If a full scale war between US and China took off, would the

>>34556196
No
no
no

>>34556217
>no
wrong

Everything else on point though.

>>34556196
Few NATO countries have the force projection capabilities to actively participate in the conflict. However they would likely take steps against the Chinese economically. Russia, if they were smart, would do nothing but take advantage of the temporary increase in oil prices and try and build up their financial reserves (which are in terrible shape) and try and build up their economy. It would be a bad move to try and push into Eastern Europe as most European armies would be in a higher state of readiness and Russia lacks the funds necessary to take part in a prolonged conflict. US would likely not require conscription as economic factors would force China, or both sides to the table. War would most effect China, Taiwan, Republic of Korea, DPRK (if they participate), and Japan.

>>34556196
>Would NATO even fucking do shit?

Article V requires an attack in North America or Europe before it can be invoked.

>>34556196

>would the US start to require conscription again?

Not unless there arent enough people volunteering to make up for losses/increasing the general size of the armed forces. I'd wager that any war against China involving the US has a realy good casus beli and thus, no Vietnam'esque problems with recruiting would take place.

>Would Russia hop in or take advantage of opening opportunities?

I dont think the Russians would directly interfere but would definitely keep the gas/oil flow, flowing and provide intel and political support through the UN. I wouldnt be surprised if it took this opportunity to invade Ukraine and possibly even occupy parts of the Baltic countries wich have a Russian majority and do a Crimea.

>>34556196
belligerents:
>the entire PLA
>US Navy's Pacific fleet

Besides the use of US bases in Japan and worst korea there would be no need for anyone else's assistance. And seeing as Russia's only aircraft carrier will be under repairs for "the next three years" they really wouldn't be any threat to anyone anyways

>>34556196
/k/ has such a poor understanding of geopolitics. A war between the US and China won't be isolated to those two countries. The major players in these new war would be: the US, China, and Russia.

It will also involve the Middle East and Africa, but those areas of conflict will be because of the transport routes and economic markets that they provide and less about their geopolitical involvement.

NATO will be forced to participate because of Russia's involvement.

>idiots on /k/ really think Russia would allow the US to invade a country that they share a border with

>>34556597
>implying Russia wouldn't take advantage of another world war by benefiting off scared nations needing arms, oil, supplies, etc.
>implying Russia wouldn't do everything in the world it could to lay low and build its economy as two nations start to deplete their resources
>implying koreas and japan wouldn't get involved in such a large scale operation
>implying europe doesn't already have its hands filled with refugee problems
>implying all of this wouldn't just be political dick swinging and there would be the invasion of any country

In a US vs. China war, nobody is getting invaded. Occupying territory isn't beneficial in situations like this.

>>34556597
>/k/ has such a poor understanding of geopolitics
Then tell us
>NATO will be forced to participate because of Russia's involvement.
Confirmed for not knowing how NATO works, overseas bases, colonial holdings, territories and anything not in North America, Europe or the North Atlantic is automatically are exempt from Article 5. One of the reason France left is because the US refused to send troops during their war in Algeria.
Also, if Alaska or Hawaii were to be attacked Article 5 would not apply, as they were colonial territories before when the NATO charter was signed.
>It will also involve the Middle East and Africa
As US staging areas for the ME and operational weapon system test range against unsupported Chinese units in or around Africa
>NATO will be forced to participate because of Russia's involvement.
What could Russia do? They can't intervene militarily as their Pacific Fleet and Far East armies are the worst equipped and least modernized of their entire armed forces.

>/k/ has such a poor understanding of geopolitics
No, you do and the embarrassing thing is it really doesn't take much to educate yourself on this topic.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1501121472/_encoding=UTF8?coliid=I2R0ZIEYO9T3NV&colid=2VO1FKTZI83XX
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1612003885/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o05_s01?ie=UTF8&psc=1
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0997309202/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o09_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0985455454/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/147281908X/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s01?ie=UTF8&psc=1
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0985455403/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0985455489/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o01_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

>>34556643
That's nice but the OP said "full scale war" and in that situation, it requires an invasion.

>>34556744
>US invading China
Logistical challenge doesn't even begin to describe it
>China invades US
It turns into a one-sided Turkey shoot that sees literally every soldier sent by the Chinese shot in the oceans by the Yanks.

>>34556770
>Logistical challenge doesn't even begin to describe it
You're fucking retarded if you don't think US for could to go with the China and invasion for viability of the option for no shit and the war would not continue.

File: wen a nigga say some next level dumb shit.gif (1MB, 370x288px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 370x288px

>>34556804
>You're fucking retarded if you don't think US for could to go with the China and invasion for viability of the option for no shit and the war would not continue.

My nigga, what language is you speaking doe?

File: 1492217992828.png (659KB, 1055x808px) Image search: [Google]

659KB, 1055x808px

>>34556804
>You're fucking retarded if you don't think US for could to go with the China and invasion for viability of the option for no shit and the war would not continue.
what?

>>34556732
>linking me amazon gibberish

It's an impossible scenario because a full scale war between the US and China will never happen. Both countries are economically tied through huge corporate investments. What's possible is a cold war between these two countries where they compete in soft power and territorial influence of developing countries. The latter relates to market dominance and supporting their economic interests.

> for not knowing how NATO works, overseas bases, colonial holdings, territories and anything not in

Funny. I never mentioned any of that gibberish that you are randomly talking about. Also, justification for their support doesn't matter because these countries will participate in this "full scale" impossible war because it will be demanded of them.

>>34556770
>>34556804
more dumb gibberish. it's like you have no understanding of how industry and war-effort are related.

File: 1498700472499.gif (208KB, 323x221px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 323x221px

>>34556872

>>34556872
>>linking me amazon gibberish
Actually I'm linking you stuff that If you read, you'd be able to carry out a thoughtful discussion on the topic. Go ahead and blow it off and wallow in ignorance.
>It's an impossible scenario because a full scale war between the US and China will never happen. Both countries are economically tied through huge corporate investments. What's possible is a cold war between these two countries where they compete in soft power and territorial influence of developing countries. The latter relates to market dominance and supporting their economic interests.
Congratulations for confirming not only what everybody already knows, but what's currently happening right now.
>I never mentioned any of that gibberish that you are randomly talking about.
See >>34556597
>NATO will be forced to participate because of Russia's involvement.
You brought up NATO and I told you why the US couldn't call on them to support he war effort legally.
>these countries will participate in this "full scale" impossible war because it will be demanded of them.
By the time a SAG arrives from Europe the war might be over, not to mention be political suicide for European politicians to pitch the thought of a US centered conflict against a peer adversary a world away from Europe. We'd be on our own, which is the reason the US has been strengthening ties with allies in the region and Australia, so we have support in case of war.
>more dumb gibberish. it's like you have no understanding of how industry and war-effort are related.
good luck pumping out that equipment fast enough. It's not 1943, bombers are not coming off the production lines every 25 minutes.

>>34556196
Full scale wars don't happen when we have nukes.

>>34556949
/thread

File: 1464737709373.gif (1001KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

1001KB, 640x480px

>>34556949
>>34556961
>replying to yourself

File: 1499668003707.gif (3MB, 252x263px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 252x263px

>>34556872

File: 1500161379925.jpg (88KB, 480x640px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 480x640px

>>34556196
ITT people buying into the delusion that Russia and China are even a threat to US let alone NATO.

Russia has no economy to back up any actual war that requires more than a few months. Can't project force worth of shit. Coast line so long impossible to defend, and no navy worthy of note.

China can't even fucking make their own engine for their newest generation fighter. No navy worthy of note.

America now is Rome at its peak. Just like Rome back then, nothing can challenge US if there's an actual war.

Unless Russia and China wants to go all suicide pack and just nuke the the entire earth. There's no chance for them to win any conventional war.

For fucks sake, US has RAILGUN now, rail fucking gun. When war breaks out that shit's going to get accelerated in deployment and R&D. Right now it's almost mach 10 speed projectile that can go up to almost mach 20. There's literally nothing Russia and China has that can even goes remotely on par with railguns. Fucking, US can just build a giant railgun on the coast of california and just pound both china and russia into dust, zero counters.

Anyone that thinks Russia or China or even both combined can challenge US is just stupid. So the fuck what China has 1.4 billion people, are they going to swim to north america?

File: 1487515457085.png (2MB, 856x1202px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 856x1202px

>>34557007

lmao if you think his reply is too long then your attention span is far too short.

>>34556217
Why do you think the US wouldn't draft? That's ridiculous, of course they would.

>>34557046
Your attention span is too short for you to count all the long dicks that your mom takes per night.

>>34557046
lol this fag replied

>>34557078

xD

>>34557088

>I-it was b-bait

Yeah right...

>>34557066
Because any war in which we sustain that amount of causalities would be so unpopular, the party the suggests a continuation of the fighting would be assured to never hold high office again. Besides, it takes months to properly train and equip a soldier in even the shortest pipeline.

People just wouldn't stand for it if we couldn't fight and win the war with what we have now.

Doubly so with the advent of social media, the war would be broadcast in it's full horror in 4k.

>>34556744
>That's nice but the OP said "full scale war" and in that situation, it requires an invasion.

Full scale war =/= "invasion". All that's needed is whatever it takes to bring the other side to the table. Actually invading China would be counterproductive to the US war effort.

Actually trying to invade the US would be hilariously catastrophic for the PLA(x).

>>34556196
Nukes or nothing, china's sea lift is shit so we really only have to worry about Korea and Japan in an unlikely conventional engagement. Nobody would be cool with conscription to protect them.