US vs. a resurgent China

First of All Mr. Ishihara has always had a clear agenda of trying to expand Japanese SDF and making the US allies seem weak is the only way he can urge the population to overcome the constitutional hurdles.

The Tokyo governor is a fool when it comes to military strategy or at least he pretends to be. One of his recent arguments was that the US couldn't combat China's submarine force because a larger percent of Chinese submarines were armed with missiles. Submarine launched missiles aren't even used to take out other submarines, they are used to take out surface ships and land based targets. In fact the US pacific fleet is leaps and bounds ahead of the Chinese when it comes to antisub warfare.
 
First off, I don't see a war between the US and China happening anytime soon. Our economies are both too dependant, they would be hurt VERY badly in the even of having trade cut off all of a sudden. China may be led by people who are, for all intents and purposes, evil - but that doesn't make them stupid. They aren't going to send China back a decade or two, lose the US as a trading partner, and likely a lot of Europe as well by starting a war with US. They, like all humans are greedy and looking out for themselves first - but that doesn't mean they are stupid about it.

Anyway, in the event of a war between the two, I still maintain that the US would win. In the original article, it is assumed that a land war would take place. Why? Starting a land war in Asia is suicide; by say, the Soviet standard, we're doing great in Afghanistan and Iraq. While undoubtedly North Korea would attempt to invade South Korea in the confusion, I doubt they would be able to break through. Hungry, badly trained troops with low morale don't generally like running into thousands of machine guns and artillary pieces that we have gathered across the Korean border.

But that would only be a sideshow. The main attraction would be the US alliance (With Japan as chief ally) fighting a sea and air war around Japan and Taiwan. Air is the most important here, whichever side takes total air superiority can sink the others navy and attack their cities and bases at will. Navy is important here too though, because without a navy China can never launch and amphibious assault upon Taiwan, much less Japan. (I find both options unlikely, as China's amphibious forces are pretty bad, and both targets would be heavily defended. A bombardment until peace was arranged would be more likely)

As this would be an air and sea war, the US would win. I hate to break it to all the Pro-Chinese guys out there, but do you know what the strongest Air Force out there is? The USAF. Do you want to know what's the second? The US Navy. China is third, with England fourth. We have more planes than they do, and most of ours are better than most of theirs.

Don't get me wrong, they have some good MiG imitations and whatnot, but they have only a few that are better than the F-15 or F-16. And in a few years, once the F/A-22 and JSF enter service, our air superiority will be assured. (The only plane that can compare with the F-22 is the Eurofighter Typhoon, which doesn't have stealth technology, and perhaps one of China's newer fighters that they are developing - which is AT LEAST 20 years down the road before operational deployment) In trials, an F-22 can commonly shoot down four or five F-15's before he's even spotted; it's scary how big of a jump has happened in thirty years.

I'll talk briefly about nukes, quite simply, I don't think they'll be used. The international political fallout would be as bad as the physical; once again, they aren't stupid.

I think I've talked for long enough, but you see the point. And I haven't even mentioned the wild card in all this - India. India seems to be unsure whether she is a ally or rival of China's, but lately they seem to be growing more towards the US as China's power grows. (Anyone remember that poll, with more Indians favorably viewing America than in France or Germany?) If India has competant leadership at the time of any war, they would use that time to gain more power on the international stage, possibly by negotiating a peace deal or something of that magnitutde. That could be their ticket to a UN SC seat, which they desperately want.
 
I agree. Why does the US have to conquer and pillage Beijing with GIs in order to defeat the Chinese militarily?

Neither side can defeat the other on the other's land so the fight (assuming no nukes are used) would be decided in the air and sea.

Having 100 million millitary aged male foot soldiers doesn't mean alot facing the worlds largest and most advance navy and air force. Especially with 10,000 miles of ocean between you and your enemy. And double especially with that ocean filled with near by island allies of your enemy.
 
Azadre said:
Globalization of economies are the safeguards against this war.

You know in 1914 Britains biggest trading partner was Germany. Interdependent economics does not necessarily ensure peace.
 
imagine if china were a democracy today... not hard to imagine seeing as how there had been countless opportunities in history to do so. I say, the problem we have with China today is created by ourselves. We gave up China (Manchuria) to Communism to win WWII (even though we did not need the soviet's aid against japan), we gave up China to communism when we failed to counter Mao's take over, and we gave up China in the Korean War.
 
the chinese are not so stupid as to attack the united states. What would they gain aside from a population drop? it would be impossible to conquer the USA, im sure even gun hating liberals would pick up a gun to kill them(well not all of them but at least 50%)
 
I expect China to cause some conflict in five years. They just need to take Taiwan quickly and their allies will support China against the counterattack. It might become another Desert Storm at first with liberating Taiwan, but a conclusive victory over China will keep Asia pacified.

China has numbers but not much else. Their budget can barely support a campaign and they will collapse quickly.
In war, numbers alone confer no advantage. Do not advance relying on sheer military power - Sun Tzu
 
Azadre said:
Globalization of economies are the safeguards against this war.

It makes war less likely, but definitely not impossible.

EDIT: it would make it impossible in the case China supplied the US with materials necessary for waging a war. But AFAIK, China exports just a cheap textile, consumer goods, less-sophisticated electronics and so on. US would without any doubt suffer economically (dollar fall, huge loses of capital in China etc.), but it's capability to wage a war wouldn't be harmed.
 
general_kill said:
imagine if china were a democracy today... not hard to imagine seeing as how there had been countless opportunities in history to do so. I say, the problem we have with China today is created by ourselves. We gave up China (Manchuria) to Communism to win WWII (even though we did not need the soviet's aid against japan), we gave up China to communism when we failed to counter Mao's take over, and we gave up China in the Korean War.
We took Stalin over Hitler; Chiang and Mao over Hirohito. They were the best choices we could make at the time, and while it's regrettable we had to side with the bad guys to get the job done, war is a regrettable and sad business.

I'm hoping that China will become a true democracy in the future. They already have a fair amount of economic freedom, and soon the people will hunger for more and more, and eventually they will begin to hunger for political freedom to go along with it. Perhaps not for decades, but I believe that China eventually will become a democracy; perhaps not on the US model, but a democracy all the same.
 
Back
Top Bottom