Is China Preparing for War?

[POTUS]

According to most analysts, China has up to 20 nukes with ranges long enough to hit the US. India is a big supporter of Taiwan, and they have about 50 nukes able to hit China. The US has in excess of 2,200 nukes.

[Sava]

good, I hope ww3 breaks out... America will lead the world to armageddon

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
We wouldn't need to occupy China to defeat them. The goal would to be defend Taiwan, which we could do. But even if China did manage to quickly take over Taiwan and fortify it(a dubious prospect in itself), we could devestate China without landing a soldier. China is so connected to the world economy a blockade would devestate them, and we would be able to use airpower to severly cripple the Chinese economy.

Crippling the Chinese economy would place the Communist Party's hold on leadership in question. Which is why the PRC won't invade.

But theres just one problem with that....
The US would have to devestate it's own economy in order to compromise the Chinese economy. Do you really think Americans would just turn in their standards of living so Taipei can remain independant? Doubtful.
But this is also why China is unlikely to even cause a scenario with the US: In order to compromise the US, it would have to compromise it'self as well.

MAD.

According to most analysts, China has up to 20 nukes with ranges long enough to hit the US. India is a big supporter of Taiwan, and they have about 50 nukes able to hit China. The US has in excess of 2,200 nukes.

I doubt India would even have the balls to attack its nuclear neighbor, especially considering its OTHER Nuclear neighbor is just looking for an excuse to war.

In contrast the US President would be fine, along with most of the country

Except that it probably wouldn't have an economy anymore.
I mean come on: Even if the US isn't completly interdependant on China, a nuke strike on a major city with MILLIONS of people would probably destroy almost any economy in any nation

[Sava]

the world is infested with human filth and scum...

nuclear war

[Nubclear]

OMG KOOol NUKE SCNASRIO:

US Nukes beijing.
China nukes Los Angeles and Sacramento.
India nukes Shanghai and Hong Kong.
Pakistan nukes New Delhi, Calcutta, and Bombay.
Russia nukes Islamabad, Berlin, Washington, Salt Lake, Grozny, Cairo, Ottowa, Paris, London, Tokyo, Seoul, Pyongyang, Canberra, and some random South American city.
US nukes everyone.
Russia nukes everyone+1.

Russia wins.

[Sava]

russia wouldn't win because the weather patterns would drop most of the fallout across russia and make those drunken bastards even weirder

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


The US military might is vastly overrated. Vastly.

This is so wrong that it brings your entire credibility on the subject into question. The US has more equipment and ships in moth balls than China has ever possessed in its entire history. In WWII with a population of 140 million, US mobilized 40 million people...Today could possibly mobilized 100 million if pressed and training is vastly superior to China. Logistically, US can call on assetts that China could not even begin to dream of. Technologically, US is still at least two generations ahead of China. Prewar assets VASTLY favor US. With a US will to fight, there is no doubt of the outcome...none.

People like to talk about US military being pressed thin. What a joke. A British friend but it best, "You Yanks are amazing. You go to the other side of the world and conquer two countries and the way your people live their everyday lives has not changed one bit."

Take this warning back to the Chinese people...Don't ever give us a reason to fight. You really, really wouldn't like the results.

UR, you claim to be smart guy. Look at US industrial capacity...not what we are producing, but what we are capable of. Next, look at natural resources needed to fight a war and where they are. (Did you even know that the third largest oil field in the world is 100% owned by US military and hasn't pumped a drop since WWII although the wells are maintained and ready to go?). Can you even fathom the amount of capital this country could muster if its citizens saw a need to buy war bonds? Did you know that the US still controls the lion's share of the world's gold supply?

Would the US defend Taiwan is the question. Who knows? But the Chinese better pray that it won't should they decide to attack.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
Russia wins.

Only if their missles now run on Vodka and have learned to follow a seeing eye dog.

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
Except that it probably wouldn't have an economy anymore.
I mean come on: Even if the US isn't completly interdependant on China, a nuke strike on a major city with MILLIONS of people would probably destroy almost any economy in any nation

Actually I think you're really wrong here. Yes it would lead to some disruptions, but actually it probably wouldn't ruin the economy for the rest of the nation, although it would drop the overall GDP. Survivers might be an economic burden, but it would still be a relatively limited effect. Companies might be destroyed, but since most of the employees for the company are dead, this wouldn't lead to greater unemployment. While factories in the area destroyed by a nuke might lead to unexpected disruption of a suplier for other companies, with the global economy they should be able to make other arrangement for a suplier relatively quickly. I'm not saying it wouldn't cause an economic disruption, but actually when you analyse it, the effects would be relatively limited for the rest of the economy.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by POTUS
According to most analysts, China has up to 20 nukes with ranges long enough to hit the US. India is a big supporter of Taiwan, and they have about 50 nukes able to hit China. The US has in excess of 2,200 nukes.

Before last START talks, US had almost 11,000 warheads. Do you really think the press just missed the disposal of all that bomb grade plutonium? I'm guessing they are "being stored for disposal" at Fort Hood. (Bye Bye China if you are stupid enough to launch. Ha...China fires 20 nukes...15 are viable launches...10 are shot down or badly miss tarkets...5 hit. US retaliates with 10,000 nukes...Former SE Asia now known as the East Persian sea.)

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Smiley
Remember when the Americans underestimated Iraq's nonmilitary strength.

The US has already spent $87 billion on the invasion and occupation of Iraq. Occupation costs around a billion a week. China's annual military budget is $15 billion. Even if one considers that the Chinese soldier gets paid far less than the American soldier, and the supply lines would be shorter, the math don't work out, especially since every part of the war would be urban combat.

In this scenario, there is absolutely no reason for the US to get involved with a landwar on mainland China. The US can use its air and naval assets to prevent China from sucessfully invading Taiwan. The US can then achieve air superiority and bomb strategic and tactical targets in China until the Chinese leadership is willing to go to the negotiating table. (Depending on the situation the US might press for Chinese governmental recognition of Taiwan as an independant nation.) What you are talking about doesn't even apply.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Everybody will be launching nuclear missiles at the US if the US even contemplates in making such a thread, Floyd. Better to get rid of a madman first.

VERY doubtful. Outside of the Russian arsenal. US arsenal is over 100 times the rest of the world combined. Is "Everybody" some stupid moron who wants his country blown to hell? If so, you may be right.

[Nubclear]

In WWII with a population of 140 million, US mobilized 40 million people...Today could possibly mobilized 100 million if pressed and training is vastly superior to China.

Theres a difference though...In WW2, people were fiercly supporting the war and actively giving things up in order to help. People worked in shops all day and again, were generally supportive.
DO you really think that Americans would mobilize themselves to do such a thing in a war against China, a war that would pretty much secure the destruction of the US economy?

Technologically, US is still at least two generations ahead of China.

Perhaps, but it would be pretty difficult to combat the huge population China has.

A British friend but it best, "You Yanks are amazing. You go to the other side of the world and conquer two countries and the way your people live their everyday lives has not changed one bit."

Really? You mean Americans haven't changed their ways of livings at all? Americans are in their panic xenophobic mode right now (or half of them at least) and to say that these wars haven't changed the way America lives is a bit much
But if we talk about numbers alone: Well what do you expect? You go and conquer two incredibly weak nations (one of which practically gave up, considering much of its army was defecting) and hold it up like its some stunning victory?
I would be impressed if you defeated a nation actually capable of putting up some sort of challenge, but Iraq and Afghanistan were both simply a push away from completly collapsing into small little pieces.
But the real thing is that your being bogged down in both of them. Imagine the peacekeeping operations and costs it would take to hold China or India or Russia down.

Can you even fathom the amount of capital this country could muster if its citizens saw a need to buy war bonds?

But would they? That's the entire point. I don't think the American people would sacrafice everything to invade China? I just don't think so.

Of course if were talking about simply defending Taiwan....That would be pretty easy for the US to pull off, one has to admit But invading China would be impossible.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Mordoch

In this scenario, there is absolutely no reason for the US to get involved with a landwar on mainland China. The US can use its air and naval assets to prevent China from sucessfully invading Taiwan. The US can then achieve air superiority and bomb strategic and tactical targets in China until the Chinese leadership is willing to go to the negotiating table. (Depending on the situation the US might press for Chinese governmental recognition of Taiwan as an independant nation.) What you are talking about doesn't even apply.

Bingo. US troops would only get involved on Taiwan proper. Possible strategic targets could draw limited US grund action. All that changes though should Tiannamen square type situation rise during struggle. China's military could split (it was questionable weather or not they would follow orders last time), and if so US ground troops may be introduced on one o the sides.

[David Floyd]

UR,

Everybody will be launching nuclear missiles at the US if the US even contemplates in making such a thread, Floyd. Better to get rid of a madman first.

I'm not talking about a US first strike. I'm talking about a US response to a Chinese first strike. And if the PRC struck first with nuclear weapons, the US would annihilate China - no questions asked.

The US military might is vastly overrated. Vastly.

If you mean the US can't invade China, I agree. If you mean that the US can't defeat China, I strongly disagree. The USN would wipe out the PLAN in less time than it would take for the US ambassador to deliver a declaration of war. Hell, US attack submarines could eliminate the PLAN, most likely with no losses.