afghanistan in the first 7 days of that war than the WHOLE of world war 2, including both nukes.
I'm sorry, and I know I don't have enough info to make a fully justified opinion on this, but I really don't see how China could hope to win a war with the US. -
As for their missile capability, they did send someone into space... if you can do that you can attack anyone on earth. I'm much more concerned with the Taiwan situation than the Japanese one... although they maybe connected in many ways. At some point something will happen with Taiwan and that will have massive implications. -
Lutz 48,870 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years agoVectorWarrior wrote:
Big word that needs inserting in there: Potentially.
As for their missile capability, they did send someone into space... if you can do that you can attack anyone on earth.
In the back end of the cold war if teh Soviets had fired a nuke at the USA there was a 4% chance of it hitting it's target and exploding correctly IIRC. The USAs figure was at 72%.
/hunts figures for linkies. -
cov 2,524 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 18 years agoIt is hard to see China ever gaining much ground on the west never mind the u.s. in terms of modernising their army because of its sheer size.
They have been attempting to do so for 50 years but it is becoming increasingly impossible with the quickening tempo of technological change.
Clancy has written a book on this scenario, the bear and the tiger or something or other. while the man is a complete arse, he does know, or his team of researchers do, a great deal about military power and geo-political tensions.
Its worth reading for that, no matter how distasteful his politics are -
Khanivor 44,800 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years agoA war with China would come down to airpower. As soon as you lose air supremacy then all the men and tanks in the world don't count for shit. China has no hope of keeping air supremacy against the US. Within a few days their C&C network would be next to useless, making air defence next to impossible and signaling the end of the PLA.
Then again, their only hope should a shooting war start is that they have enough materiel to outlast the bomb and missile stockpiles of the US. Which is a dstinct possibility. I do wonder if Conress's refusal to allow Bush to develop bunker-busting tactical nukes may come back to haunt then one day. You can be pretty sure that a nation which can build the Three Gorges damn wouldn't have to much difficulty burrying C&C centres deep underground. Of course, the infrastructure to transmit and recieve commands must also remain intact.
If war did occur it would be a lot more interesting then the Iraq turkeyshoots of '91 & '03 -
"Pacific war - how soon?"
A: As soon as Bush decides he wants to go play army again.....
/coat -
Lutz 48,870 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years agoAnd then let's us chuck in the conspiracy theories.
The Stealth Fighter (reportedly) entered the USAF in 1989. First we heard of it was 6 to 7 years later.
Then youv'e got crap like [link=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2847029.stm">this and -
MrWorf 64,187 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 20 years ago/waits for flight prices to China to plummet
/rubs hands in anticipation -
sam_spade 15,745 posts
Seen 1 week ago
Registered 20 years agoThinking of signing up for the China cause? -
Lutz 48,870 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years agoHmm...
China vs USA = USA win.
China + Razz vs USA = China + Razz win.
Hmm...
China + USA vs Razz = ? -
Chris_C 458 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 20 years agoLutz, you are completely right on the fact that China at the moment cannot defend itself from an attack from the state. I think that fact keeps China up at night.
Looking at military spending, I can only see this gap in technology increasing, not decreasing. Cov I feel is correct in China's difficulty in bridging the technology gap.
So I cannot see China as the power who starts a Pan-pacific war against the US. Also, I feel that the only power in the world who can potentially break the US's military dominance in the world is Europe (if one were to want such an event happening)
Personally, even tho the US does a fair amount of bullying, I don't mind it being the top dog of the world. -
Khanivor 44,800 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years agoChina has one area where they are very strong.
l337 haXx0rz
So this is interesting. ties in with what Lutz said about all the super-cool shit-hot new stuff we have no idea about. -
Whizzo 44,810 posts
Seen 4 days ago
Registered 20 years agoLutz wrote:The Stealth Fighter (reportedly) entered the USAF in 1989. First we heard of it was 6 to 7 years later.
Er not quite, people knew about the Wobbly Goblin long before it went into service, after all a lot of us played F19 Stealth Fighter back in the late eighties!
It was also doing combat missions during Gulf War I and USAF was very proud of it. -
Khanivor 44,800 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years agoF19 was a great game but helped to show how far off the mark people were in trying to fgure out what and how this new plane worked. It wasn't until GWI that we got to see what it actualy looked like and then folk figured out how the lack of right angles and strict adherence to flat planes worked with radar-absorbing material to make the thing invisible.
You'd think with all the amazing new ordnance of the last decade it would be a ripe time for new flight-sims. MOAB anyone? -
Lutz 48,870 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years agoWhizzo wrote:
Sorry, type, that was meant to be 1984, not 1989. Still, 4 or 5 years is HYUGE technology wise.
Lutz wrote:The Stealth Fighter (reportedly) entered the USAF in 1989. First we heard of it was 6 to 7 years later.
Er not quite, people knew about the Wobbly Goblin long before it went into service, after all a lot of us played F19 Stealth Fighter back in the late eighties!
It was also doing combat missions during Gulf War I and USAF was very proud of it.
And I think for China to bridge the technological gap would be nothing short of miraculous. Technological advancement is also meant to be increasing exponentially, meaning that China is getting further and further behind whilst catching up every day.
I mean, look at a MOAB. People though Daisy Cutters were bad, and they can level a BIG area, and they're nothing comparred to a MOAB, and then what is beyond that? Who knows... -
cov 2,524 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 18 years agoam I the only one who sniggered when Whizzo wrote wobbly goblin 
/am picturing pissed up green dwarves on teh razz -
Lutz 48,870 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years agocov wrote:
O_o
am I the only one who sniggered when Whizzo wrote wobbly goblin
/am picturing pissed up green dwarves on teh razz
"Forumite regular attacked by drunken randy green dwarves!
BAN THIS SICK FILTH!" -
cov 2,524 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 18 years agoheh
never said they were randy tho, terrible imagination you have there
-
MrWorf 64,187 posts
Seen 10 hours ago
Registered 20 years ago/readies mayo jar -
Whizzo 44,810 posts
Seen 4 days ago
Registered 20 years agoKhanivor wrote:It wasn't until GWI that we got to see what it actualy looked like
It was publicly unveiled in April 1990 at Nellis.
And Wobbly Goblin has been the stealth fighter's nickname for years due to the fact it's completely unstable so dependent on its computers.
Edited by Whizzo at 15:32:13 19-04-2005 -
Lutz 48,870 posts
Seen 4 years ago
Registered 18 years agoRazz wrote:
Razz. You disgust me.
/readies mayo jar
I've still not shaken that story from my mind.
You're a bad bad person. -
ssuellid 19,142 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years agoBut then you have stuff like the US not being able to get a rocket into space when the Russians could launch in a blizzard. Whose ICBMs would be more reliable?
Plus ask anyone who has been to Iraq about the broken down US battle tanks that cannot cope with sand and the sand filters that severely restrict engine performance.
Or the torpedos with a less than 10% bang on impact success rate.
Then you have the societies - do you think the US public would support the US government taking on China? The Chinese government would have far less hassle.
End of the day tho it comes down to nukes. -
You people keep forgetting that little country called India that sits on a substantial border with China.
The US have been corting them so sometime now and even selling vast amounts of f-18s to them with options to buy more later. This isn't irelavent. Its long been understood that the US wants India and or Pakistan to act as its regional power base to keep china in check.
The problem, for the US, is that India seems to be playing nice with China now.
I make it sound like a playgorund fight dont I. Cause it is
MCM
Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.
