Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Do u think the US would beat China in a war ?

China is perhaps the toughest country and army in the world. But being tough itself, doesnt necessarily secure a victory over the US. Its about strategy. Its about engineering. Its about planning. The US would beat them in an air war for sure because they are not capable of outmanning us in the sky. We have spent so much over the years on our military defense which is second to none. Even though they do outnumber us, I think the US has the upper hand. Yes. Do you agree ?
War is a zero sum strategy. Nobody wins.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
[quote]China is perhaps the toughest country and army in the world.[/quote]

Its really not.

China is an economic power comparable to the USA because of its huge population but it is not a huge (or yuuuuuuuuge) military power. America almost as much on military as the rest of the world combined. You guys probably have ten times China's military strength but is it really necessary?

War with China would be a crazy move though because your economy is heavily interlinked with theirs. Even a trade war would be mutually damaging. It would mess up the world economy too so please don't do it.
Paschar · 70-79, M
Both sides would loose

[youtube=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktUFGKelZdw]
Zonuss · 41-45, M
@Paschar The US government is not going to give you the amount of weapons they have, or tell you what they have hidden from the masses. The elites are too intelligent to give away this type of knowledge without consequences. ☺
Paschar · 70-79, M
@Zonuss They brag about how well armed they are as the consequences places fear to the other side , fear tactics work better than one bomb can , It's standard text in the army

jackjjackson · 61-69, M
ozgirl512 · 26-30, F
The Chinese are rumoured to have an aircraft carrier missile that's not defeatable .. it's a sub orbital missile, coming in vertically and very fast... No defence... There goes the air power
ozgirl512 · 26-30, F
@Zonuss that's true... But one ship killer missile and it's all for naught ... I'm thinking it may reflect the time when the Battleship was king... Until the first one was sunk by an aircraft ... Times change
Zonuss · 41-45, M
@ozgirl512 We have too many hidden weapons also in that territory. It would be very difficult for them to hit the US without them being hit first by an arsenal somewhere on that side of the world.
ozgirl512 · 26-30, F
@Zonuss let's just hope it doesn't come to that
EuphoricTurtle · 41-45, M
When it comes to war between countries with nuclear weapons there aren't any winners....hell there isn't even a war, just one big BOOM.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Paschar · 70-79, M
@WindOfAdolf if you remember the star wars program developed by DARPA , We put a laser in orbit , The other side wouldn't know who hit them

Zonuss · 41-45, M
@WindOfAdolf The US has weapons all around the world. Some of them are underground and in buildings that noone even knows exist.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
jimjim1969 · M
Not conventional, maybe nuclear. But then both would lose
Tierra · 26-30, F
@SW-User If you know your enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.
SW-User
@Tierra True, but to underestimate him is to not truly know him.
jimjim1969 · M
@Tierra You do remember the Korean war? When 200,000 Chinese invaded? Logistical support? They are right on the border .
goliathtree · 56-60, M
Since China's economy is largely dependent upon our own, I think that the farthest a "war" would ever get is posturing.
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@goliathtree They lend you money to buy their shit. You are dependent on each other.
goliathtree · 56-60, M
@Burnley123 and your point is different than mine how?
Burnley123 · 41-45, M
@goliathtree You say China is dependent on you, I say you are mutually dependent.
Dlrannie · 31-35, F
It's not something that will be any good to either party. One should not assume American Forces will win and even if they did it would be at enormous cost in troops and equipment
Zonuss · 41-45, M
@Dlrannie Of course.
SW-User
War is not conventional anymore, it's far easier to destroy a country through trade and economy.
Zonuss · 41-45, M
@SW-User Thats not the question.
SW-User
@Zonuss In a brawl, it's impossible to tell based on information available to the public. One side has soldier numbers, the other has arguably better technology, both have nukes as a last resort.

Limiting to just armies capability and size does not really apply to unconventional warfare.
smiler2012 · 56-60
zonuss lets hope this is only a hypothetical question and never comes top fruition
Zonuss · 41-45, M
@smiler2012 Well. ☺
SteelHands · 61-69, M
The location of any battle is the first thing to consider.

Supply line efficiency and geographical challenges make lots of things undoable be less doable by an opponent.

Also secure central deployment and communication means.

Intel, morale, adjoining lands sympathetic to an opponent.

We learned during the 60s in Nam. There are some other things that make the standard formulas imbalanced.

The press is not always to be trusted.
Xuan12 · 31-35, M
In a conventional war, China would eventually be defeated, though it would be messy.

 
Post Comment