quote:

Originally posted by Alccode Why does this perceived "competition" with China exist? Thinking like this can ONLY lead to a war! Don't you see? Especially with today's nuclear weapons ... war is out of the question! Is everyone insane or am I? (Yes, you are. Har har.)

Ugh.

i never stated anything about 'competition' tho China is becoming in some ways more capitalist, so therefore there will be competition. hell China is in the WTO which theoretically stresses 'perfect' competition whatever that may be.

war is out of the question, but i think everyone here is confounding the original question. the original question had to do whether military tech could overcome the sheer numbers of ground forces in China. there was nothing about occupation, nukes, or that we WANTED war.

beyond that i hoped people had information beyond 'jeez, the nukes will kill us all!'

as i said in my original post, China is worried about its failing expansion into the more technological spheres of national defense - where the US is the worldwide leader (even tho these techniques arent used for 'defense' much anymore)

and TuanAhn213 - i simply said it because you made the proclaimation of China being 'the future' of something. this completely disregards India or Pakistan, for example in world power struggles and because of this you seemed like a China supporter. its really not a big deal, but I like to see that you have made it one|

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

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Thanks . Yes the nuclear bomb issue would be the iffy of the situation. My last post completely disregarded nuclear weapons for obvious reasons ... it's virtually impossible to predict a "victory" with their use. If nuclear weapons were to be used two questions must be asked: A) Is it going to be a strategic nuclear war? B) Is it going to be a tactical only nuclear war? In a strategic nuclear war China would only "win" if they initiated a first strike. The US would lose in the sense that the loss of 15-30 large US cities would be relatively unacceptable to the US despite the complete obliteration of China. If the US were to initiate a first strike China would have no chance at all. Simply put, the US strategic arsenal is so much more adept at first strike scenarios (it was designed to defeat russia) than China could ever hope to match. What makes the US arsenal so lethal? The 12-14 or so Ohio class SSBNs submarines that carry a whopping 50% of the US's strategic arsenal of nuclear weapons. Each submarine carries 24 trident missiles whereby EACH MISSILE contains 5 MIRV (Multiple Independantly Targetable Reentry Vehicle) warheads ... therefore each submarine contains up to a 120 100 kiloton nuclear warheads. One submarine, launching off the coast of China ... its warheads would probably make landfall in 5-10 minutes, relegating the 24 or so Chinese long range ICBMS to radioactive dust. Second scenario ... a tactical only nuclear exchange. Again I would say the US would "win" such an exchange. The reason I say this is because, once again, the US posseses a far superior arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons. The US possesses thousands of tactical weapons: tomohawk or standoff attack missiles, bombs, artillery, shit there are even nuclear torpedoes. Compared to China's approximately 300 tactical nuclear weapons and there's no competition. Additionally bear in mind that the US nuclear weapons delivery systems are significantly better than the Chinese. Just about the only chinese warheads that stand a chance of getting through are its missile launched warheads ... all of which are quite succeptible by attack from the air. Anyway further info on US/Chinese weapons systems can be found at: http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/index.html A good analysis of Chinese military modernization compared to US modernization can be found at: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa465.pdf Yea sorry for babbling ... I'm a huge study of military technology.

so all you're basically saying is the U.S. has more nukes and submarines. Super!!

way to write a paragraph about almost nothing!

quote:

Originally posted by 'mju:zik so all you're basically saying is the U.S. has more nukes and submarines. Super!! way to write a paragraph about almost nothing!

Yes yes, I know that all the big words can be a little bit intimidating ... but my my, we've demonstrated remarkable reading comprehension for our age! So here, take this yummy lollipop



And here's your very own grown-up newspaper for you to read!

http://ink.news.com.au/

Now go run along now!

___________________
Retro ...

Last edited by occrider on Nov-13-2003 at 01:15

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Yes yes, I know that all the big words can be a little bit intimidating

ACTUALLY,

the biggest word you used in the paragraph before was "speculation"

if you consider that a "big" word, then you should prolly go back to high school buddy

What do you do when a person doesn't understand the concept of patronizing someone?

___________________
Retro ...

quote:

Originally posted by 'mju:zik ACTUALLY, the biggest word you used in the paragraph before was "speculation" if you consider that a "big" word, then you should prolly go back to high school buddy

ACTUALLY try and read through the article again. There are several bigger words there, and if you find one, I'm sure that the general consensus will be that you deserve another lollypop if you find them.

___________________
1+1=10

china, nukes, u.s.a...oh my!

i don't even know why you even discussed nukes...

imo they will always be a standoff weapon, i'd be a bitch to deploy small tactical nukes because it raises so many stupid questions and it makes launching strategics nukes all that easier.

lastly, to the point of U.S.A. vs China

China has the largest free standing army on the face of this planet...however, it has no mobilization abilities. However, the U.S. has the largest heavy lifting air mobility wing in any air force and logistics capabilities to complement. China, however, lacks this ability and with a proper first strike (unannounced) the U.S. could take key parts of the Chinese with relative ease, while China would take weeks if not months to muster enough troops to counter the U.S.

However....again, i know i just argued the U.S. vs China bit....but i tend to agree that hypothetical situations like this are unlikely...and thus hypothetical it's not war mongering, it's just playing a little game.

___________________


You need people like me!!! You need people like me so you can point your fucking fingers, and say 'that's the bad guy!' So, what dat make you? Good? You're not good; you just know how to hide. Howda lie. Me, I don't have that problem.

Help Fight Disease TA United Research Team