If America went to war with China, how would it go?

>>32201193
Very badly for China.

>>32201193
Lots of dead chinks, a couple of suits of power armor, and everybody wishing for a nuclear winter.

File: USS-Chafee.jpg (3MB, 3000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3000x2000px

A few lost ships on the side of the USN , but eventual American victory at sea.

Underestimate American naval war fighting capacity and skill at your own risk.

Right now?

China gets raped in the air and in the sea before they can force project to anywhere that matters.

The USA, never, in a million years, considers committing ground units to combat with the PLA, unless they're actively flowing across the Yalu towards Seoul.

Since China depends on importing oil through the Malacca straits and through easily bombable pipelines, they eventually run out of oil.

>>32201193
Cyber warfare would be done on a larger scale. Internet would be disrupted, financial markets could be delayed, banking transactions could be slowed, . We do have contingency plans but we will be fighting threats on a scale we have never had to confront before.

>>32201193
too many chinese and air defence it would have to be with nukes

only a 100 million americunts vs a billion chinks think about it they could just zerg rush tanks and they could win. yeah usa might win and get there but it would be hard to hold the ground also the economic impact of it would be something else and god knows if russia will get involved thinking usa might attack them too lol

>>32203454
Zerg rush across russia?

Where do you imaging the PLA and US army duking it out?
Taiwan?
Hong Kong?

The US navy and USAF would pummel china.
There wouldn't be any land engagements. Not unless China invaded Taiwan.
And how will the "billion man" PLA get to Taiwan?
Walk?
Swim?
Take fishing boats?

>>32201193
lots of dead gooks

>>32201193
Economic chaos the likes of which we've never seen. The US would win but serious shortages of consumer goods would leave the US economy in shambles for years to come.

>>32203505
The attack would probably come from kpop korea as korea and best korea are still at war and south korea still has bases. Also japs have us baese aswell. All usa needs to do is make a video aabout japanese or korea folks being kidnapped or how nk has attakced usa and usa will go ahead take up nk the slowly move towards the capital

I am thinking usa might become friends with uk and get india to attck china they cpuld use the man power but india being india and in the past they said fuck you ameripig we no go to war in iraq with you so doubt they would do that but still its a posibility

All i am saying is oppinions and not actual shit

Also it might be posible attack could happen from afganistan or pakistan or those eastern european block countries like kazikstan

Also about pakistan they are close to china and have many trade agreements so would be hard but india who hates china and has in the past gone to waar with them would probably be easy to get the,

>>32203454

The PLA is actually 2.2 million vs. 1.2 million US Armed Forces. It would not go down how you think.

>>32203638
I doubt the consumer goods being short is the biggest worry manufactering could be moved to taiwan which can make microchips and other countries like bangladesh worst fear is them dumping the trilions of american debut they hold or the facr most housing is owned by chinese business men what happens to tjose property does the government take them or do they sell them ?

>>32201193
Things would not end well for China. First of all they have jack shit for force projection so how the hell are they going to go on the offensive?

>>32203668
No the whole population is a billion strong if they had a war they could probably put majority of them in the war. Think of the people as assets or finance. The people will probably be pressed on as conscripts and put in manufacturing weapons and equipment. The question is hpw long would it take china to impliment that. Would usa be able to muster up that much work force for the war without imigraton? Only hope is to nuke majority of them so there population goes down

>>32203674
Consumer goods would just be one the most widely felt economic effects. In short, going to war with a vital trading partner is not something you should do, such a war would be felt by literally every citizen.

>>32203715
I doubt that if there is a war the business would find a way to change supplyiers there is plenty infustructre anywhere really

Usa might even get a bost in personal growth if the business came back home dont forget taiwan bangladesh are countries that can make the shit even korea

At worst it would probably be felt for a short time untill the products are are back again. Only fear is what hapoens to the american debut china has

>>32201193
The US would die, hopefully.

>>32203674
>dumping the trilions of american debut they hold
Ok. So the US is in exactly the same position, and everyone else in the world who uses US debt as part of their overall national wealth is now poorer.

Why do people not understand US being in massive debt is one of our weapons? That debt actually gets traded around, nobody wants to call the US debt because it would hurt everyone who owns it and meanwhile weve used that money we borrowed to build weapons.

>>32201193
Both gonna be destroyed from the economic backlash

File: ins.new.super.dvora.jpg (32KB, 678x381px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 678x381px

There is no winning.

China can pump out small littoral craft and torpedoes from workshops along their many many river systems all day. They make half the steel in the world, and most of the cargo ships.

Its not winnable, not in any traditional way. Even Britain, at the height of their power, they could only invite the rest of the world into China to help them fight, and succeed in boxing China in at the sea.

Otherwise, it would have been them throwing every frigate in the Royal Navy into the Yellow, the Yangtze, the Yalu river to fight.

I'm about 80% convinced the U.S. is only trying to build large riverine ships now so they could potentially fight the Chinks.

>>32201193
We'd curbstomp the Chinks. Our Navy is almost three times the size of the Russian and Chinese Navys combined. Nobody on the planet can set foot on American soil by force. Our Navy is just too OP

>>32204125
All you need to do is box them in. Nobody actually wants the mainland, its just pollution and a lack of water.

File: Great-Wall-of-China_04.jpg (651KB, 3071x2047px) Image search: [Google]

651KB, 3071x2047px

both sides would build a wall and...well impasse.

>>32203648
You need help dude

File: SR-71 Blackbird Wallpapers 1280x800.jpg (270KB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

270KB, 1280x800px

>>32201193
In 1969 we put a man on the moon with technology that was as powerful as a pocket calculator. Before this, we created the SR-71 Blackbird. Imagine what hundreds of billions of dollars poured into black projects can produce more than half a century after the creation of a plane that still holds the air-speed record for manned air-breathing jet aircraft.

If the US ever went to war with China and had to pull out all the stops, a classified aircraft would be scrambled from a location that doesn't exist on paper and bring the fury of God with it

Wal-Mart's stocks would plummet.

China loses

>>32204024
Edgy

>>32204010
It literally took decades for the level of industry to be built to support the production of our consumer goods in China. An economic miracle wouldn't even come close to satisfying the development of new facilities to pick up the slack. That and a major war in Asia would disrupt trade with other partners there.

Our economy is attached to China's at the waist and we both know that. That and the economy is far more sensitive than you realize, for example last year a freighter broke down and was unable to offload its cargo and closing several docks, prices for many goods shot up and the markets took a good hit that day. Now imagine if shipping across the South China sea was stopped, one of the most trafficked areas in the world.

It would ruin us in ways we probably haven't even realized.

File: 1478661402927.jpg (138KB, 1001x823px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 1001x823px

>>32201193
>Hiro militarizes 4chan
>/k/ommandos deployed to mainland China
>hundreds of faggots slaughtered within hours
>dragon dildo shrines built to memorialize our fallen /k/omrades
>Hiro surrenders
>Moot rises to power for a second time
>Unites the boards against China
>Dissenting faggots get permab&
>Organizes raids like we haven't seen in years
>Chinese Internet getting blown the fuck up
>Chink military intelligence h@xd and l33kd
>Murica forces Chinese unconditional surrender the next day
>4chan gets all the glory
>all anons awarded with honorary Brazzers Premium access codes
>fap and shitpost in peace for the next 50 years until king moot dies.

Tiny ass Japan held half of China with trade sanctions against them

>>32203638

What shortages of consumer goods? It's really not hard to find all types of products that are still made in the U.S., or even other Asian countries whose trade routes would not be disrupted by Sino-US war

>>32204125
>China can pump out small littoral craft and torpedoes from workshops along their many many river systems all day. They make half the steel in the world, and most of the cargo ships.
Which would be targeted and destroyed.

>>32204741
Hopefully it happens and small local companies will move in and produce things with out planned obsolescence.

>>32205514
Prices would skyrocket and demand would exceed supply immeasurably. A truly massive amount of trade occurs between the US the average citizen cant afford for it to be severed.

>>32205551
Short term, yes. Long term, we are much more likely to benefit from that war. With such huge demands, we either find replacements for China (they're disposable) or start making things for ourselves again. Most likely however, we'll do some of both.

>>32201193

A bunch of dead Americans who oo-rahed to go fight for a capitalist cunt that deluded even more retarded Americans.

>>32203707
They completely lack force projection, meaning we can bomb their factories and they can't touch ours

>>32201193

Probably like this

https://youtu.be/J3VqF2dXje0

>>32204608
This, we got some spooky tier shit in the works that no one knows about and when the next big war hits people are gonna die...like alot of them

>>32203707

You don't have to. China imports most of its oil and cannot protect those imports. The USA can sustain on its own internal oil production for a time, but doesn't have to because it can protect its imports.

No oil, no way to persecute a war with a nation on the other side of the world (aside nukes).

So yes, the war would have to go nuclear and China would have to be the one to do it. The US Navy and Air Force defeat China. Unless they go after South Korea, the US Army doesn't have to do shit.

>>32201193
China gets a few hits in but gets thrashed unless the US then tries to invade mainland China or something retarded. Economic ruin for both countries and probably much of the world.

>>32201210
Kek'd

>>32204077
Retards think government debt is like their personal credit card debt from buying a flatscreen

>Can't even defeat Iraq
>Think they can take on China
America will lose, then for the next century masturbate over their k/d ratio, while claiming they actually won the war.

>>32201210
brb, finding a cryo vault.

File: nuke_training.webm (3MB, 710x400px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 710x400px

>mfw the Chinese probably did something like put bombs on the ocean floor, so that they float up and blow up our carriers in an attack when given the signal.

>mfw the Chinese blow up satellites, causing debris to fly around the earths orbit taking out everybody ellses satellites too.

>mfw the Chinese have rail-lines across Russia to its friend Iran, giving them access to Iranian and Iraq oilfields.

>mfw the Chinese are more than ready to fight the US.

File: 1428369777571.gif (2MB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 480x360px

dropping this shit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3VqF2dXje0

>us wins in the end.
>japan gets rekt by land/air based missile attacks.
>us doesn't invade but the Chinese infrastructure gets devastated to the stone age.

>>32201193
>China tries the surrender meme
>"Lol no. Not taking them."
>"B-but you have to!"
>"Get fucked."

Is it true China has a fuckload of missiles inside the Great Wall?

My friend from China said they do but I don't know if he's full of shit or not

>>32203707
>Billion strong
>Let's put babies in uniform

File: pluto.jpg (60KB, 600x500px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 600x500px

>>32206338
I hope they remake project pluto. A nuclear powered ram jet dropping H bombs with exhaust that is basically fallout going mach 3 at tree level. Absolutely brutal...

>>32207096
>mfw the ocean floor bombs don't work.

>mfw the misses blow up in the silos because they are chink shit.

>mfw the rail lines are crooked and not complete because they can't finish shit.

>>32206230
I do believe it's victory I dont believe it would go like that

>Hey japan you wanna help war with ch... oh you're already there? Unit 731 is deployed. Ya thanks, you got this.

File: Rod-of-God-Weapon-300[1].jpg (11KB, 300x205px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 300x205px

>>32204608
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYKKCaprhlA

>>32207559
Pretty interesting and plausible

>>32204328
underrated

Like a Tom Clancy novel.

>>32201210
>A world where bloatflies exist

Pass.

>>32204125
>They make half the steel in the world
lolno. they run all the scrap they can get through blast furnaces and smelters, and make mostly shit low grade impure as fuck steel for africa and construction. their entire mining industry is an inefficient deathtrap that even stalin era soviet union gulags would be shocked by. they get by, because they just throw manpower at a problem and grind away.

and the fucking china owns the USA's entire debt meme needs to die. its flat earth tier retardation. they own a fraction of it, and mostly a small specialized bond type.

if anything with china getting blocked in trade would cause, is the industrial sectors of SEA and south and central america to go into overdrive, until we rebuild those sectors that were sold off by the neocons and clintons.

watch some youtubers that live in chinas rants about how everything is schlock and shoddy as fuck. one dude had a car that rusted away in 4 years.

>>32201801
So nobody wins.

>>32207717
>Never seen fertilizer cook off.

Get that Windows Vista bullshit out of here.

>>32204608
oh yeah the ghoul project.

if we pushed them into full on production and the other even deeper 7-3-2 projects would meet the public and blow the minds of all of humanity.

>>32204844
dubs for the second coming of /i/

>>32207776
if they started shit with us, India would LOVE to run up their ass, and poo all over their ricebowls, just to become most favored nation and get specialized trading rights.

>>32208089
I saw that happen when I was a kid in the south. these assholes had a brand new building and had like 15K pounds of fertilizer stored in there for a farm exchange. some bad luck happens and the whole night was lit up, for miles around and it stank like pure rotten hell till the fall rains came. its a great big pond there now. they stocked it in 96 which was 5 years after it happened.

>muh billion men

>Mongols
>British
>Japs
>Korea

>>32207559
i wonder how the jap or korean army bases would be like if war did happen

the amount of rape and shit would be high as shit

also would uk and the west be in on the war ?

>>32201193
Why do you guys want to go to war with china? They are miles away dont have any weapons that can harm usa dont do anything bad ? They also make all the shit you like and buy american debut

>>32208921
Because they are dicks.

They are like that kid who wins the lottery and generally is an asshat to everyone.

>>32207588

your friend is daydreaming like everyone in this thread

>>32201193
Trump would nuke them in a surprise attack and then force the survivors to pay his company to rebuild their cities.

>>32204125
China gets all of their met coal from America and Australia. Their industry would cease to exist by declaring war on the west.

File: CuAJsY3WYAAgc1R.jpg large.jpg (126KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 960x960px

>>32203707
>No the whole population is a billion strong if they had a war they could probably put majority of them in the war.
first of all, that's impossible. you still need people working in the industries to produce supplies to sustain a war effort.

second of all: so what? even with quantitative advantage, we'd possess a qualitative advantage. it's not the middle ages where anyone with a sword became a competent soldier. in modern warfare, total numbers matter less due to how drastic technology acts as a force multiplier.

third: it's a moot point because with the invention of ICM-nukes, the topology of advanced warfare has changed. countries don't invade each other anymore, they conquer each other via cultural, or economic dominance. that's how we defeated the USSR, and that's how putin/china are currently beating America via electronic hacking, electoral interference and propaganda. the USSR was defeated by importing liberalism; now Russia/china are defeating the west by importing nationalism. we dismantled the USSR by getting Yeltsin elected; they are dismantling nato by getting Trump/nationalists elected.

>>32209145
Trump already walked back the leaving nato meme.

>>32206951
There's a difference between being defeated, and deciding it's too expensive to keep kicking their asses and leave.

>>32209145
Thank you for correcting the record.

>same question asked every day
>same answers given every day

>China would get buttfucked (the answer)
>China would collapse the US markets because of debt (retarded)
>China stronk billion chinks zerg rush (retarded)
>China is able to stand up to the USA on its own merit, would be a standstill or China would win (retarded)
>memes, memes, and more memes

Kill yourself, OP.

>>32207671
>underestimating your enemy

>>32208934
So you want to commit thousands of servicemens' lives, and potentially their deaths, toward fighting a country that is politically uncomfortable. For what strategic good? What will you tell Private Billy's wife that he died for?

>>32209993
>For what strategic good?

Remove chicom.

>What will you tell Private Billy's wife that he died for?

China not growing larger

>>32209968
>0.05 rubles has been deposited into your bank account, ivan.

>>32201193
China and the US won't go to war. It would fuck China up so badly financially it just would not be worth it, same for the US.

>>32201193
Three days later, China would run out of gas.

>>32210252
>itt: old man yells at cold war

>>32209322
>walked back
oh really? did he make a guarantee that we NEVER would? because I don't remember him saying 'WE WILL LEAVE 100 PERCENT NO MATTER WHAT' and I can tell you, I have been an avid watcher/poster in /tg/ since last fucking year

>>32204129
its the worlds second largest airforce and its incredible

our navy keeps us safe.

>>32209322
>trump tells it like it is!
>dont worry he's walked back pretty much everything he has ever said

>>32207559
no faults with this video tbqh

>>32210270

China is in the middle of bypassing Pacific shipping.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Belt,_One_Road

As you can see, they can get gas directly from Iran overland. They can get to their African interests via the middle-east. They can transport goods to Europe via Russia by land.

>>32204125
Britain was always a sea power. in numbers the Army was about the same size as Belgiums or Portugal most of the time (though considerably more experianced). Boxing other nations in at sea was literally Britains go to tactic and what made them a superpower.

You have terrible knowledge about these things.

>>32208869
Probably not. Perhaps the UK but it depends what direction they take after brexit.

Immediate destruction of the chink fleet. Prolonged comflict inna sprawl with the chink ground forces. Prolonged material issues as exports cease to the US and the US burns up what little surplus they have.

Long term American win as the industrial and manifacturing base gains a huge economic advantage over foreign imports

Short term food spoilage as exports to chinka cease and have to be sold elsewhere.

Assuming no side resorts to nukes we would probably stalemate int he major cities. Shangai through HongKong would be a new south Korea

>>32201193
Considering China owns the companies that supply most of the US with food. They'd kick our ass internally.

>>32210808
[Citation Needed]

>>32210819
One that I can think of of the top of my head is Smithfield Foods.

>>32210833
The ham people?

>>32210833
And do you think that they make the food in china?

>>32210871
Yes

>>32210876
No, but they can cut off the supply

>>32210883
If the companies they own are in operation in the US how exactly can they do that?

>>32210891
Ask Congress. They were concerned about it enough to investigate when the sale was trying to go through.

>>32210905
If its grown in the US during war it will be turned over to another company.

>>32210928
And if they know it's coming, so they decide to poison all the pigs before pulling out?

>>32210962
How will they get the farmers to throw away their livelihood?

they can taint whats in the factory but even thats iffy.

>>32201193
The completion of the Three Gorges Dam is a guarantee that China will never go to war with any superpower.

>>32210962
Right. chinks are going to tell a bunch of american employees living in america to poison their own food.

>>32201193
Global economic collapse

Literally every economy in the world is tied to the two, and the two are so entwined they're basically one economic entity

I can't imagine a single thing that would actually touch off a conflict between the two that would be worth the amount of money and global stability lost

It will literally never happen because capitalism

File: image.jpg (39KB, 320x249px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 320x249px

>>32204125

>>32201193
a couple of flashes of light, all urban anons in the US and China would be dead, and all the rest of us would live in a post apocalyptic hellscape of violent anarchy until international aid or radiation poisoning got to us.

File: 1507997_338030349671738_530900705_n.jpg (54KB, 499x563px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 499x563px

>>32211652

I'm not seeing the downside here.

>>32201193
A proxy war somewhere else probably over Coltran resources in Africa. No one goes head to head anymore.

This thread look oddly familiar

Op
>how will X county do against US

Every bubba on /k/
>murca will DESTROY X nation
>will be no contest
>war will be over in a couple weeks

The fact of matter is that war will a be very drawn out and bloody. Boths sides will take massive casualties both in equipment and personnel. Victory favors the US, however it will be a very long war. This is all considering that a war between US and China will not trigger WW3 (it will).

>inb4 fuck off, murca will not lose to manlett chinks who are poor and can't afford military stuff like us

Must I remind you of Korea, Vietnam, and the middle east? (w/ the exception of Kuwait)

>>32211719
Our efforts may be better directed into cultural imperialism and pushing open market capitalism into the mainland. Even introduce feminism as a way to foment insurrection. A toe to toe conventional conflict is a loss for everyone.

File: 1466493210405.jpg (22KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 480x480px

>>32201210

>>32211751
I have a tinfoil feeling china introduced feminism to SK to do that

>>32211697

I would NOT want to live in Ooo, shit's way too surreal for my taste. Would feel like I'm on a permanent acid trip and probably off myself. Even the show makes me uncomfortable now and then.

>>32201193
It would mostly go in the
W A T E R

If we go to war with china, do not join the navy.

Everything else is covered though, they cant get here on foot without being mowed the fuck down and blown to pieces.

They have alot of soldiers and can train alot more of them than us but they cant get them here.

If they did the Fallout plot meme and took over Alaska I think Russia would kick their fucking ass
> Trump + Putin teammates

But either way thats alot of warm signatures trying to move through cold terrain.

And when they did they'd get here there would be Steel Rain waiting for them.

Plus 80% of Civilians being Armed, and probably even being handed rifles by executive order.

> civilians arent exactly the best to throw against a foreign military
> but when they outnumber you immensely and they have shit that operates almost as good as your own stuff you're fucked
> especially when they'll shoot your medics out of prejudice too, there is no medical aid for your chink ass on this soil

>>32201193
Ever played Fallout?

>>32201193
The war itself?

The US won't commit to a ground war, and doesn't need to. The US beats the Chinese Navy and Airforce, and since China is largely reliant on sea based exports the yield or they collapse.

Back home, the short term effect is an economic depression, from which long term effects can't be determined.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/805538149157969924
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/805539770864693253

>When he says aloud what everyone has known for years

>>32212002
>not joining the navy for all the promotion opportunities

>>32212002
>Don't join the Navy
>He doesn't want to be an ace pilot or submarine skipper

Chinese invasion of US mainland 100% impossible
Costly air war, most likely eventual US victory
Economies of both countries, and by extension the rest of the world, completely bankrupted by the cost of funding such a large conflict
Invasion of mainland China by US would be the ugliest, most violent, soul-destroying combat in human history. Massive collateral damage and civilian casualties in densely populated urban areas, gooks in the trees, gooks in the wire, gooks absolutely everywhere
Lack of guerilla resistance from unarmed Chinese populace balanced out by the fact that there are SO FUCKING MANY men in the PLA
A total US victory, besides being incredibly unlikely, would be totally pyrrhic

Oh and back stateside there would be mass rioting against this whole pants-on-head retarded conflict, possibly leading to open civil war

tl;dr it'll never happen

>>32205478
Not to mention the little Manchurian takeover, Nips can be fucking savage

>>32204608
Power armor being supported by orbital telephone pole drops and Boston Dynamics robot dogs with CROWS 40 Mikes and M2s when?

>>32212917
Don't know, but there may be some plasma railguns.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARAUDER

File: 1452219786915.gif (676KB, 164x166px) Image search: [Google]

676KB, 164x166px

>Ameriburgers think they could win when they couldn't even win against mudslimes

PLA, PLAN, and PLAAF cannot physically move the equipment and troops they would need to the west coast, and that's before the USN and USA get involved.

Once on the ground, USA would dominate, with the support of the USAR and USNG. Not to mention muh every blade of grass.

TL;DR China is a regional power that can't come over here

>>32213254
how about you stop using American made CGI film .gifs as reaction images

i'm sure europe or wherever you come from has equally talented high budget CGI films ripe with reaction .gifs

File: 7.gif (871KB, 500x282px) Image search: [Google]

871KB, 500x282px

>>32213429

>>32203615
>Chinese
>gooks

learn your terms, tripfag

I wonder how the US would exploit Chinese holdings on the other side of the world. Do we just start seizing shit the chinese invested in?

>>32201209

FPBP

>>32203454

USN and USAF would take out everything that mattered and they wouldn't be able to project force anywhere on the US except Korea and Japan.

The initial strikes plus extreme feelings of dissent built up in Chyna already probably equate to a *relatively* quick US victory.

>>32201193
Really depends

Naval/Air war over a bunch of Islands in the South China Sea

(Relatively) Limited Conflict Fighting them in Best Korea?

Or a full on invasion of China?

First:
>bunch of USN and coalition ships lost
>millions of dead chinks
>lots of cyber warfare
>China BTFO's

Second Option:
>RIP Best Korea
>Lot of dead Koreans
>Lots of dead Americans
>Lots of dead Chinks
>Possibly some dead Japs
>We win but at a large cost, and we agree not go over the Yalu river.

Third Option:
>Pray India or Russia allies with us (easiest way to win)
>Invasion from the Sea (US/NATO/Coaltion troops)
>Invasion from the North (RU and maybe some NATO)
>Invasion from the South (India)
>Pakis BTFO
>RIP Best Korea Pt II, Electric Bongoloo
>Tibet's a country now (yay!)
>Divide and conquer China
>Aid in rebellion in ethnically less Han Chinese provinces
>Banished government in Taiwan retakes control
>Hong Kong becomes a British territory again
>IDK about Maccau
>Several dead Chinks
>Several dead Americans
>Several dead Russians
>Several dead Indians
>Several dead Pakis
>Several dead Japs
>Several dead Sorks
>Several dead Norks
>Several dead NATO and other Coalition Troops
>Humanitarian clusterfuck of epic proportions
>

>>32217914
Also

>Pray Nukes don't get launched
>If they do, pray we strike them first

>If they are used, it (most likely) won't be armageddon due to the relative lack of nukes that the chinks have compared to US and RU

>Some US cities may get nuked

>If that happens the chinks will get BTFO'd to epic proportions

>World probs won't end but the chinks aren't gonna have a country

>>32213254
>yuropoor cant tell the difference between fighting insurgents and fighting a actual army

>>32216502
probs, and vice-versa for US owned companies in chinkland

>>32201193
Considering the US couldn't even conquer vietnam, very badly for the US. The Chinese have nukes and they aren't afraid to use them.

The US wouldn't have a coherent plan beyond "lets punish china for [whatever offense we have staged or invented]. They would feed in a few thousand men, take a whole lot of casualties, try to bomb shit until Chinese AAA wrecks their shit and they lose a bunch of expensive fighters, then they would give up after public support for the war wanes. If would be over within 5 years, US would not accomplish any of its war aims, and would take some horrific casualties.

China would shortly return to normal. They have the manpower to rebuild and repopulate even the most wartorn and decimated areas.

The real question is, why would US try to start a war with China? would they ignorantly think they could "take over china"? would it be purely a punitive expedition? sack shanghai then leave? or would they try some kind of cold war posturing for 10 years with no one really winning or losing anything? and no actual pitched battles?

>>32201214
China is mostly land though. Navies cant operate on land. They can support things along the coast, like the Japanese did in 1937, but beyond that, they can't really do dick.

Notice how the US had a huge navy and total naval and air supremacy, but still weren't able to stamp out the VC in vietnam? thats what would happen in China, but much worse, becuase most of the country is outside the reach of the navy or naval-bourne air power.

>>32204129
you guys keep forgetting that China is largely landlocked. Beyond the shores, Navy doesn't mean shit.

>>32205478
China was fractured when Japan first invaded. They got their toe hold in china in the russo-japanese wars, then during the warlord period of China, and then played off the Nationalists / Communists fighting each other.

Even during the second sino-japanese war, the communists and nationalists were still fighting each other.

Focused as a single entity, China is perfectly capable of winning a defensive war against US. The US will take massive casualties, and lose public support for the war, just like in Vietnam.

China can sustain massive casualties and the no public is going to have any say ever. They can just send in more men.

You guys underestimate China's ruthless control over its populace. The US army is a slave to the US civilians. the Chinese people are all slaves to their government, and their military.

>>32217914
>First:
how does losing a navy and buttload of men effect China in any way? neither of those, nor cyber warfare would win a war for the US.

Your second option doesn't really have an effect on China, and your third is improbable at the very least. Russia has nothing to gain from invading china. If anything they'd probably side with the Chinese.

>>32207096
Real talk, though, aren't they refitting old cold war tactical/theatre BMs with better targeting so they can be used as uninterceptable ASMs? *If* it does materialise, rip US naval aviation that tries to fuck around with them

>>32201801
but what about my porn?

>US tries to start shit
>China nukes their navy at sea
>US retreats with tail between legs, doesn't have the balls to commit to full nuclear war by attempting to nuke Chinese mainland
>China overtakes US in the world power department
>US becomes fractured and has another civil war just for the lolz

>>32210328
/tg/? what the fuck does Warhamautism have to do with anything?

>>32201193
cheap Chinese guns, boats, planes all break

i bet the us navy could make them surrender with out anyone seeing them. send over a few subs and boom. no more Chinese navy and they will never even see our ships.

>>32218163
>>32216654
>>32212036
>m-muh navy
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/how-sink-us-navy-carrier-china-turns-france-ideas-14605

>>32218146
>how does losing a Navy and a lot of people affect China

we'd decimate their entire Navy (which is a lot of people) and bomb the Chinese mainland, that would affect the Chinese

>cyber warfare won't win a war
Fully aware, but if you think the chinks won't wage cyber war against us and we gotta defend, you're wrong

>second option doesn't affect China

Wut
>US troops on their border
>Actual war since the last Korean war
>Actual ground fighting between US and Chinese forces

>Third is improbable, Russia has nothing to gain

>Territory
>Major economic rival out of the way
>Influence

All important things anon

>>32218157
One yuan has been deposited into your account

>>32218201
>that source

>>32218206
Sauces elsewhere, but twas the first one I found that said china sat up and listened

>>32209145
>the USSR was defeated by importing liberalism; now Russia/china are defeating the west by importing nationalism.

Pretty funny way of saying "making us stronger."

File: Pluto_run.jpg (19KB, 800x500px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 800x500px

>>32207658
Oh yeah, they should have made a few six packs of these missiles with updated stealth tech. Just sit on them in a mountainside near the coast and don't ever leak out the capability.

Once the enemy knew that over 100 nukes are about to be dropped on them, plus the crafts will just orbit the country to fry the rest, they should put up the white flag and quit.

Everything would go boom, although the entire scenario is ridiculous considering China gets nothing out of a war with us, and we get nothing out of a war with China. The cold war is over, nobody's afraid of the reds anymore. Our economies are too intertwined for them to risk war.

War really is, as we know it, dead. Sure, there'll always be tiny countries full of muzzies and shitskins getting kicked about, but real, big wars, those are a thing of the past, that kind of fighting is done with money and companies now, not guns and soldiers.

>>32218361
Trump just needs to start a sanction against China and start trading with the ruskie again, that would be great.

>>32201193
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3VqF2dXje0

File: China_generals_logo.gif (20KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 200x200px

amerika is already at war with china


it isnt going so well.

>>32204024
t.wong

>>32218361
But war never changes

Not usa vs chink post but

I think its tome for a leader like in advanced warfare cod.

Fucker turned bagdad into a great city and brought peace to the middle east.

I wanted to fight for him, dumb fuckin game said noooo i had to fight agenst him.

Nukes would have to be deployed early before china build up their nuclear capabilities.
Which would happen in a matter of a couple months.

>inb4 MUH USA would just Rekt em

That would take time and they have good anti air capabilities, they USA will lose more pilots than they can replace.

>>32203638
Actually shortages of consumer goods rocketed the US economy through the roof after WWII. Remember, we fight wars away from where our manufacturing and food is.

>>32218113
You're comparing two entirely different war scenarios. The USN just has to blockade china and then we wait for them to surrender. It would be a very limited ground game, if at all.

5/10 you got me to reply.

>>32218630
Whys everyone always talking about missle defence. No one has a good defence agenst icbm's. Patriot will work agenst small home made rockets but not the fast icbm's

>>32218113
if you cut china from sea shipping that's enough to blow them the fuck out of the game. it's over for them at that point.

>>32218645
well if us fights china will china stop all exports? or still export to india, europe and russia? that is two entirely different games.

What if the US sanctions China?

Congratulations, Trump just brings job back to the US by the millions.

>>32218694
Will they export through land route?

That will still kill their main sources of income and increase tranpostation cost/time.

>>32218658
GBI

>>32218913
George burio of investigations?

>>32218946
Ground
Based
Interceptor.

Used by the US to shoot down ICBMs

>>32201193
>America vs. X
At this point, America is so lopsidedly powerful we could likely win against most of the world combined.

File: 1474827260711.jpg (423KB, 1280x853px) Image search: [Google]

423KB, 1280x853px

>>32218954
Arnt those still in testing phase?

Also dont they have like a 70/30 falure rate?

>>32219131
Deployed in AK and CA.

On a one on one basis, sure. But the system isn't designed to stop 500 incoming ICBMs, its designed to stop a small handful.

The limiting factor is the number of GBIs. If you wanted to stop hundreds of them you could, you would just need more GBI's. The point is that you are incorrect that no one has a good defense against ICBMs.

>>32218113
http://www.china-food-security.org/data/maps/pop/pop_1_h.htm

the vast majority of what is important in china is along the coast

>>32219248
Can we agree that bombers with nukes is the worst delivery system? Theres no way in todays world bombers can get into enemy airspace to nuke em

>>32219858
Bombers fill a valuable role in that you can recall a bomber. A bomber can also be used to demonstrate resolve in a crisis, as the B-2 was used during a recent interaction with the DPRK.

During a full nuclear exchange, bomber aircraft would not be as vulnerable to air defenses as you might think do to SEAD efforts.

File: 1478803271947.jpg (36KB, 486x439px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 486x439px

>>32219880
I thought the b-2 was a joke, that it cant really be used for missions.

>>32218629
Holy shit.

>>32201193
China would be destroyed or completely overrun within a few months.

>>32219991
Why would you think that?

>>32204125
You do realize that any conflict with China would not involve a land invasion of the mainland right?

>>32208921
>>32209993
No joke, if a war with China over Taiwan looked likely, I'd definitely enlist. Defending a free and democratic nation from annexation is something I'd totally be willing to die for.

>>32220181
I heard the b2 needs like special climate controlled hangers and are too much of a pain to fly long missions with and need overhauled after every flight

>>32210556
So what if we go to war before One Belt, One Road is finished?

And I highly doubt that there would be no oil and goods transported via the South China Sea anymore, even if One Belt, One Road accomplished all of its goals.

>>32220316
You think those are legit concerns when flying nuclear missions?

>>32210833
>>32210905
>China is buying our pigs and soybeans
>That means the pigs and soybeans will be magically transported to China in the event of a war

>>32211746
>Must I remind you of Korea, Vietnam, and the middle east? (w/ the exception of Kuwait)

Again, there's no conceivable reason the US would actually invade China in the event of a war. The most likely causes of a Sino-US war would be Taiwan, the Diaoyu Islands, and the South China Sea. It would be a purely naval and air conflict, and once we sink the PLA Navy, we win cause China would no longer have force projection.

And before you mention North Korea, the Chinese are sick of them. China will do everything it can to prevent a war on the Korean Peninsula, but there's no way they'd go to war with the US and South Korea over North Korea.

>American aggresion unifies all of China and all chinese resist on a united front
>no EU country lends any help, due to the fact that Trump has disbanded Nato and told Europe to go fuck themselves
>being the aggressors, Americas reputation, global standing and credit rating is ruined
>first landing attempts on Chinese shores turns into a total disasters due to American arrogance
>eventually manage to gain a foothold but not after loosing many men, aircraft and ships
>American forces gets bogged down to a stalemate after initial successes
>American forces make surprisingly good progress across southern china, finding entire cities deserted
>American forces in Southern China are wiped out when Chinese high com blows up the 3 gorges dam
>after years of stalemate America is forced to withdraw with heavy losses
>ceasefire signed with China
>hawaii becomes neutral ground and international dateline becomes a DMZ
>Treaty states that the American navy is barred from the western pacific
>Chinese resettle into ghost cities
>China rebuilds, as they do every time
>KMT moves into fill the power vacuum left by the CCP
>America with its economy in ruins and unable to borrow more money breaks up like the USSR
>European and Japanese companies, eyeing up the massive market in China onces again flood the couintry with foreign investment
>China's military industry reverts back to a civilian one
>America experiences civil break down, with traumatised veterans leading armed insurrections in multiple states against the government due to lack of care caused by the faltering economy
>Texas secedes
>California seccedes so their tech companies can sell shit to China without interference from DC
>fat basement dwelling fucks on /k/ and /pol/ who cheered for the war and the deaths of men better than them, who were either too cowardly or physically unworthy to fight themselves finally live out their SHTF fantasies for a few days until they are killed by marauders whilst scavenging

>>32218157
>doesn't have the balls to commit to full nuclear war by attempting to nuke Chinese mainland

Why not? Our number of active nukes is 6x the number of your total nukes (both active & inactive). And have you forgotten that China has a no first use policy while the US doesn't?

>>32218658
So then why is China freaking out about THAAD on the Korean Peninsula?

>>32220427
You left out where the US nukes china due to imminent defeat of conventional forces.

>>32220427
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre

>>32220478

And China nukes America back.

Once again basement dwellers on /pol/ and /k/ die en mass and America ceases to exist. Same ending. Sad

>>32220489

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bataan_Death_March

>>32220493
See
>>32220443

You would face far more destruction than us.

File: impotentcommies.jpg (46KB, 800x546px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 800x546px

>>32201193

the Chinese would get massacred, it's why it'll never happen in a million years, even if the Chinese went insane and tried nuking the US they'd never land a missile. Plus ROC, ROK, Japan, Vietnam all HATE them. They know they can never actually stand up to America militarily, fucking wish they'd try though.

>>32220493
Doubtful as the US first strike will likely destroy China's nuclear arsenal.

>>32220493
>And China nukes America back.

with their 260 nukes? to America's 2,100? getting through the NMD?

File: Shut up and send me more pigs to kill.png (66KB, 745x487px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 745x487px

>>32220493

>>32220579
>>32220510

And what makes you think the missiles won't be prepped and ready for launch the instant a launch from America is detected, as opposed to the 2nd Artillery corps just sitting their with their thumbs up their asses

>>32220594
Because China has no launch detection.
Because China has no real warning capability against DT shots.
Because China keeps their nuclear weapons at a low state of readiness, and increasing that readiness during a crisis in likely to initiate the very exchange we are talking about as the US decided to hit Chinese weapons before they can be made ready to launch.

>>32220594
>And what makes you think the missiles won't be prepped and ready for launch the instant a launch from America is detected,

becuase lol liquid fuel, warheads seperate from missiles.

File: 1476256695726.png (651KB, 1281x894px) Image search: [Google]

651KB, 1281x894px

>>32210711
>>32208869
>UK
>Not jumping on the opportunity to retake Hong Kong
They'd probably be welcomed with open arms. Hong Kongers despise the mainland.

>>32204125
>They make half the steel in the world

they buy most of their iron ore from Australia

>>32220594
First off, how many of China's 260 nukes are active?

Second, what makes you so confident your nukes would get through our NMD? If the 2nd Artillery Corps is so prepared, why is China freaking out about THAAD?

>>32220690
The U.K. didn't do shit to secure Hong Kong's freedom prior to 1997, I doubt they will now.

>>32211697
>wanting adventure shit
I'll fucking pass.

>>32212917

oh they'll use all of that, we'll never know or see though

File: remove chink.jpg (64KB, 468x604px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 468x604px

>>32220294
This
I'd enlist immediately to remove the oppressive CCP and protect the democracies of Taiwan and HK, and hopefully liberate the mainland.

>>32220594

even if it was, it'd get destroyed in the air by missile defense

>>32208081
Basicly yes. We learned during the world wars that modern war is simply too expensive to maintain. By the end of WW2, the US basically owned the world's gold supply because we were basically supplying the whole effort.

>>32207559
>us doesn't invade but the Chinese infrastructure gets devastated to the stone age.

So they some how improve it?

File: 1479618040134.jpg (186KB, 319x776px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 319x776px

>>32204125
>Britain only succeeded in boxing China in at the sea

>opium war 1842
>chinese war junks completely destroyed by RN warships
>army and marines despite being outnumbered 10 to 1 defeat the chinese and capture their forts easily
>Qings forced to sign the Unequal Treaty of Nanking aboard HMS Cornwallis

>opium trade secured and expanded massively
>hong kong ceded
>china forced to pay massive crippling reparations with juice
>Century of Humiliation begins

>opium war 2
>literally the same story
>qings have to sign even more unfare treaties with Britain, America and France

"th-they only beat us at sea"

when the Royal Navy was at its height Britain was pumping China with enough Indian Opium it makes current afgan/shan warlords look like dimebaging fuccbois and the legal opium trade was only ended by pressure from white countries not china

>>32208921
Because they're fucking commies

>>32201193
It would be extremely painful

File: 1479766842652.jpg (31KB, 423x353px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 423x353px

>>32221957

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtfKTCW-2t0

File: China, China china china.jpg (53KB, 786x514px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 786x514px

>>32218688
>if you cut china from sea shipping that's enough to blow them the fuck out of the game. it's over for them at that point.
how come China didn't cease to exist during WW2 then?

China makes enough of its own shit to survive. If millions have to die from not enough food, so be it, they will have a slightly reduced population. big whoop. Millions have starved to death in china before.

>>32218654
likewise, blockade doesn't really do shit to China. They're large enough they can produce enough rice to sustain most of their population. Plus they get plenty of trade over land from Russia and europe etc. Wheat from Russia, rice from China, plenty to feed them.

>>32218202
>we'd decimate their entire Navy (which is a lot of people) and bomb the Chinese mainland, that would affect the Chinese
Like I said, neither of these would force China to give up. They 1.3 billion people. A few thousand or hundred thousand dead isn't an issue. Destroying their navy isn't going to magically make them surrender, the same way destroying most of the US navy in WW2 didn't make the US magically surrender. They are a large country with massive production.

A lot of you dont realize that modern war is about production. Whoever can outproduce the other will win a war of attrition. Destroying the Chinese navy and capturing their coast still wont knock them out of the war, as shown in the second sino-japanese war. They can retreat indefinitely into the mainland, the same way the soviets can retreat indefinitely eastwards every time someone from Europe invades them.
If you guys hadn't noticed, china recently overtook US in overall production.

Take a look at this comparison of China vs US:
http://www.indexmundi.com/factbook/compare/china.united-states

China has
>more people
>higher production
>more land dedicated to crops
>smaller coastline
>less AIDS (lol)
>Slightly lower GDP, but higher GPD growth rate - likely to overtake US in a few years.
>7 Times the labor force
>lower unemployment

>>32209958
So the British didn't lose the AmericanWar of Indepedence?

>>32223852
Compared to US, China also has:
>Roughly equal income, but spends less (so more in the bank - roughly 600 billion dollars)
>5% higher industrial growth
>imports slightly less (so US would be more affected by a blockade or by having its ports nuked)
>600 million strong military (as opposed to the 120 million strong US military)

Source again: http://www.indexmundi.com/factbook/compare/china.united-states
>CIA
Surely the CIA would know what they're talking about right?

So as we can see, China overtakes the US in pretty much every aspect except oil production, but if they cut their exports, they would still have plenty to wage a defensive land war.
Production is what wins wars, not wiping out navies or strategic bombing.

Also we have to remember that the US would have no reason to attack china beyond some punitive expedition. The US would have no chance of conquering China, they couldn't even "conquer" Vietnam by stamping out the VC. China is a much much larger kettle of fish, and the notion of peoples war (the Chinese version of guerrilla warfare) is deeply ingrained in the population.

Also we must remember that China is a communist state. The people will do whatever the government orders them to do, have done for 50+ years.
US is a democracy, with delicate ties all over the world. The US is controlled by its people, and its wars are terminated when public support wanes. Chinas people dont have a choice. They will fight to the death in their millions, until the US lose their nerve, over-extend their supplies, or support for the war fails.

Long story short, US cannot "win" a war against China. But they can take a shitload of casualties and potentially start a full-out nuclear war if they try.

>>32221766
But anon, you cannot destroy an ideology.

If the US really wanted to wipe out communism they would have tried long ago. They're either too scared of big bad China or just dont care anymore what kind of government is running other countries.

File: spin rol.png (43KB, 121x162px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 121x162px

>>32203505
TAIWAN ISN'T A COUNTRY REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>32201214
This. People are talking about the land, but the difference in airpower and having proper carriers is fucking abysmal. Americans would be on top of the Chinese of it was proper war (short of nuclear) in no time. When the gloves come off the burgers are fucking savage

>>32224223
>People are talking about the land
the land is all that matters with China. You can control their coast and destroy their navy and they will be fine, they'll wait you out and guerilla warfare you until you leave.

Source: second sino-japanese war
And that was before they were a single unified country with an incredibly powerful army - 6 times the size of the US.

Dont forget war comes down to production and manpower. China has the advantage in both, so US cannot win a war of attrition against them.

US also has to worry about public support for the war. China doesn't give a shit about that - the people will do whatever the government orders them to do.

>>32204125
China would starve like a motherfucker. States have the beauty of their plentiful fields. Midwest is bountiful, no burgers admit it but they can feed themselves. Even with the inflated populations on each coast. The real strength of america is through the middle.

>>32201193
Everyone has a really bad time.

>>32224269
Im ok with this. Take the goverment out of the coastal citys, sink their navy, and let the goverment rot in the rural highlands.

Once the US is done let the chinese goverment sort them out.

It will take 50+ years to rebuild, while china has no real way to strike and hold the US.

>>32224269
>China doesn't give a shit about that - the people will do whatever the government orders them to do.

Somebody missed out on the majority of chinese history.

Chinese people bend until they dont. Then the house comes tumbleing down.

File: love it.png (16KB, 1705x72px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 1705x72px

>>32213056
I fucking love classified things

>>32224269
You motherfuckers keep talking about manpower and production. If that held true, Russia would've rolled over everyone. And Russia has a far harsher land to invade. Other than the godawful guerilla warfare that would ensue, the US would dominate. Navy wouldn't be effective. Carriers launch planes. Carriers launch marines. A navy can intercept and blockade. Nobody would fight because we're in the age of trade.

>>32224273
>States have the beauty of their plentiful fields
China has more land dedicated to food crops that the US.
http://www.indexmundi.com/factbook/compare/china.united-states

China pretty much out does the US in every way.

>>32224301
I guess US have always been ok with taking massive casualties, holding a place for a few years for no reason, then giving up and going home.

>>32224309
During a war the people will easily understand hardship. The Chinese government has forced the people to do what it wants for 60+ years, a war will only strengthen than control.

>tumbleing
I bet many Chinese have better English than you... how did you fail that when we have spell check in the reply boxes?

>>32224390
>Only the last 60 years matter in chinese history

How to spot a chicom.

>>32224380
>Russia would've rolled over everyone. And Russia has a far harsher land to invade
two different elements there. Yes Russia is hard to invade, but they're also smart. They don't usually go around conspicuously placing troops in places and waging "global war" like the US. they keep their cards close to their chest.
Afghanistan in the 70s is probably the only major exception, but the leadership was pretty dumb at that stage: dimentia-laden brezhnev.
Russia tend to get involved in plainclothes or by support like in Ukraine recently. There are no "Russian troops" just "Russian loyalists" are they actual Russian troops? no one really cares to prove it.

China also has some climactic extremes, can be incredibly harsh.

>Carriers launch planes
planes get shot down

>Carriers launch marines
thats not how carriers work lol

>A navy can intercept and blockade.
like I've said controlling the sea around China doesn't really do dick. you're just asking to get nuked off-shore

>>32224390
>for no reason

The reason is simple. Smash china back 50 years. China cant touch the US, thus any war is a net loss for them.

File: Screenshot_2015-12-13-21-29-25.jpg (814KB, 1440x821px) Image search: [Google]

814KB, 1440x821px

>>32201193
Something like this

>>32224444
Nukes lead to nukes, and the US has alot more.

Saying the US wont retaliate to nukes by slinging nukes shows a gross misunderstanding of america.

It would be extremely painful.

For Yu.

>>32224434
Before 1950, China was split into 2 or more factions - largely the Nationalists under Jiang Kai-Shek - who did most of the fighting against Japan, and the Communists under Mao. Its only in the last 60 years they've been united under a single leadership, making them even more powerful and focused than they were during the second Sino-Japanese war.

The US wouldn't get as far as the Japanese did during WW2. China has learned a lot about warfare since then, and has much, much better recon. They would actually see an amphibious landing force coming this time, instead of being surprised by Japanese forces landing north of Shanghai like in 1937.

>>32224444
>thats not how carriers work lol

LOL +1 LIEK UPBOAT!

Get out kid.

>>32203505
Their 4 Marine regiments would land on Taiwan after the largest artillery and missile barrage ever witnessed by man was carried out.
Under complete naval and air dominance as the US carriers would be kept at a distance under the threat of AShM spam.
Followed by regular PLA troops being boated over.

China would take Taiwan.


Question is, would America take it back?

File: chinese buisness.png (946KB, 1400x5552px) Image search: [Google]

946KB, 1400x5552px

>>32204125
>they make half the steel in the world
Then the rest of the world has the quality steel

>>32224499
>A2/AD
>working

Hope you like torpedos, friendo.

>>32224464
I think if the Chinese nuked some US warships off their coast in defense, the US wouldn't launch nukes at the Chinese mainland. There's a reason no one has nuked cities since WW2, it would lead to mutual destruction, and everyone knows they dont want that. Neither China nor the US would start that fight imo.

It may not be nukes the Chinese use, but surely plenty of Surface missiles to keep the US navy busy, and a pretty healthy IADS to keep US aircraft for a good couple of months before they can deal with it.

>>32224449
I dont think you could really "smash China back 50 years" without nuking the whole place, with would guarantee retaliatory nukes. China is pretty well equipped to deal with an invasion. The US isn't going to gain anything from an attack, except a bunch of casualties and some lost equipment. Id be surprised if they can even get a foothold on the coast.

>The US will never control as much of China as Japan did in WW2
Its the truth

>>32224464
How do you know how many nukes China has? Serious question.

>>32224473
>china got better at war

Cant even spend two weeks underground without needing state funded whores brought in.

>>32224536
>I think if the Chinese nuked some US warships off their coast in defense, the US wouldn't launch nukes at the Chinese mainland.

You are mistaken.

>it would lead to mutual destruction

China practices minimum deterrence, not mutual destruction.

Unfuck yourself.

>>32224390
And China also has to feed that population. And the states could've won ever time they went to battle. Vietnam was with 19 year old conscripts and experimental weapons, while HOLDING a position. Fucking asians. If you could've taken over the world, you already would have done so. The only thing asians hate more than foreigners is other asians. You'll sell each other out for a penny. And this is a westerner saying this. Kings of commerce.
You have to be an asian american of some sort to nitpick over a grammatical error and feel superior when you've given no counter argument of any weight.

>>32224536
There is nothing of value beyond the coastal citys.

There is zero reason to invade.

>with would guarantee retaliatory nukes.

Except they are all liquid fueled.

>>32224539
Serious answer: dozens of arms control groups, both private and otherwise.

>>32224444
The climatic extremes are more to do with the mountains and desert folk in the Gobi.
And carriers carry more than just planes. And planes can do a lot more damage than you think. Not to mention UAVs, which Obongo fucking loved btw

>>32224594
>If you could've taken over the world, you already would have done so
same with US

I'm not Asian if that helps.

>>32224597
exactly.

>>32224625
How do they know?

File: 1478586795625.jpg (193KB, 600x739px) Image search: [Google]

193KB, 600x739px

>>32220664

>no strategic warning
>no launch on warning
>no way to stop a SSBN slinging DT tridents destroying their missile fields mid-fuelling
>no way to stop the US from saying for every DF-5 you fire at CONUS we will fire twice as many back

why do I feel like speaking the information out loud would cause Curtis LeMay to raise from his grave at the prospect of winning a nuclear war against commies

>>32224663
planes still have to get past the IADS. It will take them a few months even without the presence of the Chinese air force.

China actually has a larger fleet strength, just less carriers which are essentially an obsolete item anyway.

China has an equivalent number of subs, which would wreck a US naval invasion force.

>>32224704
>DF-5

whoops meant DF-31

>>32224686
Centrifuge outputs, platforms in use (x many tels and missiles, etc) weapons facilities.

The real problem is they keep warheads seperate from missiles after a chinese general in charge of the nukes almost decided he was president now.

>>32224723
>China actually has a larger fleet strength, just less carriers which are essentially an obsolete item anyway.

Wew laddy. The US has more tonnage in cruisers and destoryers than the entire PLA navy.

I guess the 100+ one gun wonder subchasers, and the 100 gunboats are more relevent than carriers.

>>32224723
Those subs are, for the vast majority, exceedingly loud.

File: 1468497668128.gif (27KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 200x200px

>>32208001
>a world where cazadores exist
PASS

>>32224723
>just less carriers which are essentially an obsolete item anyway.
This post just screams 'sour grapes'.

>>32224723
China does not have a larger flee strength, what the fuck are you smokeing? Damn near half of the PLAN is missile boats and subchasers. The other half is frigates and corvettes, along with LSTs and other support ships.

Only 27 destoryers, and out of that only 6 are truly modern (52D).

Zero cruisers. One 2nd hand Ukrainian carrier.

Oh, and the US is currently putting out more warship tonnage a year than the chinese.

>>32210444
thats exactly what I want.

I want him to say the bullshit on his mind that we all feel and then change his mind if things change.

>>32223852
>China
>Cropland

K E K

most of their food is imported and they're running into the very real problem of less and less crop land

>more people
we have more bombs
>more production
we have more bombs
>smaller coastline
negated when we're at their doorstep

All Hail God Emperor Trump!

Well hopefully we get 3 years to add a couple more carriers.

First you get huge amount to of Data network disruption. Go find your old Analog antenna using 40" Sony trinatron, and grab your radio. We will shut bow. The global hubs. Networks for retail are done for at least 72 hours. Domestic agents will hack the fuck out of the USA. But that's ok. We are at war. The military is ready. Satellite networks, cell service etc, say goodbye. Rockets are flyin in space and communication is first. The reality is Rissia will probably partner w China, and bring in any s American partners they can. Shits blowing up in Africa too. It will be WW3. NATO and Russia get into it proper. They wanted to after the CCCP abuse of the eastern block countries. As far as China goes they are fucked. We underreport Drone strength. We have more effective air assets. In a short amount of time the first steps, air/water superiority is achieved. Then we settle in and starve out and destroy Chinese infrastructure. Hundreds of millions will die. India hopefully crushes the Pakis. Khasakstahn forces will keep China busy. The Moderate Islamists are already causing problems. China is ready to break, just needs a push. Nuke conflict won't come until the USA gets tired and like we did last time, fighting Japan, and drop a couple. Maybe Moscow and Shanghai. define the ultimatum. Offer terms. Our missile defense is solid. We can afford a loss or two for cities. But the best way to unite the KKK and a black panther, drop em in the nam. You think we'd go to civil war because Chinese goods were not an shelves at Walmart? That's a retarded misunderstanding of core US values.

We have a military that is so ready to unleash full warfare it's insane. Afghanistan, Iraq. They just keep us frosty, warmed up. They are like Poland for Germany. A nice warmup with Only 1pct of gdp dedicated to the conflict.

>>32223915
I know you're a retard who doesn't read books, but Britain actually got their asses kicked out of America in Yorktown 1781, where the British army surrendered, effectively ending the war.

America occupied Iraq for nine years and decided to leave for a variety of reasons, none of them including suffering defeat.

>>32218119
Lmao
>what are missiles
>What are carriers
>What is trade denial
>What are rivers

>>32205521
Preferibly after a large fleet is complete and before its crewed, for maximum morale damage.

>>32220409
This, the most infantry level action we'd see is Marines/Army taking/garrisoning the artificial islands china controls and maybe some raids on coastal facilities. As for actual invasion/occupation of the mainland, no fucking way the nation is to big and the chinks would just fall back into the less accessible areas to draw out the conflict Vietnam style. the most likely course of action would be to reck the navy and air force, bomb the fuck out of the infrastructure/PLA assets maybe some amphibious raids to fuck with the ports and occupy Hong Kong so they can become an independent state, since they're cool as shit.

>>32218201
USN: 10 CVNs plus another 34 ships that would in any other navy be considered a carrier.
PLAN: 9 SSNs and a further 5 SSBNs.

Even if every single PLAN nuke sub takes out a Carrier or Assault Ship, they would still lose the war at sea.

>>32208001
Honestly, fallout wouldn't work from a realistic standpoint because the general response to a basketball sized horsefly would be to immediately commit suicide because you refuse to deal with that bullshit

>>32224559
wait what?

File: china wall.jpg (60KB, 639x426px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 639x426px

>>32201193
Not good, how can we compete with this?!

>>32220316
It didn't stop them blitzing the Libyan air defenses in 2011.

File: dong-peng-21d[1].jpg (55KB, 490x314px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 490x314px

>>32201193
>>32201214
>>32201216
>>32203615
>>32203691
>>32203707
>>32204129
>>32204644
DF-21D
F
-
2
1
D

I can't be arsed to read the rest of the thread, but America would be totally fine

China is a paper tiger.
Not because of its infrastructure or falsified numbers, it's because the people are fundamentally out for themselves

It takes a special type of person to give up their life to die for others
The Chinese aren't like that.
They look out for themselves primarily and then their family. Then everyone else can fucking die

There's a reason why you can see videos of families being eaten by fucking escalators
Because the people who install them steal anything valuable and then bribe the inspectors to say it's ok

The Chinese are fucking cheats. It's in their culture for hundreds of years

If proper war to ever break out, half their rounds and shells would have no gunpowder because the workers who made them stole it in the factory and either tried to sell it or used it at home as fuel.

The Chinese are scum people

>>32220427
I want your job, who do I call as the Ministry of Information?

>>32201193
Simple.

US: 6950 nuclear warheads in active service

PROC : 260—500 warheads in service
What do you think?

Top kek advantage: most of ours are submarine based and bomber (b1 b2 b52) based. That means low short warning time not the 30 minutes you get with icbms. The f 35 can carry certain variants so too can other carrier based aircraft.


China would get some bombs through but very very few maybe like 10 since our ABMS are very high end and since of their warheads only maybe 100 have carrier rockets that can reach America. China is far behind in the nuclear world.
Russia on the other hand.....

>>32224499
How dose the PLA their guys past the ROCN? Taiwan has a far more advanced navy than people tend to credit it with.

>>32227139
Kek

>>32224723
>China has an equivalent number of subs

China: 14 Nuclear subs of all types, plus 57ish SSKs (total of 71)
US: 69 nuclear subs of all types

Technically true, but highly misleading statement since an SSN is a lot better combatent than an SSK, and its not like very many (if any) of those SSKs have advanced AIP systems like the hottest subs fresh out of the German/Japanese shipyard do.

If an enemy force blew up the Three Gorges Dam, how would that affect China?

>>32201193
America would be swarmed under by 500 million chinks 16-50 that would beat everyone to death with sticks.

What I would find most interesting is that if China had a aggressive war against the US (Which would lead to all of the US's Allies coming into the war and India probably would join up just to fuck up China) is what would happen to the TONS of Chinese nationals going to US Unis?

Would we see internment camps part 2?

Would the US confiscate all Chinese investments in the US? I mean there are a lot in the real estate sector and more

And would the US just mark all debts owned by China as null and void?

>>32210808
>US just confiscate the companies from their enemies

Not too hard to understand

>>32212042
His policy on china is one place that I agree with him on

I wish that he, and Hillary if she won, understood the importance of TPP in reigning in China in Asia though...

>>32227139
I like that wall ,bigly!

>>32203505
I kek'd at multiple points.

>>32210808
>China owns the companies that supply most of the US with food
Where do you think our food comes from? Any answer other than the US mid-west is wrong btw.

>>32211746
>all wars must be total war scenarios
>there has apparently never been a war between 2 nations that has had limited political objectives/denied that are achieved in a reasonable timeframe
Read On War nigga.

>>32213254
It's the difference of fighting the people and fighting the fighters. Fighting the people is slow, prolonged, and most likely neither side takes a victory home. Fighting the fight is quick, brutal, and a clear victory

File: 1465521710600.png (262KB, 446x456px) Image search: [Google]

262KB, 446x456px

>>32223971
>wiping out navies doesn't win wars
I just can't take you seriously.

>>32201193
Chinese economy would die out fast. They might be able to fight militarily for a while but the moment they go to war with the US the Chinese will see businesses that once happily used them for labor fleeing in droves. It would not be a good idea at all to stay in business with China under those circumstances. The US debts with China would also immediately "vanish". You cannot maintain open war with a legit superpower without a massive economy to back it up. Couple that with widespread targeting of infrastructure and factories and it only gets worse from there.

The other countries out there are either not in any way large enough to make up losing US business or will be standing shoulder to shoulder with US troops preparing to push China's shit in. The Japanese and other allies in the region might suffer in the initial days before the Chinese economy fully tanks. On the bright side the Japs might actually get their formal military back instead of merely maintaining an SDF as a result of it. Taiwan would get fucked hard.

I wouldn't count on Russia jumping in to save the Chinese. Last thing they want is a hot war with the US. Dick waving and proxy wars? Sure, why not? But a direct war with the US is the worst thing that could possibly happen to Russia short of a massive natural disaster. Honestly, the Russians probably want to be on friendlier terms with us, especially now that we're going to actually have a president who doesn't want to keep up ye olde cold war attitudes towards them.

The Norks might jump in but all we'd have to do for most of them is give them a hot meal. Korea would probably end up united again under the Seoul control of what is formerly known as "South Korea".

I'd be willing to bet that at first opportunity Hong Kong would straight up invite the allied forces to land there. From what I understand Hong Kong not so secretly hates being back in Chinese hands. Could be misremembering past articles though.

>>32205514
What you dont realize is that a majority of the raw materials we consume come from China.

Your electronics and their components? China.

Use any plastic items? China

Use any American made plastic/steel items? Tooling made in China

Electronics, equipment, materials, packaging for everything American made? China


>>32206363
They get their oil from Africa and Russia

>>32218645
This was because we set up supply chain and essentially trained an entire generation of people to work in a factory. If we went to war today, we don't need raw labor. What we do need is raw materials which come from CHINA.

If the argument for all of this is to move manufacturing to the USA, guess what we can still build it but we don't have the supply chain to deal with a massive shortage of Chinese goods. Plus you need materials from everyones favorite country, China.

>>32218726
Congrats, you bring back a bunch of low paying, low skilled jobs that no one wants. Plus 90% jobs would be automated when they hit American shores.

And now that we have all this labor thats going to get automated in America, the goods are even more expensive so now nobody can buy shit. But if you invest heavily into Automation, you make a lot of money.

You guys got fucking conned

>>32228641
>China makes all your shit, you couldn't live without us
>America would just automate all of that production anyways and you wouldn't have jobs you already don't have
Well, which one is it Xin Ping?

>>32228675
What? What are you trying to say?

>>32203454
>only a 100 million americunts vs a billion chinks
Try 318.9 million vs 1.357 billion with around 1.8% that being of Ethnic groups that they simply will not do recruitment from.

>they could just zerg rush tanks

They have about 6500 tanks in service, of which around 2700 are very outdated. As in 105mm outdated. The US army has 8,848 Abrams in active service plus 3500 in storage.

>>32228675
Given our labor laws, both.

>>32228686
Jesus fucking Christ Mulan, try and keep up here if you're going to try and shit post.

You said:
>What you dont realize is that a majority of the raw materials we consume come from China.

>Your electronics and their components? China.

>Use any plastic items? China

>Use any American made plastic/steel items? Tooling made in China

>Electronics, equipment, materials, packaging for everything American made? China

And then said that the US could just automate all of that shit anyways at the end of your post.

So, which is it? Either you make all our shit and we need you, or we could just automate it all and produce it domestically? It doesn't fucking matter that those jobs are automated, because we don't have those jobs domestically anyways and as we all know, you can't take away what you already don't have.

>>32228641
>companies will still be able to sell just as much if they eliminate consumers
This is why I don't listen to economists

>>32228709
I had to ask because your question is fucking retarded.

America could automate its manufacturing if it came back to the States. But here's the kicker dipshit, we still need MATERIALS to fabricate, which we buy from CHINA


So we still buy materials from China to have them fabricated and assembled in the USA. But now the goods cost more because they're no longer cheaply made in China, they're more expensive in America since we dont have the supply chain to make it cheaply and also the large capital cost to automate.

But now since everything is more expensive due to a higher capital cost to create them and we haven't created any new jobs for people to earn money, everyones purchasing power goes down. So you literally gain nothing ,except the person who owns the automated factories.

I heard an anecdote where I work (manufacturing) about why Apple works in China. Apparently to launch the manufacturing phase of the iPhone 6 S, they needed to get about 1800 manufacturing engineers in 1.5 weeks to develop the tooling and process to create the phones. They did it. can you imagine finding 1800 manufacturing engineers in a 10 days in America?


>>32228747
>things dont get expensive ever
This is why I don't listen to people who dont understand economics

>>32228862
Things are expensive because people are willing to buy them. If no one is willing or able to buy consumer products because they can't find work, prices will either be forced to fall or companies selling these products will go under

>>32228913
Thank you for ECON 101. The point is that you're hurting your economy when you unnecessarily raise the price of everything for 0 reason. Things can be produced at an overpriced scenario but not an under priced one.

How are you supposed to sell products to people if their cost to produce is more than people are willing (able) to pay for it? You don't, you go out of business until someone can do it cheaper. If no one can, then there is 0 incentive to produce it. Which results in an economy where a majority of consumers can't afford goods, and business collapse because they can't sell goods. Which results in a shitty economy.

Yes?

File: 1477420644096.png (380KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 640x360px

>>32220316
>>32227149
We've been using B-2s for quite a while now and they're doing well - the alleged problems with durability and maintenance turned out to be utter bullshit. The only problem they are having is Pic Related: lack of targets that are actually worth bombing.

>>32228973
>How are you supposed to sell products to people if their cost to produce is more than people are willing (able) to pay for it?
Exactly. If workers are eliminated, consumers are eliminated, so the idea that everything will be automated is a farce, because sales would be nonexistent

Biological warfare would work very well against China.

>>32207658
What if you had a modified version of the missiles to simply spray VX over the coastal regions of China? I'd think that'd do even more damage.

>>32229224
Anthrax is scary effective.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Vegetarian

>>32201193
America would get its shit pushed in pretty hard. We've seen wars where the unskilled massed go up against the skilled few.

>>32227194
>morals matter in war