Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 25 of 25

Thread: China v USSR 1989

  1. #16
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    982
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    There were some good units like the Talinin Guards or some airborne and spetznaz units but by and large the bulk wasn't much better than the Chinese. They lost pitched battles against the Muhajadeen in Afghanistan despite overwhelming superiority in armor, air support and artillery. The war may well have devolved into something like Iran-Iraq.
    Really not a fair comparison at all. Both Chechnya and Afghanistan were at best battalion level engagements. When the Soviets massed regimental or larger, they achieved their objectives with relative ease. In those battles that the Soviet Army lost in Afghanistan, they were company garrisons or platoon houses being swamped by Mujahadeen numbers hugging the Soviets negating Soviet superior firepower that when employed friendly fire did more damage than the Mujahadeen did.

    This would be a far cry from any Soviet-Sino conflict where the battle would be at the Army and Front level. There is no doubt that a battle would be fought at Lop Nor. 4 Chinese armies would clash with the Soviet 58th. Lop Nor is not a city. It's a nuclear weapons base and that means open spaces and lots and lots of maneuver room.

    Considering the fact that the Chinese were shocked by the Kuwait War in how advanced military technique and technology had surpassed them, the PLA did not even have the Generals to even comptemplate a successful defence of Lop Nor.

    And again, if the Chinese lose Lop Nor, the Soviets would have divided China in half.

  2. #17
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,611
    Been away for a while. Went down to Georgia for a wedding and then on the spot decided to do a fishing tour of the lakes in the US.
    it's damn good to have you back. and if you caught up on a Celine Dion concert on the fishing tour, all the better! ;-)


    The PLA was also starved of funds during this period; having to cut over 2 million men just to have funds for equipment. And that was another can of worms. The bulk of Chinese air might was the MiG-19 and these would have go against MiG-21bis/23/27s and the Soviet had numeric and qualatative superiority in airpower. Chinese tanks was the Type-59 variant and it was a wet dream if they can punch through the T-72 armour.

    However, look at the map. The Soviet 58th Army was poised against Lop Nor and there was nothing in between them and Lop Nor. And this would not be a conventional strike. The 58th Army was going to use nukes to blast their way to Lop Nor within 24 hours. The time the Soviets think the Chinese would need to issue a nuke strike order against Moscow. Lop Nor represented the only point in China where they could hit Moscow with a nuke.

    Whatever the issue with Grozny, do note nothing stopped the Soviet Army from reaching Grozny and nothing was going to stopped the 58th from reaching Lop Nor.
    a nuke against the 58th staging grounds might, although China would probably be radioactive for quite a while afterwards. i wonder if PRC nuke targeting was up to it.

    Plesae look at where Lop Nor is. The Soviets take Lop Nor. They cut China in half. Tibet automatically becomes indefensivable.
    pretty sure DXP wouldn't give half a sh*t about Tibet or Xinjiang once the war with the Soviets start. it'll be about saving himself and the CCP top cadre first, Beijing second.

    In the East, there has been a lot of talk of repeating AUGUST STORM. By 1989, I don't think that was going to happen. The Soviet economy was going downhill and there was no threat from the PLA (being 100 miles behind their own border). There was also Deng Xia Peng. As bad as a shape the PLA was in, there was absolutely no doubt that he was going to fight. Tianamen Square proved that much.
    i have no doubt that the PLA would -fight-, but wouldn't it really have been like the Red Army fighting the Japanese? PLA getting cut off, fixed, and annihilated.

    now i wonder what things would have been like in 1969 or 1962, with the Korea War vets still in place.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  3. #18
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    982
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    it's damn good to have you back. and if you caught up on a Celine Dion concert on the fishing tour, all the better! ;-)
    I got lucky. I believe she's tormenting Australia or will torment Australia.

    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    a nuke against the 58th staging grounds might, although China would probably be radioactive for quite a while afterwards. i wonder if PRC nuke targeting was up to it.
    Not her missile force. Do recall that China only had about a dozen nukes that were kept apart from their delivery vehicles and all her rockets were liquid fueled. That meant 2Arty must mount the warhead onto the missile and then fueled up the missile, taking valuable hours under the direct threat of continous Soviet air and missile strikes.

    Also, China's nukes at the time were the 3-5 Megaton beasts mainly because they lack the accuracy against harden targets and would rely on such a large blast radius against softer targets. This essentially means the only reliable accurate delivery are the H6 bomber. I would not put money on any H6 getting off the ground at Lop Nor.

    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    pretty sure DXP wouldn't give half a sh*t about Tibet or Xinjiang once the war with the Soviets start. it'll be about saving himself and the CCP top cadre first, Beijing second.
    DXP would have no choice but to continue the fight in both Tibet and Xinjiang; much like Stalin had no choice but to keep the Partisans in operation behind German lines. Deng, like Stalin, would have been dead if he yielded those territories. Dictators cannot tolerate the loss of that much power.

    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    i have no doubt that the PLA would -fight-, but wouldn't it really have been like the Red Army fighting the Japanese? PLA getting cut off, fixed, and annihilated.
    The Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan convinced the Chinese on how just inadequate that 100 miles depth and their natural barriers were. If you recall from CMF and CDF, the talk was People's War Under Modern Conditions. If the unorganized, ill-disciplined, divided Mujahadeen can prevent a Soviet conquest of Afghanistan, imagine a Deng lead organized, doctrinated, and trained PLA People

    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    now i wonder what things would have been like in 1969 or 1962, with the Korea War vets still in place.
    Kruschev? He would have nuked China. He was a racist and he hated Mao.

  4. #19
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,844
    It is indeed good to here the Colonel's voice back in the forums, although the tone is suspiciously genteel. Too long south of the Mason-Dixon line?

    Tibet and Xinjiang: The PLA thought nothing of ceding ground for strategic advantage, and when it comes down to it there were only ever about 2% non-Han in the top party ranks. Saving the heartland would be top-of-mind, and only in the North-east might they have been fretting about losing a significant minority group (Manchus).

    It isn't about yielding territory, but more about strategic retreat with the full intention of kicking the Soviets out in this or the next century.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  5. #20
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    982
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    It is indeed good to here the Colonel's voice back in the forums, although the tone is suspiciously genteel. Too long south of the Mason-Dixon line?
    Fishing is a very meditative past time. I was one with the fish ... or more precisely, the salesmen at the Bass Pro Shop. Since I didn't bring any gear down with me ... they saw me coming.

    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    Tibet and Xinjiang: The PLA thought nothing of ceding ground for strategic advantage, and when it comes down to it there were only ever about 2% non-Han in the top party ranks. Saving the heartland would be top-of-mind, and only in the North-east might they have been fretting about losing a significant minority group (Manchus).

    It isn't about yielding territory, but more about strategic retreat with the full intention of kicking the Soviets out in this or the next century.
    You're forgetting the butterflies. Deng started 2 wars with Vietnam and was prepared to start another one with India. Now in the middle of a life or death struggle with the Soviet Bear, could the PLA divert spare parts and munitions to either of these theatres?

    The Soviet Army was concerned with Lop Nor. It would not be they who would take Tibet but India and you can be sure that Vietnam would be more than eager to settle the border threat.

    Lastly, the only Soviet war plan that we know of was a nuclear first strike against China's nuclear capabilities and that also includes the nuclear release authority, aka DXP. Through NATO's Parrallel History Project (where former NATO and Warsaw Pact Officers discuss their war plans against each other as a matter of recording history), that plan was never replaced. In short, DXP's bunker would be under a mushroom cloud.

  6. #21
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    966.3673
    Posts
    3,318
    Colonel, what makes you say that India would have taken Tibet in 1969? I don't think the IA had any warplans of liberating Tibet, and would have sat out of the confrontation between USSR and China.

    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    DXP would have no choice but to continue the fight in both Tibet and Xinjiang; much like Stalin had no choice but to keep the Partisans in operation behind German lines. Deng, like Stalin, would have been dead if he yielded those territories. Dictators cannot tolerate the loss of that much power.
    Why do this logic not apply to the Pak Army?
    Last edited by Oracle; 19 Sep 18, at 14:30.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  7. #22
    Regular
    Join Date
    07 Jan 08
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    I got lucky. I believe she's tormenting Australia or will torment Australia.

    Not her missile force. Do recall that China only had about a dozen nukes that were kept apart from their delivery vehicles and all her rockets were liquid fueled. That meant 2Arty must mount the warhead onto the missile and then fueled up the missile, taking valuable hours under the direct threat of continous Soviet air and missile strikes.

    Also, China's nukes at the time were the 3-5 Megaton beasts mainly because they lack the accuracy against harden targets and would rely on such a large blast radius against softer targets. This essentially means the only reliable accurate delivery are the H6 bomber. I would not put money on any H6 getting off the ground at Lop Nor.

    DXP would have no choice but to continue the fight in both Tibet and Xinjiang; much like Stalin had no choice but to keep the Partisans in operation behind German lines. Deng, like Stalin, would have been dead if he yielded those territories. Dictators cannot tolerate the loss of that much power.

    The Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan convinced the Chinese on how just inadequate that 100 miles depth and their natural barriers were. If you recall from CMF and CDF, the talk was People's War Under Modern Conditions. If the unorganized, ill-disciplined, divided Mujahadeen can prevent a Soviet conquest of Afghanistan, imagine a Deng lead organized, doctrinated, and trained PLA People

    Kruschev? He would have nuked China. He was a racist and he hated Mao.
    Suppose that a dictator does lose a gigantic chunk of territory. Explain step by step what happens.

  8. #23
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    982
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Colonel, what makes you say that India would have taken Tibet in 1969?
    The timeframe in question was 1989 and that was just after the Sino-Indo Border incident.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    I don't think the IA had any warplans of liberating Tibet, and would have sat out of the confrontation between USSR and China.
    Don't think India would have a choice. The Tibetans would certainly be uprising after a weakened China losing Lop Nor. India would certainly be re-enforcing her borders against spill overs and this in turn would strongly tempt the PLA to strike first as they did Vietnam to clear their southern problems before tackling the life-and-death struggle against the USSR.

    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Why do this logic not apply to the Pak Army?
    Pakistan didn't have a dictator when they lost Bangladesh.

    Quote Originally Posted by hboGYT View Post
    Suppose that a dictator does lose a gigantic chunk of territory. Explain step by step what happens.
    It's not a dictator losing a gigantic chunk of territory. It's the dictator acknowledging that he gave up the fight for that territory. Stalin did not give up the Soviet territories under Nazi occupation though the military effect of the Partisans can be described as miniscue.

    A dictator needs 2 of 3 three things to stay in power: support of the people, money, and the army. Within context, if the army was still willing to fight to reclaim lost territories and the dictator is unwilling, then the army would either accident the dictator or more likely shoot him as a traitor.

  9. #24
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Defense Professional
    Albany Rifles's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Apr 07
    Location
    Prince George, VA
    Posts
    8,775
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Good Day, Gentlemen,

    Been away for a while. Went down to Georgia for a wedding and then on the spot decided to do a fishing tour of the lakes in the US.

    The scenario does not make sense militarily. The bulk of the PLA was stationed 100 miles from the Sino-Soviet border. That was the strategic depth they were counting on absorb a Soviet thrust. So, right off the bat, the Chinese would have to build the logistics tail just to get to their own border, never mind venturing forth into the teeth of Soviet military might.

    The PLA was also starved of funds during this period; having to cut over 2 million men just to have funds for equipment. And that was another can of worms. The bulk of Chinese air might was the MiG-19 and these would have go against MiG-21bis/23/27s and the Soviet had numeric and qualatative superiority in airpower. Chinese tanks was the Type-59 variant and it was a wet dream if they can punch through the T-72 armour.

    However, look at the map. The Soviet 58th Army was poised against Lop Nor and there was nothing in between them and Lop Nor. And this would not be a conventional strike. The 58th Army was going to use nukes to blast their way to Lop Nor within 24 hours. The time the Soviets think the Chinese would need to issue a nuke strike order against Moscow. Lop Nor represented the only point in China where they could hit Moscow with a nuke.

    Whatever the issue with Grozny, do note nothing stopped the Soviet Army from reaching Grozny and nothing was going to stopped the 58th from reaching Lop Nor.

    Plesae look at where Lop Nor is. The Soviets take Lop Nor. They cut China in half. Tibet automatically becomes indefensivable.

    In the East, there has been a lot of talk of repeating AUGUST STORM. By 1989, I don't think that was going to happen. The Soviet economy was going downhill and there was no threat from the PLA (being 100 miles behind their own border). There was also Deng Xia Peng. As bad as a shape the PLA was in, there was absolutely no doubt that he was going to fight. Tianamen Square proved that much.

    And before you asked, I was feeding musquittoes more than I was catching fish. Almost all catch-and-release. Motel living isn't condusive cooking a nice fish dinner.
    Welcome back, Sir!

    You have been missed.

    And as usual your arguments are cogent and well constructed.
    “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
    Mark Twain

  10. #25
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Defense Professional
    Albany Rifles's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Apr 07
    Location
    Prince George, VA
    Posts
    8,775
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Fishing is a very meditative past time. I was one with the fish ... or more precisely, the salesmen at the Bass Pro Shop. Since I didn't bring any gear down with me ... they saw me coming.
    Sir, you bring this video to mind...

    “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
    Mark Twain

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 16 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 16 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Tiananmen mothers call for probe of 1989 crackdown
    By Shuimo in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03 Mar 09,, 14:10
  2. Cold War turns hot in 1989?
    By gunnut in forum Warfare in the Modern Age
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 18 Sep 07,, 21:46
  3. China, USSR, N Korea planned Japan invasion in Korean War
    By Francois in forum The World Wars
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 22 Feb 07,, 01:56
  4. The Siege of Firebase Gloria (1989) question
    By ChrisF202 in forum World Affairs Board Pub
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01 Mar 06,, 19:38

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
  •