Page 1 of 14 12345678910 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 205
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: USA vs China in a war

  1. #1
    ? Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    06 Mar 06
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    970

    USA vs China in a war

    here are questions

    1 can the Us invade china?

    2are americas technological and firepower going to help in thelong run vs 1.2 billion people.

    3 how effective would US airpower be?

    4 Is it safe to say every citizen would fight?

    5 can the US military hold up against a modrn military supported by gorilla warfare?

    6 Any other thoughts?

    so what do u guys think?

  2. #2
    -{SpoonmaN}-
    Guest
    1. Yeah they could try, but it'd be a real bad idea. While the USM has the PLA beat on tech and training, they'd never be able to replace their losses fast enough. And more to the point, they'd have absolutely nothing to gain from it.

    2. It'd help, but I doubt it'd decide it. Occupying China wouldn't be much fun either, so supply lines would have a lot of trouble. I'd imagine the USM would take pretty massive casualties, but the PLA would take a hell of a lot more.

    3. Pretty darn effective, considering Aircraft servicability, pilot training and real-world experience are pretty thin on the ground for China. Also take note that the PLA-AF is still largely made up of totally obsolete aircraft like the J-7 and J-8. Their Flankers would pose problems but there aren't enough of them and they dont have the same pilot skills as the USAF, so while the USAF would take a lot of losses, they'd rack up a pretty itense kill ratio against the PLA-AF.

    4. That'd depend on the reason for war. By far the most likely reason for actual armed conflict between the USA and PRC is over Taiwan, whether or not that would be a protracted war of attrittion is impossible to know for sure but I doubt it. I'm sure a lot of people in both the USA and PRC wouldn't think Taiwan worth fighting over, although there'd be a lot of recruits from both populations none-the-less. Seems to me there are a lot of idiot Nationalists in both countries that want this war to happen.

    5. Depends on the resources given to them, even if they would succeed in actually invading the Mainland (Not gauranteed) it'd take a pretty super-human war effort to sustain supply lines like that, and controlling an occupied population of hundreds of millions may well be impossible for any one nation to achieve. I'd imagine both nations would be too busy dealing with the after-effects of a nuclear exchange before the USA would try to invade and occupy mainland China.

    6. This will never happen, the USA will never be invading the Chinese mainland, because it'd be doomed to failure, either in the short term or the long term. Both countries would be economic, if not physical wastelands from sustaining what would need to be the greatest war effort in Human history.
    The most likely scenario for war between China and America right now is over the Taiwan straits. Say China has some domestic troubles, or the Taiwanese do something very stupid like declare independence, so China uses their (somewhat limited, but growing) power projection abilities to invade the Republic by Sea and Air. The Taiwanese Military is apparently having some troubles with incompetence, inefficientcy and corruption, which weighed with the massive superiority in numbers the PLA has, and it's growing technical superiority, means they would have a real hard time stopping the invasion, if it's even possible for them to do so. Thus the USA would have to decide between humiliation or fighting a very expensive and possibly futile campaign to drive the PLA out of Taiwan before they secure the Island. The US Navy would most likely devastate the PLA-N before too long but by then it might be too late, as it'd be pretty hard for a nation even as powerful as the USA to take Taiwan back if the Chinese had it secured. So after that it'd probably degenerate into the USM shooting the PLA-AF out of the sky and making selective strikes on the Chinese mainland, while they tried to isolate the PLA forces on Taiwan and force a negotiated peace.
    Only problem is, the USM would take a lot of casualties and it's cost both nations so much money it's hard to say for sure they'd go through with it.
    Just a theory anyway.

  3. #3
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by -{SpoonmaN}-
    The Taiwanese Military is apparently having some troubles with incompetence, inefficientcy and corruption,
    In that, both the RoCA and the PLA are on par with each other. You've got a PLA school principal mouthing off about nuking the US.

    Quote Originally Posted by -{SpoonmaN}-
    which weighed with the massive superiority in numbers the PLA has,
    The RoCA has a massive, undisputed, and unchallengeable local superiority. Not even the US can land enough forces to match the RoCA in sheer numbers.

    Quote Originally Posted by -{SpoonmaN}-
    and it's growing technical superiority, means they would have a real hard time stopping the invasion, if it's even possible for them to do so.
    You might want to examine a real world scenario. It would be damned easy for the RoCA to DESTROY any PLA invasion attempt.

    Quote Originally Posted by -{SpoonmaN}-
    Thus the USA would have to decide between humiliation or fighting a very expensive and possibly futile campaign to drive the PLA out of Taiwan before they secure the Island. The US Navy would most likely devastate the PLA-N before too long but by then it might be too late, as it'd be pretty hard for a nation even as powerful as the USA to take Taiwan back if the Chinese had it secured. So after that it'd probably degenerate into the USM shooting the PLA-AF out of the sky and making selective strikes on the Chinese mainland, while they tried to isolate the PLA forces on Taiwan and force a negotiated peace.
    Only problem is, the USM would take a lot of casualties and it's cost both nations so much money it's hard to say for sure they'd go through with it.
    Just a theory anyway.
    In the real world, it would be the PLA driving for a political solution. In fact, that's how they think. They think political before military. From a military standpoint, the PLA has absolutely no hope of taking over the island. Their best hope is to win ONE battle of annihalation and then negotiate from a position of immediate but not prolonged strength.

  4. #4
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    Quote Originally Posted by urmomma158
    here are questions

    Well, for whatever it's worth, here is my take on your specific questions:

    First, and most importantly, IMO, there is less than a .001% chance of this happening in our lifetimes, but...

    Quote Originally Posted by urmomma158
    1 can the Us invade china?
    Invade via sea/air and hold a corps sized perimeter(ie an extended beachhead complete with FARPs and FOBs)?

    Yes. Probably even indefinitely.

    Perform highly effective yet essentially localized corps level airmobile and mechanized offensives, raids and spoiling attacks?

    Yes.(it would obviously take months to build up that sort of force level in theater prior to an invasion. Taiwan is an obvious natural staging point for a huge US invasion force, which would be an absolute neccesity)

    Conquer?

    No.

    Defeat by military land campaign?

    No. Not even close.

    Quote Originally Posted by urmomma158
    2are americas technological and firepower going to help in thelong run vs 1.2 billion people.
    See above.

    Quote Originally Posted by urmomma158
    3 how effective would US airpower be?
    Overwhelmingly effective.

    In open combat with the USAF and USN, and barring an Iraqi style mass exodus, the PLAAF would literally cease to exist within a matter of weeks.

    To destroy the PLAAF in detail would take about 2-3 months, but it would literally just be a matter of time.

    The same is true for PLAN, which would likely cease to exist as a cohesuve fighting force almost immediately in any war with the US.(The USN is so overwhelmingly superior to PLAN that it would be one of the most onesided mismatches in the history of warfare).

    Any PLA attempts to dislodge the US invasion forces would be met with a bewildering array of TACAIR/CAS, UAVs, Rotary aviation, and ARTY before they were ever able to engage US heavy mechanized forces in direct combat.

    PLAs best weapon would almost certainly be it's own artillery, and would IMO be a never ending thorn in the side of the US, but by itself, not a showstopper.

    Quote Originally Posted by urmomma158
    4 Is it safe to say every citizen would fight?
    No, but even 10% is over 100,000,000 people...

    Quote Originally Posted by urmomma158
    5 can the US military hold up against a modern military supported by gorilla warfare?
    See my answer #1
    Last edited by Bill; 19 Mar 06, at 07:27.

  5. #5
    Military Enthusiast Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Aug 03
    Posts
    4,996
    Quote Originally Posted by M21Sniper
    Yes. Probably even indefinitely.
    Not in a war of attrition.

    Perform highly effective yet essentially localized corps level airmobile and mechanized offensives, raids and spoiling attacks?
    Only up for a time. See my above answer.

    Yes.(it would obviously take months to build up that sort of force level in theater prior to an invasion. Taiwan is an obvious natural staging point for a huge US invasion force, which would be an absolute neccesity)
    Which by that time, Chinese soldiers and civilians would have absolutely beef up every point of possible landing making D-Day landings miniscule by comparision.

    You will have a very bloodier time than your WWII ancestors in getting a beachhead. PLA can very easily create several 10,000 lb bomb and bury them in several possible beachhead and detonate them by remote, thereby ensuring any destruction of a viable beachhead.

    Overwhelmingly effective.

    In open combat with the USAF and USN, and barring an Iraqi style mass exodus, the PLAAF would literally cease to exist within a matter of weeks.
    Sorry but China is too vast and American forces cannot extend their LoC and LoS more than 100 miles. PLAAF would be shifting most of their forces deeper into Chinese territory and go into war of attrition.

    But USAF and USN would easily establish local air superiority and can easily launch bombing raids but would face 10x more damage than they faced in N. Vietnam in LineBacker I and II campaigns.

    To destroy the PLAAF in detail would take about 2-3 months, but it would literally just be a matter of time.
    I strongly doubt that you can do it within 2 or 3 months. Remember China is a vast country so unless you can extend your LoC & LoS more than a couple hundred miles to let's say 1000 miles, I wouldn't even dream of PLAAF being out of the action.

    The same is true for PLAN, which would likely cease to exist as a cohesuve fighting force almost immediately in any war with the US.(The USN is so overwhelmingly superior to PLAN that it would be one of the most onesided mismatches in the history of warfare).
    No argument there.

    Any PLA attempts to dislodge the US invasion forces would be met with a bewildering array of TACAIR/CAS, UAVs, Rotary aviation, and ARTY before they were ever able to engage US heavy mechanized forces in direct combat.
    Not if the CHinese have prepared their defenses. No way US invasion forces can easily navigate through CHinese minefields with tens of thousand of soilders taking potshots at you using artillery and suicidal air raids with your back to the sea thus giving yourselves lack of breathing or manuever space. US invasion forces would have a problem of establishing local supplies being able to last more than a week unless they blow their way out of the minefields (no other way to do it in such a quick time, but presents its own set of problems). It will be a hard and bloody fight resulting in significant casualties for US invasion forces. See my answer above in reference to D-day landings.

    PLAs best weapon would almost certainly be it's own artillery, and would IMO be a never ending thorn in the side of the US, but by itself, not a showstopper.
    Agreed and also its masses even though US has carpet bombing. The fact is that PLAAF has way more planes than USAF can bring to bear and PLAAF will use those planes to take out the B-52 and tankers. They won't give a **** about your fighters because they cannot carry large loads of bombs. B-52s and tankers are their biggest targets and PLAAF will do anything to take those out of action.


    No, but even 10% is over 100,000,000 people...



    See my answer #1[/QUOTE]

  6. #6
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Come on, Hitesh, you should know alot better than that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    Not in a war of attrition.


    Only up for a time. See my above answer.
    And to this day, Russia continues to hold territories claimed by the Chinese and this territory was taken from the Chinese as a result of the Sino-Soviet clashes.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    Which by that time, Chinese soldiers and civilians would have absolutely beef up every point of possible landing making D-Day landings miniscule by comparision.
    Which makes them great targets for bombardment.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    You will have a very bloodier time than your WWII ancestors in getting a beachhead. PLA can very easily create several 10,000 lb bomb and bury them in several possible beachhead and detonate them by remote, thereby ensuring any destruction of a viable beachhead.
    So? What do you think Engineers are for?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    Sorry but China is too vast and American forces cannot extend their LoC and LoS more than 100 miles. PLAAF would be shifting most of their forces deeper into Chinese territory and go into war of attrition.
    If the PLAAF stays on the ground, then the USAF doesn't have anything to worry about. They would have to come up and mass to challenge US air supremacy in which time

    1) the US would know where they're coming from and target their landing strips
    2) shoot them out of the sky

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    But USAF and USN would easily establish local air superiority and can easily launch bombing raids but would face 10x more damage than they faced in N. Vietnam in LineBacker I and II campaigns.
    Why would they have to?

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    I strongly doubt that you can do it within 2 or 3 months. Remember China is a vast country so unless you can extend your LoC & LoS more than a couple hundred miles to let's say 1000 miles, I wouldn't even dream of PLAAF being out of the action.
    Why not? Again. The PLAAF have to come out and play and without the benefit of ground based AD. If they stay on the ground, it's a soft kill.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    Not if the CHinese have prepared their defenses. No way US invasion forces can easily navigate through CHinese minefields with tens of thousand of soilders taking potshots at you using artillery and suicidal air raids with your back to the sea thus giving yourselves lack of breathing or manuever space. US invasion forces would have a problem of establishing local supplies being able to last more than a week unless they blow their way out of the minefields (no other way to do it in such a quick time, but presents its own set of problems). It will be a hard and bloody fight resulting in significant casualties for US invasion forces. See my answer above in reference to D-day landings.
    I'm really disappointed in you on this. You should know alot better. Alot better.

    The US would not be facing tens of thousands of soldiers taking pot shots. They would be facing a division at the most. There simply is not enough frontage at any point of engagement that would fit a corps.

    You've also forgotten about heloborned insert troops. After an extreme bombardment of the enemy forces, you can land troops on the other side of the minefield to keep the bad guys too busy to bother the engineers from clearing the mindefields.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    Agreed and also its masses even though US has carpet bombing. The fact is that PLAAF has way more planes than USAF can bring to bear and PLAAF will use those planes to take out the B-52 and tankers. They won't give a **** about your fighters because they cannot carry large loads of bombs. B-52s and tankers are their biggest targets and PLAAF will do anything to take those out of action.
    What is the battlespace? There is simply no way for the PLAAF to mass that many planes to be of direct challenge. They would be crashing into each other and be bingo fuelled before they can get all those planes up.

    Come on, Hitesh. You know alot better than this. Alot better.

  7. #7
    Regular anand1266's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Mar 06
    Posts
    66
    keeping economics and economy in mind.....US will never attack china as far as my ideology is concerned.....according to goldman sachs and a reputed consulting group....by 2050...china will become number country in the world economically , militarily and etc. SO for USA to attack china ...it should strike her within 50 years
    and if it fails to attack her by 2050.....it could take india's help to attack her..so thats the reason usa is trying very hard to impress by giving all accessto its technologies...nuclear reactors and all latest techs...

    goldman sachs report -

    top countries in the world by 2050-
    1) china
    2)india
    3) USA

    to for USA TO ATTACH CHINA....ALL SHE WOULD NEED IS INDIA

  8. #8
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Bullcrap!

  9. #9
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Hey dolt,

    We have an Indian Army Brigadier on this board. You want to pass your crap through him?

  10. #10
    Regular anand1266's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Mar 06
    Posts
    66
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers
    Hey dolt,

    We have an Indian Army Brigadier on this board. You want to pass your crap through him?
    who r u talking to?

  11. #11
    Contributor The_Burning_Kid's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Oct 05
    Posts
    444
    Quote Originally Posted by anand1266
    who r u talking to?
    You.

  12. #12
    Distant Deeps or Skies Senior Contributor HistoricalDavid's Avatar
    Join Date
    19 Jul 05
    Location
    North London, UK
    Posts
    2,292
    Hang on, are we not avoiding factoring in nuclear weapons? The US has quite an edge in those over China, both in number of warheads and delivery systems.

    Unless we're talking strictly conventional to avoid millions of civilian casualties?
    Last edited by HistoricalDavid; 19 Mar 06, at 17:14.

  13. #13
    Military Enthusiast Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Aug 03
    Posts
    4,996
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers
    Come on, Hitesh, you should know alot better than that.



    And to this day, Russia continues to hold territories claimed by the Chinese and this territory was taken from the Chinese as a result of the Sino-Soviet clashes.
    IIRC, those areas were where Chinese troops do not have any good LoCs or bases of supplies. However remember at the time, the threat of nuclear war was very real and the Soviets were so pissed off at the Chinese that they were willing to nuke China back to the Stone Age and China didn't have anything to counter with. So the PLA didn't push the Soviets but prepared for a war of attrition. Remember your often recited posts of how the Chinese were willing to trade space for time and prepared Beijing ala Stalingrad style. The PLA officers were looking at the Afghanistan war and saw, (thru ChinaWarrior's words) if a rag tag force could wear down the Soviet, imagine what a professional guerrilla with vast supplies of weapons could do against the Soviets in a war of attrition. Now with Americans, they have one distinct disadvantage that the Soviets do not. They don't share a border with China so it means the economical costs of keeping troops in those occupied territories are astronomical. No way can Americans keep the troops indefinetly because China is not South Korea or Germany. Just too many people with nationalistic sentiments. AMerican troops can occupy the space but won't face any friendlies. After a while, the american troops would feel only safe in their fortified bases and only go out of their bases in force to deter any attack. AFter a while, the pschological of being surrounded by people who are determined to see you go will get to the American troops as well as to the people back in the homefront.

    I am not saying that PLA would come out smelling roses and feeling the victory. Hell there may not be a PLA or CCP after this but as long as the Americans occupy some Chinese territory which by the way is coastline territory and is teeming with countless Chinese citizens not like those territories siezed by the Soviets, there will be a PLA force.

    Which makes them great targets for bombardment.
    ok then they would be producing huge crater sizes which presents its own set of problems on the beachhead because USAF would have to keep raining bombs for a while before they could make it safe for landing.

    Like you said, USAF would run out of bombs before they run out of targets.


    So? What do you think Engineers are for?



    The US would not be facing tens of thousands of soldiers taking pot shots. They would be facing a division at the most. There simply is not enough frontage at any point of engagement that would fit a corps.

    You've also forgotten about heloborned insert troops. After an extreme bombardment of the enemy forces, you can land troops on the other side of the minefield to keep the bad guys too busy to bother the engineers from clearing the mindefields.
    Yeah engineers can do the job but it won't be an easy task. Heliborne troops can do the job. Ok. Now take a look at how an Apache battalion got shot that every one of the Apache had to abort the mission and that's only using rifles. Chinese troops would be using more. And don't forget the layered defense that the PLA is so fond of it. As for enough battlespace frontage, you are right but remember it is also more restricted for the US troops.


    If the PLAAF stays on the ground, then the USAF doesn't have anything to worry about. They would have to come up and mass to challenge US air supremacy in which time

    1) the US would know where they're coming from and target their landing strips
    2) shoot them out of the sky
    Yes they can near the coast but what about western China? Can they get through thousands of SAM to bomb the landing strips? REmember PLAAF's job is to keep the USAF from harrassing the ground troops so it means that they will offer themselves as targets to keep the USAF busy. The only real action that PLAAF would try to take is to take out the bombers at all costs. The PLA cannot withstand massive bombardment and B-52s and B-2s are the only ones that can do the massive bombardment.

    Why would they have to?
    Operation LInebacker campaigns were designed to break the morale of the people and break the logistics and destroy the army to encourage the enemy to the table which succeeded. After looking at Gulf War I & II and Kosovo and the great desire to saturate enemy fields with bombs before committing ground troops, I would dare say that USAF would try to mount some kind of massive campaign similar to Operation Linebacker.


    Why not? Again. The PLAAF have to come out and play and without the benefit of ground based AD. If they stay on the ground, it's a soft kill.
    How good is the C3I system they have? Is the ground based AD well integrated with the PLAAF? If that's the case, then PLAAF will come out where there's ground based AD or they need to keep the USAF off the backs of PLA by offering themselves as targets.

    I'm really disappointed in you on this. You should know alot better. Alot better.
    Remember I am coming from an historical analysis of Vietnam and the Soviet Afghanistan War. Notice how ragtag guerrillas gave a lot of headaches to the occupying forces even with their overwhelming firepower. And PLA is no ragtag force.

    I am sorry but I don't agree that taking a piece of China territory especially on the coastline where US do not share a land border is a piece of cake. I mean take a look at D-Day landing. Britain was only off France by 20 miles and Germany had a huge enemy bearing down on her on the other side and yet it was bloody and damn near. Applying that to China, Russia won't be able to bring the kind of pressure because it is no shape to do that. Right now USN doesn't have enough ships required to mount a successful D-Day landing. I am sorry but heli-inserted troops won't do the job because there isn't simply enough mass to sustain the momentum against hardened defense. You need to mount a shore invasion force so you can create that necessary mass to sustain your battle momentum.

    Remember, I said the PLAN would be gone in a matter of hours and the PLAAF and PLA Army would shift their headquarters and bases deep into Chinese territory into the mountains near by Tibet to preserve some kind of C2 systems. Yes they would take significant casualties, but casualties they can withstand. They are going to, symbollically speaking, "ride out the storm". The US forces do not have enough bombs or bullets to sustain their battle momentum in order to negate that "riding out the storm" strategy.

    Yeah for the first couple months, things will be going the way of US forces, but not for long. That's why I said it will be a battle of attrition and once that starts, US forces will see the writing on the wall.

    The only way I could see US forces winning the war is, that is, IF there was a faction of CHina or a region that wants to break away from China and there is popular grassroots support for that. Then US forces can move into that territory and be able to defeat PLA forces in a war of attrition because US forces now share a border and its bases are in a area surrounded by friendlies thus not having to face the pschological value of being surrounded by unknown enemies.


    What is the battlespace? There is simply no way for the PLAAF to mass that many planes to be of direct challenge. They would be crashing into each other and be bingo fuelled before they can get all those planes up.

    Come on, Hitesh. You know alot better than this. Alot better.
    Like I said, PLA view those bombers as the biggest threat and WILL DO ANYTHING to bring them down. THey may resort to kamikaze tactics by crashing the planes down onto those bombers ala EP-3 incident. I wouldn't be too surprised if they figure out a way to get around the battlespace problem.
    Last edited by Blademaster; 19 Mar 06, at 18:24.

  14. #14
    Military Enthusiast Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Aug 03
    Posts
    4,996
    Quote Originally Posted by HistoricalDavid
    Hang on, are we not avoiding factoring in nuclear weapons? The US has quite an edge in those over China, both in number of warheads and delivery systems.

    Unless we're talking strictly conventional to avoid millions of civilian casualties?
    If we are, then this discussion is pointless because after the second hour of war has started, China would cease to exist for the first time in the history of mankind.

  15. #15
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    Which by that time, Chinese soldiers and civilians would have absolutely beef up every point of possible landing making D-Day landings miniscule by comparision.

    You will have a very bloodier time than your WWII ancestors in getting a beachhead. PLA can very easily create several 10,000 lb bomb and bury them in several possible beachhead and detonate them by remote, thereby ensuring any destruction of a viable beachhead.
    First, you must consider that the US would NEVER put a large number of forces ashore until the PLAAF, PLAN, and PLA were all practically combat inneffective forces. There's simply no reason to.

    China's coastline is simply too big to defend it at all points against invasion, and by the time a single boot stormed the shore from the sea the US would already have several divisions of Abn and AAslt infantry securing the actual landing site(where the heavy stuff would have to come ashore).

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    Sorry but China is too vast and American forces cannot extend their LoC and LoS more than 100 miles.
    The vastness of China would work against it in a war with the US.

    As far as LOCs, Taiwan is less than 100 miles from China.

    We seemed to keep our forces supplied fine in Vietnam and Korea in two seperate wars btw, both of whom are Chinas neighbors.


    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    PLAAF would be shifting most of their forces deeper into Chinese territory and go into war of attrition.
    The PLAAF could try to do whatever, it simply wouldnt matter. US Airpower is a complete and total overmatch for the PLAAF. The PLAAF would have some early successes, but against the combined weight of the USAF, USMC and USN fighter fleets, forget it.

    PLAAF would have three choices:

    1) Run and hide and maybe live
    2) Come up to fight and die
    3) Stay on the ground and die

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    But USAF and USN would easily establish local air superiority and can easily launch bombing raids but would face 10x more damage than they faced in N. Vietnam in LineBacker I and II campaigns.
    I seriously doubt it. By the time the massed cruise missile and SEAD strikes were accomplished in any one target area there'd be very little left to even shoot at US planes operating at high altitude dropping JDAMs and Paveways, and what did remain i would expect to be about totally inneffective vs the F-22, F-117, and B-2.

    Unless you have some magical solution for stealth...

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    I strongly doubt that you can do it within 2 or 3 months. Remember China is a vast country so unless you can extend your LoC & LoS more than a couple hundred miles to let's say 1000 miles, I wouldn't even dream of PLAAF being out of the action.
    Obviously, i disagree. Taiwan is within C-130, CH-47, CH-53 range to China. The US should have no real problems keeping resupplied once you factor in seaborne resupply efforts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    Not if the CHinese have prepared their defenses. No way US invasion forces can easily navigate through CHinese minefields with tens of thousand of soilders taking potshots at you using artillery and suicidal air raids with your back to the sea thus giving yourselves lack of breathing or manuever space.
    Your vision of modern US high intensity warfare capabilities is incomplete.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blademaster
    Agreed and also its masses even though US has carpet bombing. The fact is that PLAAF has way more planes than USAF can bring to bear and PLAAF will use those planes to take out the B-52 and tankers. They won't give a **** about your fighters because they cannot carry large loads of bombs. B-52s and tankers are their biggest targets and PLAAF will do anything to take those out of action.
    Shaking head....

    USAF F-22s won't let any PLAAF aircraft anywhere near the FEBA without exacting a horrible price first.(let alone USAF F-15Cs, F-16Cs and USN F-18Fs all supported by AWACS).

    Once you get past all that you have to get past USA Patriot and USMC HUMRAAM batteries, as well as all the USN Shipborne SM-2 systems that would be in range to cover the beachhead as well(SM-2MRIIIB has an approx 70nm range).

    USAF B-52s would be used in the stand-off cruise missile role until the PLAAF was wiped out. CALCM cruise missiles have a 1000+ NM range. The PLAAF would never get a single shot at a BUFF.

    What you'd have to worry about in deep penetration raids is F-22s, B-1's, B-2's, F-117s, and F-15Es.(24,500lb bombload, btw).

    Over the FEBA(The actual battlefield proper and it's immediate approaches), the US would operate A-10s, AV-8Bs, F-16Cs, F-18Es, F-18Cs, AC-130s, and Predators along with Cobra, Apache, and Kiowa Warrior gunships.

    Backing all that up would be the full array of US 155mm, 105mm, MLRS/ATACMS, and 120mm, 81mm and 60mm mortar systems plus a large number of USN 5" guns.

    Once a PLA force got past all that they'd have the privelidge of facing massed M-1A2 volley fire from defiled and prepared positions.

    There is probably not a force on earth that could break that kind of nut. It would take a miracle.

    Quite frankly the US's biggest problem would be one of deconfliction.
    Last edited by Bill; 19 Mar 06, at 19:51.

Page 1 of 14 12345678910 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. India Vs. China (borderline War)
    By Kontakt Era in forum Ground Warfare
    Replies: 565
    Last Post: 02 Sep 08,, 19:36
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05 Nov 06,, 15:42
  3. Where is Taiwan as China rises in the global IC industry?
    By oneman28 in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12 Sep 05,, 19:58
  4. China Plans for World Domination
    By agent09 in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09 May 05,, 02:06

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •