There is no way US forces could control a land area the size of China without a huge increase in numbers. We could probably decimate much of their infrastructure, but a full scale invasion would be a very futile endeavor.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter There is no way US forces could control a land area the size of China without a huge increase in numbers. We could probably decimate much of their infrastructure, but a full scale invasion would be a very futile endeavor.

Hmmm it depends on what the objective is and what kind of logistical scenario there is. If the objective is to secure land and hold it in some kind of occupation then the answer is obviously the US cannot win. However, if the objective is to destroy the Chinese army, I would say it would come to be pretty close under several assumptions.

1st Assumption: US armed forces are not occupied in Iraq
2nd Assumption: US buildup of armed forces have consolidated a large buildup of arms and equipment on the Russian border of China, with several carrier air groups in the area
3rd Assumption: US logistical supply line from Europe through Russia is a strong pipeline.

I think that the Iraq war demonstrated the weaknesses of relying upon numbers against superior technology. Granted the Chinese have many many more numbers but at the same time, US forces would be significantly larger against the CHinese army. Although the CHinese have been attempting to modernize their army they still possess several signficant weaknesses:

A) They still lack a blue water navy
B) Their air force is in desperate need of modernation and they primarily import their air force equipment.
C) Many of their tanks are cold war era and wouldn't last long against an Abrams tank.

I think the US could clearly establish dominance in the skies over China depending upon the quality of China's air-defense forces. However, the US would most CERTAINLy have control over the night skies which means bye bye factories, and bye bye logistical supply dumps. The air force could pretty much starve the Chinese army from its weapons and food.

Crap I must work but I'll continue this later. Good topic!

___________________
Retro ...

thanks! The only reserve I have is if the Chinese civilians were sent into action. We would most likely immediatly see Guerilla style warfare and maybe even a re-employment of the tunnel system like in Vietnam. I do agree with the point of the bye-bye factories becasue the night skies would obviously be held by the U.S. I'm a little bit catious to say that it would be dominated by the U.S. because of the above reason. There are mulitple people saying that the U.S. could just role through with the abrhams and wipe the slate clean, but the second the tanks hit the villages they would be vulnerable IMO. I don't know, this is a hard one to call.

If there were actually some real modern day confrontation between the USA and China I would predict it be very similar of the US-Japan war of WWII.

Of course US forces would have to be much more numerous for a real battle in China, a draft would be needed in the USA. Most likely in response to that a draft would also be done in China.

I think technology and tactics will eventually win it (don't forget GPS), but it would be a long bloody war for sure, and a quaqmire for sometime.

I could envision the US however controlling most of costal China, and since it is coastal supply lines would be very strong.

funny you should ask...

well im taking a class on China now (not that i think i know everything there is to know...) but my prof Ken Lieberthal (Clinton's Asian Sec Adviser 98-00) was in China during the 91 Gulf War at a high level meeting of officials - some from the PLA. He said they just ignored him as the war began on TV, and after the meeting he rode back to his hotel with his representative from the CCP - a PLA official. at that time the official said that the invasion of Iraq showed that the PLA was a 'sitting duck' (in that English phrase).

since then the PLA has been reformed but as far behind the US as it was in 91, it is at least as far behind today regardless of the sheer numbers of cavalry.

beyond this, control of China means the control of the Eastern Seaboard, not the entire country (for the most part - since the US cant even run Iraq, China would be a clusterfuck).

China has really only made progress in advanced weaponry within the ICBM realm. all other attempts to catch up to the US have been largely unsuccessful.

___________________
'That's like telling a Kodiak bear to stop fcking older men.'

quote:

Originally posted by priveye03 thanks! The only reserve I have is if the Chinese civilians were sent into action. We would most likely immediatly see Guerilla style warfare and maybe even a re-employment of the tunnel system like in Vietnam. I do agree with the point of the bye-bye factories becasue the night skies would obviously be held by the U.S. I'm a little bit catious to say that it would be dominated by the U.S. because of the above reason. There are mulitple people saying that the U.S. could just role through with the abrhams and wipe the slate clean, but the second the tanks hit the villages they would be vulnerable IMO. I don't know, this is a hard one to call.

not likely on the tunnels. the Vietnamese gave the Chinese hell with the same tactic - China never employed it to a large scale. if anything the war would be like Korea, as that was basically US vs Chinese on Korean soil|

___________________
'That's like telling a Kodiak bear to stop fcking older men.'

The US is struggling with a bunch of Iraqi peasants. I'd love to see it going against china.

I think after Vietnam, Americans had a very hard time trying to come in terms with the fact that the US is a declining military power.

___________________
Courageous, untroubled, mocking and violent; that is what Wisdom wants us to be. Wisdom is a woman, and loves only a warrior.
--Friedrich Nietzsche

In a straight out old school war like WW1 and WW2, the USA could beat every other country in the world put together.

But that is unlikely to happen because the major economies are far more integrated than they were before World War 1. The corporations who really call the shots in the world would never allow governments to go to war with countries that they have major markets or production facilities.

quote:

Originally posted by Illusion ... I think after Vietnam, Americans had a very hard time trying to come in terms with the fact that the US is a declining military power.

And what? A declining military power that is still at least 40 years ahead of the most advanced military technologywise elsewhere?

___________________
'That's like telling a Kodiak bear to stop fcking older men.'

The yanks have all the best toys in the world, but they don't know how to use them.

Fair enough, China probably would not even be able to hit America where it hurts, but no way America would be able to occupy China.

America would do their notorious bombing rades left right and centre, and not only have their army to deal with, but a resistance from civilians.

....Would be very nasty all the same.

___________________
I walk through mindfields to watch your head rock !!!

save the pandas?

It really depends on what the US wants to do?

If it wants to elimate the population of China, they have more than enough weapons for that.

If they want to bring down their economy, they will probably have to elimate infrastructure such as power, key buildings and their satelittles.

If the US is fighting on Chinese land, that would be invasion of territory and other Chinese allies would be in support to eliminate the US invasion by taking out US support from sea, and if they are good enough, to take out satelites in space.

The US would not dare to make a move like you are suggesting on the Chinese, especially in invasion. A war would be extremely costly to the US economy, the world economy and the stability of world peace.

Probably of occurance: 0.00001%