First post. Practice makes perfect.
Great screen name... hate to bum you out but this one is already posted:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1527028/posts
They're absolutely right. If the war isn't won by our military in a month, our politicians will step in and surrender.
Telling China that they will win a war assures us that they'll start one. No one starts a war they think they'll lose.
The hell kind of scenerio is that???? When and why would we war with China?
With the Democrats and the Left Wing Media in charge of propaganda--- we'd lose to France.
Talk about a bunch of people making assumptions. As if we'd fight that war the way we fought Iraq.
Additionally, if the causes belli were an invasion of Taiwan, I believe it would go nuclear pretty quickly.
China couldn't handle two carrier battle groups. As for occupying China, then way we are occupying Iraq, I'm not sure that would be necessary. First, China has plenty of internal pressures to deal with already. Tibet would fall away quickly. Manchuria would as well. There are almost a dozen different ethnic geographies in China that would love self government over Beijing and Communism.
The Chinese aren't idiot Muslims either. They aren't stuck in the seventh century, and what's even more important - Asians were the original free enterprisers. They are capitalists from the womb. Given support from their neighbors, the average Chinese citizen wants to make money. All put our all volunteer force against their conscripts any day.
The REAL question on the table is, can the US military prevail against the US mainstream media establishment?
Though it is a little early to call Bush's visit a failure, he clearly got bitch slapped by the Chinese and comes home empty handed on piracy, trade, and currency issues.
Traiditional All Out War Vs. China?? That would be fricken WW3! If that was the Case, and nukes werent used for some odd reason, the US would still win. China would be allied with N.Korea, Iran, Syria, maybe Pakistan, and some other arab losers, no way in hell would they win in Convential Warfare.
"The overwhelming assessment by Asian officials, diplomats and analysts is that the U.S. military simply cannot defeat China."
This assessment made clear by the keystone of the Asian foreign policy establisment---the governer of Tokyo! In other words, a completely local official.
This article is bushwah.
We couldn't defeat the Chinese?
Well, not if we fought on their terms door-to-door, a war of attrition.
But if we fought on our terms, if we were fortunate enought o have a leader like, say, Geogre Dubya, then,
"BOOM" and the war would be instantly in its last stages...
This article is a load of nonsense. Let me make a couple points:
1) The US would likely possess total air and naval superiority in any conflict with China. While China has upgraded its both sub fleet and anti ship missiles, it would be greatly outclassed in going head to head with the US. This will likely not change meaningfully for at least 20 years.
2) The US would not likely fight China in large scale land battles. The likeliest possibility would be a battle for Taiwan. Crossing a body of water is a very difficult thing to do (stopping power of water) and when you are facing a modern military (Taiwain) backed by the only superpower in the world's naval and air forces it becomes even more difficult.
3) Comparing Iraq to even an unlikely large scale land war with the US is silly. First, Iraq needs to be viewed in two stages - a classic war and a counter-insurgency. The US military easily defeated the Iraqi regular forces. In the insurgency, the US military has defeated any enemy coming at them with the exception of IEDs. Clearly, the counter-insurgency phase does not compare with anything involving China. In a land battle against Chinese regular forces, US power would used in its optimum manner. Chinese armor would be cut to pieces, precision target munitions and other conventional weapons (AC-130, Daisy cutters etc) would handle wave attacks much better than in Korea. With satellite communications, the US can destroy anything that clumps. Massed infantry would likely be no exception. Also, unless fighting on the Asian mainland, China would not be able to transport sufficient quantities of men and munitions to fight the US.
4) The silly article in question also presupposes China would change its grand strategy and undertake a highly risky action against the US. China, short of starting a major war with the US, is assured of defense. The Chinese have proven willing to let their economy grow and use positive and negative inducements to sway states in the region and around the globe.
5) The article also suggests China would be willing to use nuclear weapons against the United States early in any conflict. The history of the nuclear era suggests this is really unlikely. If they did act in this way, it would not be rational in the limited sense this word is used in international relations. China's small(er) arsenal could hurt the US badly, but the US could literally push China back to the stoneage. Our missiles could saturate every city in China within 18 minutes of any Chinese launch. China's economic development is concentrated in a handful of cities - what happens with those gone?
This is a joke?
We have a kill rate of 25 to 1, but we're incompetent?
Hmmmmm.
We have a blooded veteran armed forces and the Chicoms haven't fought a serious war with ARMED opponents since 1949, but we're incompetent?
They are begging, borrowing and stealing all of American military hardware they can get, but we're incompetent.
Things that make you go, "Huh?"
>>After 2,000 casualties, he said, the U.S. military would be forced to withdraw. <<
It's called the murtha Doctrine.
You should be proud of yourself mr. murtha.
Although I really don't want to find out if I'm right, I disagree. America is the only country, in my opinion, that could actually win a war against the Chinese. I kind of doubt they want to test my theory.
I don't think it will be about "defeating" the Chi-Coms, rather than repelling an invasion of Taiwan. It'll be a high-tech battle, and they will lose.
I believe "Tokyo Governor Shintaro Ishihara" is also former Prime Minister Shintaro Ishihara. He was forced out as Prime Minister (don't remember the details, but I believe there was a hint of some sort of scandal). Bottom line - he's been demoted and does not speak for the Japanese national government. This is about equivalent to the Mayor of San Francisco commenting on Chinese military capabilities.