News:

News:  0 1 1 2 3 5 8 13 21 34 55 89 144 233 377 610 987 1597 2584 4181 6765 10946 17711 28657, motherfuckers.

Main Menu

GLOBAL ECONOMIC TRADE WAR!

Started by Cain, October 04, 2010, 04:20:47 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Disco Pickle

Quote from: Henny Youngman on October 04, 2010, 08:44:06 PM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on October 04, 2010, 08:42:21 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 04, 2010, 08:23:44 PM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on October 04, 2010, 07:19:30 PM
as to military strength between us and China..  

http://www.mint.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/chinavsunitedstatesmilitary.jpg

wallstats.com did this one.  of course statistics are, as always, dependent on who gathers the info.

by land war, I meant invasion and holding of land in the traditional sense.  This precludes the use of nuclear weapons to take out major population dense areas and dramatically lower their potential manpower recruiting abilities should they begin to sustain heavy losses.

I don't claim to know it all you old fucks, and if you have a book to recommend then by all means.

The Pickle is well aware you don't go from being a lowly cucumber to a real Pickle over night.

Uh, that graph is rather simplistic.  Chinese logistics suck and nothing on here indicates the weakness of the Chinese Navy versus the American Navy.  It also does not take into account American dominance in electronic warfare or their superior combat experience (the last time the PLA took part in actual combat was in the 1970s, when they invaded Vietnam).

America couldn't occupy China, but I doubt they'd be that stupid....well, for the most part.  Eric Cantor would probably demand it, and call anyone who pointed out the utter stupidity of trying a traitor.  A war would be fought over somewhere, like the Spratly Isles or, less likely, Taiwan.  American allies would also be involved, namely Japan, who would, with American support, likely lay China's economically vital east coast to waste.  Indeed, Clinton's military pact with Japan in the 1990s was designed precisely with this event in mind.  Equally, America has been making moves to become closer with India in the past decade, and India are not on good terms with China, both because of past wars and because of suspected support for Maoist rebels in the country.  India performed rather well in those wars, often despite them being intitiated by China and Pakistan and having to fight on two major fronts.

Finally, America has rather large airbases in Central Asia from where it could perform surgical strikes against Chinese infrastructure in Xinjiang, destroying their ability to produce crude oil internally.  Through in an external blockade, and Chinese industry would be crippled.

Of course, it wouldn't go all America's way.  China doesn't intend to attack where America is strong...and going by their Assassin's Mace program, that means they are focusing on highly unconventional warfare programs, including cyberwarfare, financial attack, terrorism and disinformation on a grand scale.

But in terms of conventional military methods, aiming to cripple rather than occupy a country, America does have the upper hand.  Indeed, these are the kind of operations their military actually carries out rather well.

our air superiority would certainly be debilitating to their war capabilities and supply lines.

Atrophy as a tactic, I think, would be easier for the US military to use with effect.  Like Dok said, we're pretty damn good at getting supplies moved around quickly.

Where do you think Russia would stand in this hypothetical?  Hands off but equipment supply to China? or is the "reboot" something they'd stick with considering our history working together post WWII?

Don't confuse Russia with the former Soviet Union.

I'm not, but I am still expecting that Russia will do what's best for Russia. 
"Events in the past may be roughly divided into those which probably never happened and those which do not matter." --William Ralph Inge

"sometimes someone confesses a sin in order to take credit for it." -- John Von Neumann

Adios

Which I suspect would not involve jumping in between 2 superpowers.

Cain

Russia would be quite happy to see both sides bleed each other out.  It works with China now, but only to balance against US dominance.  Their alliance is merely one of current mutual benefit, which would be discarded in a moment should it cease to work for them.  And being dragged into a hot war between America and China would not be in their interest.

They may, of course, cause mischief in Central Asia, the Middle East and "Near Abroad", but it'd be taking advantage of and continuing the chaos to Russian benefit.

Don Coyote

Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on October 04, 2010, 07:36:18 PM


warfare, the actual tactics of it, has always interested me but could use a lot more in depth study of it, especially modern warfare.

Most of my reading has been historical.

amateurs talk about tactics.
professionals talk about logistics.

Telarus

Quote from: Sir Coyote on October 05, 2010, 12:47:31 AM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on October 04, 2010, 07:36:18 PM


warfare, the actual tactics of it, has always interested me but could use a lot more in depth study of it, especially modern warfare.

Most of my reading has been historical.

amateurs Players talk about tactics.
professionals GMs talk about logistics.
Telarus, KSC,
.__.  Keeper of the Contradictory Cephalopod, Zenarchist Swordsman,
(0o)  Tender to the Edible Zen Garden, Ratcheting Metallic Sex Doll of The End Times,
/||\   Episkopos of the Amorphous Dreams Cabal

Join the Doll Underground! Experience the Phantasmagorical Safari!

Don Coyote

Quote from: Telarus on October 05, 2010, 02:43:53 AM
Quote from: Sir Coyote on October 05, 2010, 12:47:31 AM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on October 04, 2010, 07:36:18 PM


warfare, the actual tactics of it, has always interested me but could use a lot more in depth study of it, especially modern warfare.

Most of my reading has been historical.

amateurs Players talk about tactics.
professionals GMs talk about logistics.
NERD :lulz:

Doktor Howl

Quote from: Telarus on October 05, 2010, 02:43:53 AM
Quote from: Sir Coyote on October 05, 2010, 12:47:31 AM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on October 04, 2010, 07:36:18 PM


warfare, the actual tactics of it, has always interested me but could use a lot more in depth study of it, especially modern warfare.

Most of my reading has been historical.

amateurs Players talk about tactics.
professionals GMs talk about logistics.

I think I just saw God.
Molon Lube

Requia ☣

Quote from: Henny Youngman on October 04, 2010, 06:37:19 PM
What do they teach in history classes these days?  :?

It's been a decade since I took any classes that covered the Korean War, but let me see if I can remember what happened after China got involved.

We went from controlling 90% of Korea, and being a stones throw away from creating a united democratic* Korea to controlling only half.

The Chinese managed to successfully reverse the theory of air superiority, taking airbases with land troops in order to keep our planes out of the sky.

*Or puppet state, but we're talking about what they teach in history classes.
Inflatable dolls are not recognized flotation devices.

Doktor Howl

Quote from: Requia ☣ on October 05, 2010, 03:14:57 AM
Quote from: Henny Youngman on October 04, 2010, 06:37:19 PM
What do they teach in history classes these days?  :?

It's been a decade since I took any classes that covered the Korean War, but let me see if I can remember what happened after China got involved.

We went from controlling 90% of Korea, and being a stones throw away from creating a united democratic* Korea to controlling only half.

The Chinese managed to successfully reverse the theory of air superiority, taking airbases with land troops in order to keep our planes out of the sky.

*Or puppet state, but we're talking about what they teach in history classes.

Yeah, and what was left of the Chinese force when we got back to the 38th parallel the second time?

Also, puppet state?  I was unaware you were such a supporter of North Korea's enlightened regime.
Molon Lube

Requia ☣

I can hate both.

Quote
Yeah, and what was left of the Chinese force when we got back to the 38th parallel the second time?

Wasn't covered. 
Inflatable dolls are not recognized flotation devices.

Don Coyote

I don't remember being taught anything about the Korean War at all.

Doktor Howl

Quote from: Requia ☣ on October 05, 2010, 03:17:52 AM
I can hate both.

Quote
Yeah, and what was left of the Chinese force when we got back to the 38th parallel the second time?

Wasn't covered. 

Thought as much.  You're talking out of your arse.

Dok,
Forgot you were a fucking expert on all things.
Molon Lube

Requia ☣

On the puppet state thing: I don't think the US influenced government in Korea was anywhere near as bad as what north Korea turned into, but neither do I think the US is really going to get that involved in another country without at least trying to rig the game for the foreseeable future.

The question was 'what is taught in History classes', not what actually happened.
Inflatable dolls are not recognized flotation devices.

Doktor Howl

So, do you have any support for the argument, or was this just another failed attempt at pedantry?
Molon Lube

Requia ☣

Inflatable dolls are not recognized flotation devices.