Chinese Military is no match for US Army!

[Commander CMG]

Not only are they Airbourne they will change you into one of the after they bite you, so this will make the Chinese stronger and multiply their Army yet again.

[british_patriot]

The only reason you won the revolution was because

We were fighting Napolean, we had limited supplies becuase it too along time to reach the new world, and many other countries helped america, Holland, Russia.

[Michelle]

british_patriot, if my high school history has not leaked from my brain after twenty-five years, I believe the American Revolution ended 1776. The Nepoleonic Era started in 1798.

[british_patriot]

'American History around the time of the Revolution (1763-1810)'

[Michelle]

I don't want to derail this thread so I will only say one more thing...

On October 9, 1781 after six years the Revolutionary War was over. In 1783 the Americans and the British signed a peace treaty in Paris, France.

[PadawanOsswe]

The only reason you won the revolution was because

We were fighting Napolean, we had limited supplies becuase it too along time to reach the new world, and many other countries helped america, Holland, Russia.

702121[/snapback]

may be, but we still were winning and won. and actually we never did start a revolution. britain invaded and we defended.

[__Kratos__]

The only reason you won the revolution was because

We were fighting Napolean, we had limited supplies becuase it too along time to reach the new world, and many other countries helped america, Holland, Russia.

702121[/snapback]

may be, but we still were winning and won. and actually we never did start a revolution. britain invaded and we defended.

702356[/snapback]

How does Britain invade it's own colony?

[PadawanOsswe]

thats what they did, how did Lincoln invade his own country? he just did!

Edited June 28, 2005 by PadawanOsswe

[aquatus1]

aquatus1 do you actually believe you could take over Urban China? and why would air control work here when it didn't have an effect in Vietnam or indeed Iraq and Afghanistan, non of the latter have Air defence and yet the US can take a country that does have air defence?

702097[/snapback]

Iraq did have an air defense. It was annihilated within the first two weeks of the war. After their air defenses were destroyed by cruise missiles, we sent in our bombers and strike jets to bombard the troops, and more importantly, the supply lines. After several weeks of this, then and only then did the ground troops do their blitkrieg charge into the heart of Irag.

That is the role of modern day air warfare; to destroy the support structure of the foreign military. Without support troops to bring them supplies, reinforcements, and food, the front lines fall and are not replenished. In Vietnam and Korea, air support was a secondary, and almost negligeable in effect. The sole purpose of it was to lob bombs and hope to whittle down the opposition forces. Today, it is a bit more surgical in its approach.

So, that is why air control today is superior to air control in the past. Now, the big questions: Could we take China in the same way that we took Iraq, namely, destroy the air forces, then bomb the support structure into oblivion, and then send in the ground troops to destroy the ground troops? The answer is a resounding "Maybe". As I have said before, my primary concern is their air force, and I don't see us being able to destroy them with the same efficiency as we did Iraq's forces. I do think we will be able to, but the price will be very high, and I am not convinced that we could guarantee the safety of the bombers that would take out the support units afterwards. Until such time as the support lines are destroyed, it would be suicidal to send in ground troops.

Now, if we do achieve air control, and we do destroy the support lines...then, yes, I do believe that we would be able to take over urban China. It will definitely be a bloody affair, and it will take much longer than the Iraq invasion. Strangely enough, it is my opinion that the clean-up effort, after a clear victory, will be easier than it has been in the Middle-East, however getting that clear victory will be much more difficult.

Under no condition do I think this war could be fought by America alone, however.

[aquatus1]

And, incidentally, it is true that we only won the Revolutionary War because Britain had other concerns, and frankly, didn't think America would survive too long without them. At least we can say that the best revenge is to be successful.

[Space Commander Travis]

just a mischievous observation; wasn't one reason why you won the Revolutionary War because of the help of the French? !

[british_patriot]

Yes the french sold supplies to the Americans and gave them soldiers to fight Britain

[The Silver Thong]

Yes the french sold supplies to the Americans and gave them soldiers to fight Britain

702965[/snapback]

Is that why the Americans failed to envade Quebec??

Sorry of topic

Edited June 28, 2005 by The Silver Thong

[Commander CMG]

aquatus1 do you actually believe you could take over Urban China? and why would air control work here when it didn't have an effect in Vietnam or indeed Iraq and Afghanistan, non of the latter have Air defence and yet the US can take a country that does have air defence?

702097[/snapback]

Iraq did have an air defense. It was annihilated within the first two weeks of the war. After their air defenses were destroyed by cruise missiles, we sent in our bombers and strike jets to bombard the troops, and more importantly, the supply lines. After several weeks of this, then and only then did the ground troops do their blitkrieg charge into the heart of Irag.

That is the role of modern day air warfare; to destroy the support structure of the foreign military. Without support troops to bring them supplies, reinforcements, and food, the front lines fall and are not replenished. In Vietnam and Korea, air support was a secondary, and almost negligeable in effect. The sole purpose of it was to lob bombs and hope to whittle down the opposition forces. Today, it is a bit more surgical in its approach.

So, that is why air control today is superior to air control in the past. Now, the big questions: Could we take China in the same way that we took Iraq, namely, destroy the air forces, then bomb the support structure into oblivion, and then send in the ground troops to destroy the ground troops? The answer is a resounding "Maybe". As I have said before, my primary concern is their air force, and I don't see us being able to destroy them with the same efficiency as we did Iraq's forces. I do think we will be able to, but the price will be very high, and I am not convinced that we could guarantee the safety of the bombers that would take out the support units afterwards. Until such time as the support lines are destroyed, it would be suicidal to send in ground troops.

Now, if we do achieve air control, and we do destroy the support lines...then, yes, I do believe that we would be able to take over urban China. It will definitely be a bloody affair, and it will take much longer than the Iraq invasion. Strangely enough, it is my opinion that the clean-up effort, after a clear victory, will be easier than it has been in the Middle-East, however getting that clear victory will be much more difficult.

Under no condition do I think this war could be fought by America alone, however.

702443[/snapback]

I don't class a couple of hundred air planes flown by pilots of marginal quality, defence system. Also most of the Air force flee to Iran at tha start of the War.

Vietnam howvere was bombarded by Air attack and levelled on a daily basis buit that never worked and Afghanistan... all these years in Afghanistan and the Allied forces have less than 15% control of the country?

You are correct in assuming the war would not be fought by Americans alone.. it would be the start fo a 3rd and final World War.

Edited June 28, 2005 by XSAS

[aquatus1]

I don't class a couple of hundred air planes flown by pilots of marginal quality,  defence system. Also most of the Air force flee to Iran at tha start of the War.

As a former Naval Aviation Officer, I most definitively qualify a couple of hundred aircraft a defence system, especially if the pilots are of marginal quality. The only time we have faced similar odds was during The Great Marianas Turkey Shoot, where the Japanese pilots had, on average, about two weeks of flight instruction. Unless we get that lucky again, and the Chinese pilots are currently grounded, they have a an air force that needs to be reckoned with.

Vietnam howvere was bombarded by Air attack and levelled on a daily basis buit that never worked and Afghanistan... all these years in Afghanistan and the Allied forces have less than 15% control of the country?

Again, the difference is in the purpose of the bombing. Vietnam had very little in the way of strategic bombing, and the little it had had to be carried out with dumb bombs. When it came to bombarding unseen objectives, the technology was simply not there. Our modern day military does not require an entire squadron to bomb a huge area in the hopes of destroying a single objective, but rather a single strike fighter striking a specific hub which causes a catastrophic collapse of the entire system, such as hitting a power plant and collapsing the power grid for an entire area, or a comunications tower, rendering the entire area dark.

As for controlling Afghanistan, wars are not fought that way anymore. The only areas we are interest in controlling are the areas which pose a clear and present danger to our personnel or interest. 75% of Afghanistan is just not worth the time, manpower, and money that it would cost to hold it.

You are correct in assuming the war would not be fought by Americans alone.. it would be the start fo a 3rd and final World War.

702970[/snapback]

I have my doubts that it would escalate to being properly called a Third World War, anymore than the Middle East is being considered a third world war despite all the major world superpowers being involved. If you are referring to nuclear war, then, to be perfectly frank, from the reports that I have read concerning China I am not convinced that their nuclear weaponry is capable of being launched. A nuclear missile is a high maintenance item, and requires a great deal of expertise and upkeep in order to function correctly. I do not believe the Chinese have the capacity to properly maintain a nuclear arsenal.

[Commander CMG]

So has long as Bin Laden stays within the 85% of Afghanistan that ther Allied forces are not intersested in he will be OK.. Sounds logical.

I think your underestimiting the Chinese and the abilities a little and overestimating the USA's capabilities.

Look at Iraq at present the Allied forces have not even maintained perimeter security which once in place is the foundations of control and response... I don't think China would be an option worth thinking about to the US.

[sanchera1978]

XSAS said it best we cant even handle a small country like Iraq how could we possibly win against China. It would be a stalemate I dont think the US could win against China and I dont think China could win against the US. All I know is it would be one of the worst wars in history and the loss of life would be enormous.

[Commander CMG]

[SnakeProphet]

OMG

He used a smilie..........

What happened?Have you been abducted recently?

[Commander CMG]

OMG

He used a smilie..........

What happened?Have you been abducted recently?

703159[/snapback]

My daughter has transformed me, I am getting soft in my old age.. and I have just used another one but where??? back on topic..

[british_patriot]

XSAS when you was in the forces do you train with any Americans?

[about]

brit patriot, could we pleeeaaaseee get back on topic? If you are so sure the brits' army is so good, why not go make a topic about it?

[SnakeProphet]

brit patriot, could we pleeeaaaseee get back on topic? If you are so sure the brits' army is so good, why not go make a topic about it?

A topic which won't make it past the first page.

[Space Commander Travis]

Look please, children, are we going to bother talking about China or shall we just go off and start a 'my dad is better than your dad' thread?

[Stixxman]

i agree with thanato, doesnt matter on your equipment, all wars matter in numbers of men u have fighting.

697761[/snapback]

Tell that to the million strong army of Iraq that lost to the 300,000 strong army of the US in less than thirty days.