SirWinkler

World War III.

128 posts in this topic

Who would make us pay back any debt to China? The Chinese we are already fighting, or their corpses after they're dead?

I don't think Americans would have a problem buying war bonds. Money is no object to the US because we've reached the peak of capitalism. Its all downhill from here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who would make us pay back any debt to China? The Chinese we are already fighting, or their corpses after they're dead?

I don't think Americans would have a problem buying war bonds. Money is no object to the US because we've reached the peak of capitalism. Its all downhill from here.

 

US debt to China is overemphasized, at slightly less than 10% of total debt (1.3 trillion out of a total of 17 trillion). I would expect that to be cancelled for all intents and purposes at the outbreak of war, but it wouldn't have a colossal impact on the debt situation because most US public debt is owed to private US creditors.

 

Not that I'm saying debt is a make-or-break factor in all of this, but budget problems can create supply chain problems can create combat effectiveness/morale problems.

 

Not to mention that a huge chunk of current US GDP comes from US ownership of companies with production facilities in China; what happens if those get nationalised? What physical production facilities does the US government even have at its disposal to commandeer toward war production?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What physical production facilities does the US government even have at its disposal to commandeer toward war production?

That's a good question I can't answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would debt matter at the point of war?

And if Russia is so concerned about Asia, why are they taking over eastern europe?

I don't doubt Russia would be involved, but militarily speaking, I think they would do everything they could to stay out of it.

 Money makes the world go around, even socialist nations have to make a profit or they end up like the USSR.. bankrupt and overthrown. If you enter War with a already high level of debt your not going to be able to keep up with those who have the money to spend, if you had a product and China offers cash and the US offers a IOU, your going to give it to China.

These countless examples in history how indebted Nation when entering war rarely come out of it better off, and thats if they even come out of it alive.

Also your not going to focus on one region and be completely ignores to what happing else where, Russia is becoming increasingly concerned about Asia, but it also will keep eastern Europe in mind as nato expands, Russia knows the future isn't in Europe but in Asia and is shifting its military towards Asia which explains why Russia could only mobilised around 80,000 solders during the Ukriane crisis.

Russia is moving east political, economical and military reasons, But it wont forget or ignore eastern Europe.. thats just stupid.

And already Russia has starting again to flying bombers and fighter jets to Japan and South Korea in threatening moves, As well as started New naval, Air and Land military training and exercises with China which covers everything from search and rescue to land invasion and naval combat.

 

Also, 3 aircraft carriers, by 2020? We have 16, 10 active, more planned and an army of destroyers against their little rubber ducks. They have a ways to go.

And this doesn't even touch on the rest of NATOs naval capacity.

Aircraft Carriers, are nothing more than big fat targets for the "carrier killer", with the deployment of the YJ-12/DF-21, many analyzers say the age of the Carrier is over they are simply just to big and too easy to hit. As i said before the Chinese could deploy and fire around 150 YJ-12/DF-21 in the first few hours and in a few weeks could have thousands and all of these still would be cheaper to build and replace than a full size nuclear carrier.

In the event of A war with China, Aircraft Carriers could possibly get as close as hawaii before coming under fire by the YJ-12/DF-21, the change of actually making it to China is almost 0%

And Nato is nothing more than a laughing stock currently, they have such few ships and little naval capacity that a Russian Aircraft cerreir and a few other ships was about to ship though Nato Water unescorted during the hight of the Ukraine crisis, because Nato didn't have the ships and due to limited naval capacity didn't have contact or tracking the carrier for most of its Journey.

Nato (as well as the US) has a shrinking defence budget, While Russia is due to boost defence from 17% to 26% of GDP.

the Xinhua News Agency reported that the DF-21D was “still in the research stage” and not yet operational as of July 2011. Secondly, the missile may not be able to single-handedly destroy its target. The warhead is believed to be enough to inflict a "mission kill" to make a carrier unable to conduct flight operations, while other missiles would follow to actually destroy the ship. Thirdly, there is the problem of finding its target. The DF-21D has a range estimated between 1,035 to 1,726 mi (1,666 to 2,778 km), so a carrier battle group would need to be located through other means before launching. Over-the-horizon radars could detect ships, but their exact locations could be off by miles. Chinese recon satellites would be able to look for and locate a battle group. Recon aircraft and submarines could also look for them, but they are vulnerable to the carrier's defenses. Finally, the missile may have a hard time hitting its target. To hit ships moving at 34 mph (30 kn), the DF-21D has radar and optical sensors for tracking. These are supposed to make it accurate, but the missile has not yet been tested against a moving target, let alone ones at sea against clutter and countermeasures. The "kill chain" of the missile requires processing and constantly updating data of a carrier's location, preparing the launch, programming information, and then firing it. How often this is trained is not known, and the U.S. military's AirSea Battle concept involves disrupting an enemy's kill chain.[29] Some U.S. analysts believe that the DF-21D doesn't fly any faster than Mach 5.[30]

Xinhua News Agency also reported the J20 was still on the drawing board in 2010, a year later they had a fully working prototype, remember the Chinese saying, of hind your strength and bind your time, 

​And these are all valid point, the  DF-21D is a new weapon, and the Chinese like to keep their new toys a secret, they might already have solutions to some of these problems and keeping it a secret as they usually do.  

However YJ-12 seems to be more of a threat to the US than the DF-21D, 

"Some American analysts believe that the YJ-12 anti-ship cruise missile is the biggest threat to U.S. Navy aircraft carriers in the western Pacific that China can employ, even greater than theDF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile. This is due to its ability to be carried by aircraft like the H-6 strategic bomber and Su-30 and J-11 fighters. A 2011 U.S. Naval War College study found that the YJ-12 was one of the world's longest-range anti-ship missiles at 400 km (250 mi; 220 nmi), compared to the U.S. Harpoon's range of 124 km (77 mi; 67 nmi). This enables it to be launched beyond the range of SM-2 surface-to-air missiles, where previously anti-ship missiles could be detected when they were launched at much closer ranges and even have their launch aircraft intercepted before they could attack. With over 100 YJ-12s being launched from fighters and bombers from multiple directions, a U.S. carrier strike group's close-in air defenses would have only 45 seconds to respond to the barrage of supersonic missiles approaching at wave-top height; this is more simple and reliable than the extensive network of space-based observation and communication links the DF-21D is reliant on and less vulnerable to pre-emptive interference."

Who would make us pay back any debt to China? The Chinese we are already fighting, or their corpses after they're dead?

I don't think Americans would have a problem buying war bonds. Money is no object to the US because we've reached the peak of capitalism. Its all downhill from here.

What happens to other nations when they refuse to pay back loans? And why is it today capitalism has hit its peak? what happen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LCS has limited Uses, Its not even a game changer. Its a step but a step towards a door, thats already been locked.

The LCS wouldn't be able to stop the "Carreir Killer" nor is it a game changer.

and the The Virginia Class sounds like Australian Collins-class, its won award and recognised international as well but the bloody thing would be usefully in a battlefield and even if it would work wouldn't make turn the tide of war.

The problem is how will the Aircraft Carrier get anywhere near YJ-12 missile sites when the range for these "carrer killers is up to and surpassing 12,000km, they would be hit before they get close enough to the site. Also is these YJ-12 missile are deployed on mobile launchers making them just about impossible to hit, and as soon as smart bombs, and cluster bombs all the normal anti-missile defences kick in to shoot most down.

The US has literary no defence or any way to stop/prevent or shoot down "carrier killers" and any possible candidate are bing cut.

And yes this is total war, China would likely deploy the CSS-4 Rockets(Currently in limited numbers by choice)with the YJ-12/DF-21 and hit any where from 5-8 Carriers within the first few Hours. The CSS-4 Rockets have global range and with no to limited defence, any navel ship in dock or out in the sea is a sitting duck. Honestly the US needs to stop cutting these advance programs.

But i actually agree, In a total War, i doubt anyone, Chinese or America would be having any protesting problems.

 

I'm using the LCS as an example. But if you really want to know the usefulness of the LCS. Let's go

 

the LCS is designed to operate in littoral waters (the area of water close to a shore) which means they should have an emphasis of ground attack (which they have in the form of their amphibous strike groups stored in their hangars) and subs would immediately find their doom if they encounter an LCS since one of their main capabilities is hunting subs in shallow water. So all in all, the LCS is a stealthy ship design that can land an amphibious force anywhere in China and capable of hunting subs and mines, that's a pretty useful ship to me

 

Oh and the Virginia is anything but a Collins class submarine, it has improved periscopes and has the capabilities to launch seal teams deep inside enemy territory. And besides it's classified as a nuclear powered fast attack sub which has 12 VLS launch tubes designed to launch tomahawk missiles from god knows where (it's a sub, it's meant to be stealthy) it's definitely not an american attempt to build a collinslike sub

 

I told you earlier that several US carriers would be sunk but many more YJ-12 missile sites (mobile or not) will be blown out of the water, F-18 hornets alone has a combat radius of 400 ish miles (which is wider than the YJ-12 missile range) and besides, the US managed to destroy mobile scud sites in the Gulf war and in their invasion of Iraq (granted the terrain of Iraq is rather flat but it doesn't make the US systems inept at finding mobile scud launchers) you can prove me wrong at that one since i've only heard scattered reports about the Iraqi scud sites.

 

And the US is not cutting it's advanced programs, the lasers is being field tested and the Railgun (yes the US navy is building a railgun) is ready for engineering phase. Oh and there's the really powerful US weapon that has taken form of it's debt. Expect China to lose 16 trillion dollars when the war starts

Edited by Ax3hunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia does not give two flying dongs about Asia. I can promise you, they would not march to war in defense of China against NATO. You say all of this as if such a war would actually somehow be in Russia's interest.

Again, nations, especially superpowers, don't march to war with each other just because.

The Russia/China relationship is not that close and has a history of tension.

Putin has already proven he won't be made dependent on anyone. That includes China.

Unless something happens to directly force Russia to take military action, I just can't see it happening.

As for AC Carriers, you can't call such an engineering marvel "just a giant target."

True, according to what the public knows, we have no defense against the Carrier Killer. However, let's take into account a few things.

The Carrier Killer relies on satellites among other variables to function. A chain of actions to effect damage called a kill chain. As stated above, the US Navy is all about killing kill chains. Remove even one of the many variables and the Carrier Killer is killed.

I can see this Carrier Killer being used once until we start dropping their satellites like flies.

Though, I do have to give you credit here. Those Carrier Killers are a pretty brilliant and cheap solution to our Navy.

As for the YJ-12, I'm not impressed. Our government keeps their latest aircraft technology under tighter wraps than Kim Jong Un keeps his country. Ten years from now is when you will see what the US government has right now.

And as far as aircraft go, the US IS the sky. We maintain a dominance in the air even greater than our dominance at sea.

As for MATOs navy, they, even without US help, would put the Russian navy at the bottom of the sea in a heartbeat.

As for money, money is a lie. Its an illusion making you think something is actually there. In reality, it's a symbolic piece of material saying "I owe you this much food and goods." Whether they actually have said food and goods, can be either way. Money is a system based on debt and it doesn't work unless that debt exists. If somebody isn't in debt, money would have no value.

Problem is, (and this goes for the world), rather than pay actual debts, we keep making and handing out IOUs that we all know will only pile up and pile up because the ability to actually pay back said debt, is non existent.

So we cancel debts to create new ones, thus making money an illusion.

There's so much debt in the modern world that everything now runs solely on credit.

True wealth only comes in the form of the bare essentialls you need to survive, and then services we enjoy having.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a note, despite the defense cuts, the US military budget by 2013 is ludicrous: http://pgpf.org/Chart-Archive/0053_defense-comparison


Russia does not give two flying dongs about Asia. I can promise you, they would not march to war in defense of China against NATO. You say all of this as if such a war would actually somehow be in Russia's interest.
Again, nations, especially superpowers, don't march to war with each other just because.
The Russia/China relationship is not that close and has a history of tension.
Putin has already proven he won't be made dependent on anyone. That includes China.
Unless something happens to directly force Russia to take military action, I just can't see it happening.

As for AC Carriers, you can't call such an engineering marvel "just a giant target."
True, according to what the public knows, we have no defense against the Carrier Killer. However, let's take into account a few things.
The Carrier Killer relies on satellites among other variables to function. A chain of actions to effect damage called a kill chain. As stated above, the US Navy is all about killing kill chains. Remove even one of the many variables and the Carrier Killer is killed.
I can see this Carrier Killer being used once until we start dropping their satellites like flies.
Though, I do have to give you credit here. Those Carrier Killers are a pretty brilliant and cheap solution to our Navy.

As for the YJ-12, I'm not impressed. Our government keeps their latest aircraft technology under tighter wraps than Kim Jong Un keeps his country. Ten years from now is when you will see what the US government has right now.
And as far as aircraft go, the US IS the sky. We maintain a dominance in the air even greater than our dominance at sea.

As for MATOs navy, they, even without US help, would put the Russian navy at the bottom of the sea in a heartbeat.

As for money, money is a lie. Its an illusion making you think something is actually there. In reality, it's a symbolic piece of material saying "I owe you this much food and goods." Whether they actually have said food and goods, can be either way. Money is a system based on debt and it doesn't work unless that debt exists. If somebody isn't in debt, money would have no value.
Problem is, (and this goes for the world), rather than pay actual debts, we keep making and handing out IOUs that we all know will only pile up and pile up because the ability to actually pay back said debt, is non existent.
So we cancel debts to create new ones, thus making money an illusion.
There's so much debt in the modern world that everything now runs solely on credit.
True wealth only comes in the form of the bare essentialls you need to survive, and then services we enjoy having.

 

I agree on Fox Fire for the US dominance of the skies. But Fox i have a question, there is a satellite destroying missile that the US experimented back in the early 2000s but will it be effective in destroying the YJ-12's satellites?

 

I would also like to point out another flaw that would cripple China's economy in a war (you need money to run a war), China's economy is export oriented towards western countries (especially the US) and it would be practically suicide for China to cut it's exports out from western countries BUT in the event of a war. The US would surely issue a total embargo to China. That thought alone would send chills down the spine of chinese businessmen and economists since China's main importer of goods is the US

Edited by Ax3hunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a note, despite the defense cuts, the US military budget by 2013 is ludicrous: http://pgpf.org/Chart-Archive/0053_defense-comparison

 

I agree on Fox Fire for the US dominance of the skies. But Fox i have a question, there is a satellite destroying missile that the US experimented back in the early 2000s but will it be effective in destroying the YJ-12's satellites?

Hard to say. I'm not even sure if statistics are available on our own ASAT missiles. However, we do have have them, they are specifically designed for targeting exoatmospheric targets. We have successfully dropped one of our own satellites before.

But really, the only solution to the Carrier Killer would either be that, or ICBMs, which would mean nuclear war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'm using the LCS as an example.

LCS as an example of how potential game changer technology being limited by cuts, allowing the chinese and the russians to close the gap.

 

So all in all, the LCS is a stealthy ship design that can land an amphibious force anywhere in China and capable of hunting subs and mines, that's a pretty useful ship to me

You cant deploy a stealthy ship design with the LCS anywhere near mainland china, just like the enemy couldnt get away deploying a stealthy ship design with the LCS anywhere near mainland US, its to close.

The Problem is your underestimating the Chinese capability, even the F-35 can be easily detected by Chinese new advanced radar system, even the new stealthy ship designs like the USS Independence would be detectable if they were deplyed near Chinese coast.

 

Oh and the Virginia is anything but a Collins class submarine, it has improved periscopes and has the capabilities to launch seal teams deep inside enemy territory. And besides it's classified as a nuclear powered fast attack sub which has 12 VLS launch tubes designed to launch tomahawk missiles from god knows where (it's a sub, it's meant to be stealthy) it's definitely not an american attempt to build a collins like sub

Virginia class and the Collins class were create for different roles, and are considered "the best and the most modern of their kind" i wasn't hinting that the US was trying to build a collins like sub.

 

I told you earlier that several US carriers would be sunk but many more YJ-12 missile sites (mobile or not) will be blown out of the water, F-18 hornets alone has a combat radius of 400 ish miles (which is wider than the YJ-12 missile range) and besides, the US managed to destroy mobile scud sites in the Gulf war and in their invasion of Iraq (granted the terrain of Iraq is rather flat but it doesn't make the US systems inept at finding mobile scud launchers) you can prove me wrong at that one since i've only heard scattered reports about the Iraqi scud sites.

The problem is your at Chinese homeland and they have the home advantage, they could deploy their whole air force with YJ-12 missile, and fly out to confront the US and all it will take it one hit and the carrier is down, or you can upgraded the YJ-12 missile rocket, there CSS-5 which can hit as far as japan, CSS-3 which can hit as far as Australia, JL-2 which can hit as far as Europe, or the CSS-4 which can hit as far as the US)

As for Iraq, its an interesting question, As the US did hit a few mobile scud launchers, but yet during the cold war and event today reports i hear from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, is that in Russia NATO is unable predict where these scuds will be, and are alway caught off-guard when they test launch from one.

I would imagine the Iraqi were using them wrong some how, they move at night and completely hidden at day, even today we cant detect them, its what made them so dangerous during the cold war.

 

And the US is not cutting it's advanced programs, the lasers is being field tested and the Railgun (yes the US navy is building a railgun) is ready for engineering phase.

Haha, i love it how you had to repeat it, as if i never heard it before, and it is true, not everything is getting the cut, like the railgun, But what to say the Chinese isn't developing the same thing, after all they arent as open as the US military is..

Chinese_sat_imagery.jpg

It was discovered in 2010 and its still there with much activity in 2014, its either a railgun or a long-range continental artillery, We dont know. but they it might be nothing too, 

Oh and there's the really powerful US weapon that has taken form of it's debt. Expect China to lose 16 trillion dollars when the war starts

How will China lose 16 trillion dollars?

War starts and china demands the US to pay its debts, and the US refuse, thats a automatic default on what they owe to china, the result is the interest rates on USA remaining debt would rise making it even harder to borrow and keep up payments (due to the size, even a small increase could result in automatic bankrupt), the US bonds value would decrease, which Goldman Sachs estimates that $175bn would immediately be withdrawn from the US economy and it could lead to a very deep recession and all of this overnight.. The nations with the most debt will be the one who are hit the hardest like the US, others wont be affected as much like China.

Russia does not give two flying dongs about Asia. I can promise you, they would not march to war in defense of China against NATO. You say all of this as if such a war would actually somehow be in Russia's interest.

Again, nations, especially superpowers, don't march to war with each other just because.

The Russia/China relationship is not that close and has a history of tension.

Putin has already proven he won't be made dependent on anyone. That includes China.

Unless something happens to directly force Russia to take military action, I just can't see it happening.

Just like the US is pivoting to Asia, so is Russia, and like the US they are picking sides. Just look at Russians action, and the proposal of stationing 2/3 of their military in Asia.

As for AC Carriers, you can't call such an engineering marvel "just a giant target."

True, according to what the public knows, we have no defense against the Carrier Killer. However, let's take into account a few things.

The Carrier Killer relies on satellites among other variables to function. A chain of actions to effect damage called a kill chain. As stated above, the US Navy is all about killing kill chains. Remove even one of the many variables and the Carrier Killer is killed.

I can see this Carrier Killer being used once until we start dropping their satellites like flies.

Though, I do have to give you credit here. Those v are a pretty brilliant and cheap solution to our Navy.

I wouldn't really say they were all about killing kill chains, but it will help a lot which is why the YJ-12 takes over.

Dont forget China can shoot down satellites too, everyone will be flying blind, and the US will have to get pretty close to the Chinese coast before accurately hitting targets and then you have a hand full of jets on 20 or so carriers up against the whole Chinese fair force and anti air defences which your underestimating again.

And thats the point make a few hundreds Carrier Killers fire them and eventually you'll hit a carrier, Mass produce these and you can hit and destroy a carrier faster than you could make them.

As for the YJ-12, I'm not impressed. Our government keeps their latest aircraft technology under tighter wraps than Kim Jong Un keeps his country. Ten years from now is when you will see what the US government has right now.

And as far as aircraft go, the US IS the sky. We maintain a dominance in the air even greater than our dominance at sea.

Like the hand full of B2 bombers? They wont turn the tide of war, and you maintain a dominance in the air against third world counties, china isn't Vietnam or Iraq, its not going to be that easy, China has 5 gen fighters like the US does its 4 gen are almost if not as good as the americans, you can underestimate your enemy.

As for MATOs navy, they, even without US help, would put the Russian navy at the bottom of the sea in a heartbeat.

with the fact they didn't have enough ships for a basic escort.. im not even sure if they will be able to field a force to attack let alone defend against Russia. Even their capabilities were lacking, losing track of the MASSIVE aircraft carreir.. not even Vitname had that problem.. these Nato cuts are cutting deeper than you think.

Just a note, despite the defense cuts, the US military budget by 2013 is ludicrous: http://pgpf.org/Chart-Archive/0053_defense-comparison

The US has a global system to protect and reinforce.. China, Russia doesn't, just because you spend more in like say education doest mean you'll be better or improved results..

 

I would also like to point out another flaw that would cripple China's economy in a war (you need money to run a war), China's economy is export oriented towards western countries (especially the US) and it would be practically suicide for China to cut it's exports out from western countries BUT in the event of a war. The US would surely issue a total embargo to China. That thought alone would send chills down the spine of chinese businessmen and economists since China's main importer of goods is the US

Finally.. Thats an amazing point, if anything would beat china this would.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LCS as an example of how potential game changer technology being limited by cuts, allowing the chinese and the russians to close the gap.

 

You cant deploy a stealthy ship design with the LCS anywhere near mainland china, just like the enemy couldn't get away deploying a stealthy ship design with the LCS anywhere near mainland US, its to close.

The Problem is your underestimating the Chinese capability, even the F-35 can be easily detected by Chinese new advanced radar system, even the new stealthy ship designs like the USS Independence would be detectable if they were deplyed near Chinese coast.

 

Virginia class and the Collins class were create for different roles, and are considered "the best and the most modern of their kind" i wasn't hinting that the US was trying to build a collins like sub.

 

The problem is your at Chinese homeland and they have the home advantage, they could deploy their whole air force with YJ-12 missile, and fly out to confront the US and all it will take it one hit and the carrier is down, or you can upgraded the YJ-12 missile rocket, there CSS-5 which can hit as far as japan, CSS-3 which can hit as far as Australia, JL-2 which can hit as far as Europe, or the CSS-4 which can hit as far as the US)

As for Iraq, its an interesting question, As the US did hit a few mobile scud launchers, but yet during the cold war and event today reports i hear from the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, is that in Russia NATO is unable predict where these scuds will be, and are alway caught off-guard when they test launch from one.

I would imagine the Iraqi were using them wrong some how, they move at night and completely hidden at day, even today we cant detect them, its what made them so dangerous during the cold war.

 

Haha, i love it how you had to repeat it, as if i never heard it before, and it is true, not everything is getting the cut, like the railgun, But what to say the Chinese isn't developing the same thing, after all they arent as open as the US military is..

Chinese_sat_imagery.jpg

It was discovered in 2010 and its still there with much activity in 2014, its either a railgun or a long-range continental artillery, We dont know. but they it might be nothing too, 

How will China lose 16 trillion dollars?

War starts and china demands the US to pay its debts, and the US refuse, thats a automatic default on what they owe to china, the result is the interest rates on USA remaining debt would rise making it even harder to borrow and keep up payments (due to the size, even a small increase could result in automatic bankrupt), the US bonds value would decrease, which Goldman Sachs estimates that $175bn would immediately be withdrawn from the US economy and it could lead to a very deep recession and all of this overnight.. The nations with the most debt will be the one who are hit the hardest like the US, others wont be affected as much like China.

 

Finally.. Thats an amazing point, if anything would beat china this would.

 

The problem i have is the openess (is that a word?) of the US Military. Something just feels off when they are saying that they're building Railguns here and Lasers there. Remember this is Public Knowledge (as fox fire has pointed out) and i wouldn't want to know what the US really has up it's sleeve when they're being open like this 

 

The problem with China is that they don't have truly super navies (like the US) and just like the German Navy in World war 1. They would get quickly ****blocked by the joint coalition navy in the early stages of the war (the US alone could give China problems, combine that with Australia, South Korea, and Japanese navies and things would get ugly for China)

 

China losses 16 trillion dollars of debt money from the US (they loaned it to the US so the US could buy their stuff) it's not really that complex, while true that China could flood the market with the US dollars and weaken the US currency. And wouldn't the US recover from the recession in due time by reopening their closed factories, making sure taxes are well distributed (i doubt congress would screw anything up in a world war 3 scenario), and gear the country into a total war footing?? (the Germans and Japanese are living witnesses to what happens when you have a pissed US at war with you)

 

and for that picture, that pic is taken by a civilian satellite right? if a civilian sat can locate a Supposedly top secret Chinese research facility than the US air force equipped with their ASAT missiles, strategic bombers, stealth weapons, and military grade spy satellites which has classified capabilities would do a good job at neutralizing those research facilities ( yes i am suggesting flying strike missions into mainland China, this is world war 3 after all, risks has to be taken) 

 

and have you seen the US military budget?? even China doesn't have that much of an emphasis of the military and yet they are capable of doing some really good strides in their military, if the US goes into true war footing, reopening it's closed factories and increasing the budget massively for the US military (as if they're not flowing with money already) 

 

and i simply laugh at your notion of a long range Continental artillery  i'm not going to even argue about the ridiculous notion of a continental artillery. And when you mention those intercontinental ballistic missiles i just throw my keyboard and simply respond with this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_the_United_States 

 

Trident nuclear missiles alone has a range of 12.000 km's, far greater than even the CSS-4 ICBM's, source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4438392.stm

 

And while i do admit that sending LCS's raiding Chinese coastal cities would be a rather crazy notion, what's stopping the US from advancing through North Korea (which will declare war in order to "join themselves in the noble communist crusade") and through Manchuria? human wave tactics?? that worked really well right?? (not, it ended up in a stalemate in Korea) mines? deploy the EOD units, population?....maybe

Edited by Ax3hunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem i have is the openess (is that a word?) of the US Military. Something just feels off when they are saying that they're building Railguns here and Lasers there. Remember this is Public Knowledge (as fox fire has pointed out) and i wouldn't want to know what the US really has up it's sleeve when they're being open like this

I totally agree, Even with operation desert storm, i remember watching CNN as they interviewed a military officer, talking step by step what they are going to do for the following week..THEN starting to talk about their weakness...... it was madness, my father were was formally in the military could believe how stupid they were, talking about what they were going to do on international news. 

But every military has its secrets..

 

The problem with China is that they don't have truly super navies (like the US) and just like the German Navy in World war 1. They would get quickly ****blocked by the joint coalition navy in the early stages of the war (the US alone could give China problems, combine that with Australia, South Korea, and Japanese navies and things would get ugly for China)

Why does the US has such a large Navy? well it was left over from the cold war, where they had to protect not only their international interest but to ensure ally they could respond at any notice, in other words maintain their global empire of alliances, from a military superpower. 

China doesn't need to protect or maintain a global empire of alliances, in an event of war, china wouldn't be fighting for the US's global empire of alliances but for Asia. 

And again this is why the YJ-12/DF-21 has been developed, to stop being blocked by the joint coalition, If every war plain had a YJ-12 and every ICBM had DF-21, it would be very risky and troublesome to move your navies around china let alone try and blocked it in. 

 

China losses 16 trillion dollars of debt money from the US (they loaned it to the US so the US could buy their stuff) it's not really that complex, while true that China could flood the market with the US dollars and weaken the US currency. And wouldn't the US recover from the recession in due time by reopening their closed factories, making sure taxes are well distributed (i doubt congress would screw anything up in a world war 3 scenario), and gear the country into a total war footing?? (the Germans and Japanese are living witnesses to what happens when you have a pissed US at war with you)

The problem the US wasn't in this amount of debt during the start of WW2, nations can only borrow so much before they are forced to go bankrupt.. If a world war was to start today the US and Europe would be at a disadvantage. 

And just something for you to note, the US during the world war 2 wasn't the most technologic advance military in the world, Britain still was, in ww2 the US had instead the factories and the manpower... today China has more than 3x the manpower and is the worlds largest factory nation...in a total war, the Chinese war machine will dwarf[/size] that of the US. 

 

and for that picture, that pic is taken by a civilian satellite right? if a civilian sat can locate a Supposedly top secret Chinese research facility than the US air force equipped with their ASAT missiles, strategic bombers, stealth weapons, and military grade spy satellites which has classified capabilities would do a good job at neutralizing those research facilities ( yes i am suggesting flying strike missions into mainland China, this is world war 3 after all, risks has to be taken) 

Nope Military according to the Author...  

 

and have you seen the US military budget?? even China doesn't have that much of an emphasis of the military and yet they are capable of doing some really good strides in their military, if the US goes into true war footing, reopening it's closed factories and increasing the budget massively for the US military (as if they're not flowing with money already)

Emphasis of the military? you do know China is yearly increasing its military budget by doubt digits? and even then it spends left in terms of GDP than the US does, And agaist 

 

and i simply laugh at your notion of a long range Continental artillery  i'm not going to even argue about the ridiculous notion of a continental artillery. And when you mention those intercontinental ballistic missiles i just throw my keyboard and simply respond with this

Hey hey it wasn't my idea, your pentagon is the one that said it might be either a railgun or a Continental artillery

 

Trident nuclear missiles alone has a range of 12.000 km's, far greater than even the CSS-4 ICBM's, source: http://news.bbc.co.u...ews/4438392.stm

Um the CSS-4 has a range of 12,900km 

1024px-PLA_ballistic_missiles_range.jpg

 

And while i do admit that sending LCS's raiding Chinese coastal cities would be a rather crazy notion, what's stopping the US from advancing through North Korea (which will declare war in order to "join themselves in the noble communist crusade") and through Manchuria? human wave tactics?? that worked really well right?? (not, it ended up in a stalemate in Korea) mines? deploy the EOD units, population?....maybe

Human wave tactics were phased out during the early 90s, the problem is we have this stereotype view that the Chinese are a rag tag army of old, china has modernise, they have 5 gen fighters, modern artillery and modern networks for supplies and modern weapons. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole world is looking to China as an economic superpower. However, a war with the US would leave both sides broken and Russia knows that. I assure you they won't defend China for economic reasons. They have plenty of economic opportunities elsewhere that require less losses. If anything, I imagine Russia taking advantage of the situation and invading everything north of Belarus to connect their territories.

Carrier Killers are currently useless at ICBM type ranges without a satellite. Experts speculate that this very weapon would lead to ICBM exchanges, because you're right, Its our only defense against it.

The difference in air power is staggering. China has created a naval advantage, but I have no doubt that our air power alone would prevent any mainland invasion. They would never make it to our shores with conventional warfare.

I'm pretty sure Russia and China can't track NATO ships and subs 24/7 either.

As for the CSS 4, there is a lot of speculation that if it exists, it currently does not work as intended.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DF-5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does the US has such a large Navy? well it was left over from the cold war, where they had to protect not only their international interest but to ensure ally they could respond at any notice, in other words maintain their global empire of alliances, from a military superpower. 

China doesn't need to protect or maintain a global empire of alliances, in an event of war, china wouldn't be fighting for the US's global empire of alliances but for Asia. 

And again this is why the YJ-12/DF-21 has been developed, to stop being blocked by the joint coalition, If every war plain had a YJ-12 and every ICBM had DF-21, it would be very risky and troublesome to move your navies around china let alone try and blocked it in. 

 

And it's that Large navy legacy of the cold war that would bring the Chinese trouble (plus the US's allies). And it would also be risky and troublesome for China to move it's navy since the US also has Tomahawks, Harpoons, it's 7th fleet, the Coalition navy, and the Subs in Guam armed with the Tridents. Meanwhile the US could use this to their advantage by ferrying troops from the Mainland to either South Korea or Japan (which would be blazing hellholes at this point)

 

The problem the US wasn't in this amount of debt during the start of WW2, nations can only borrow so much before they are forced to go bankrupt.. If a world war was to start today the US and Europe would be at a disadvantage. 

And just something for you to note, the US during the world war 2 wasn't the most technologic advance military in the world, Britain still was, in ww2 the US had instead the factories and the manpower... today China has more than 3x the manpower and is the worlds largest factory nation...in a total war, the Chinese war machine will dwarf[/size] that of the US. 

 

 

 

the entente was at a disadvantage in the early stages of world war 1 (yes Germany is that strong back then) and guess who won. Yes they borrow money from the US but it doesn't make the point that they managed to stopped the Germans at the Marne and attritioned and starved Germany for over 3 years moot. Yes the US might be at a disadvantage at a world war (China's population is huge) but China is allied with a Russia that is pretty much a shell of it's former Soviet Union self and proabably Iran (which would make minimal contributions to the war), the US on the other hand has NATO (invoking article 5 of the North Atlantic treaty if China declares war on the US), and it's Asian allies (and proabably India). I doubt China could survive against a Coalition that is that big.

 

And yes the US is not the technologically advanced military in world war 2, but it doesn't make it's military contributions any less significant. What would Russia and Britain do if the US doesn't us it's lend lease policy??, the country practically beating Japan by itself in the Pacific theatre, or opening another front in France putting in extra pressure to the Germans

 

And besides like the British in world war 1, the US has the advantage of range (the Pacific and Atlantic oceans are the Ultimate natural defense of the United States) Britain in world war 1 started at a horrible disadvantage but picked up the pace in the coming years. I think the US would do the same in world war 3 (if most of the nukes are shot down)

 

 

Nope Military according to the Author...  

 

It doesn't make the Chinese research facility any less significant, if a military sat can find the research facility a strike mission can be ordered.

 

 

Hey hey it wasn't my idea, your pentagon is the one that said it might be either a railgun or a Continental artillery

 

Um the CSS-4 has a range of 12,900km 

1024px-PLA_ballistic_missiles_range.jpg

 

Human wave tactics were phased out during the early 90s, the problem is we have this stereotype view that the Chinese are a rag tag army of old, china has modernise, they have 5 gen fighters, modern artillery and modern networks for supplies and modern weapons. 

 

first i am not American, so i don't know the workings of the Pentagon (just to clear the image of me not being a western citizen) 

 

Second those missiles will either be shot down by the US navy's ESSM's and the US would have time to prepare defenses in their mainland if a missile of that range is launched, and the Naval base in Guam is also a constant threat

 

thirdly no i do not Underestimate China, China as a highly technological and advanced military, i'm just saying that it's not ready to fight a war of this scale against most major powers of the world with only Russia and Iran (debatable) as it's major allies

Edited by Ax3hunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And it's that Large navy legacy of the cold war that would bring the Chinese trouble (plus the US's allies). And it would also be risky and troublesome for China to move it's navy since the US also has Tomahawks, Harpoons, it's 7th fleet, the Coalition navy, and the Subs in Guam armed with the Tridents. Meanwhile the US could use this to their advantage by ferrying troops from the Mainland to either South Korea or Japan (which would be blazing hellholes at this point)

Yes, the US Large navy would bring the Chinese trouble, which is why they developed Anti-ship ballistic missile. Also the US Tomahawks, Harpoons are not Anti-ship ballistic missile and will prove far less effective and time consuming than and actual Anti-ship ballistic missile.

Don't worry China will be more than an match for Subs in Guam armed with the Tridents, and again the Chinese military is estimated only to 10 years behind that of the United States, and being out numbered, you wont get very far. 

 

the entente was at a disadvantage in the early stages of world war 1 (yes Germany is that strong back then) and guess who won. Yes they borrow money from the US but it doesn't make the point that they managed to stopped the Germans at the Marne and attritioned and starved Germany for over 3 years moot. Yes the US might be at a disadvantage at a world war (China's population is huge) but China is allied with a Russia that is pretty much a shell of it's former Soviet Union self and proabably Iran (which would make minimal contributions to the war), the US on the other hand has NATO (invoking article 5 of the North Atlantic treaty if China declares war on the US), and it's Asian allies (and proabably India). I doubt China could survive against a Coalition that is that big.

 

And yes the US is not the technologically advanced military in world war 2, but it doesn't make it's military contributions any less significant. What would Russia and Britain do if the US doesn't us it's lend lease policy??, the country practically beating Japan by itself in the Pacific theatre, or opening another front in France putting in extra pressure to the Germans

 

And besides like the British in world war 1, the US has the advantage of range (the Pacific and Atlantic oceans are the Ultimate natural defense of the United States) Britain in world war 1 started at a horrible disadvantage but picked up the pace in the coming years. I think the US would do the same in world war 3 (if most of the nukes are shot down)

 

My point was during the world war 2, the US has a massive population compared to the axis, they weren't the most technologically advanced but they had the factories and the manpower, today China has taken over that role, its military might not be the most technologically advanced but they have the most factories and the manpower to have a larger war machine. Often who win wars isn't the one who is the most technologically advanced but who has the largest war machine, in which China will dwarf the US.

 

It doesn't make the Chinese research facility any less significant, if a military sat can find the research facility a strike mission can be ordered.

 

Google earth has to blur US and other nations research facilities, its not hard finding them in the 21th century, however after the first 24 hours of shoot each-others satellites down, it will be harder to find the relocated facilities.

 

Second those missiles will either be shot down by the US navy's ESSM's and the US would have time to prepare defenses in their mainland if a missile of that range is launched, and the Naval base in Guam is also a constant threat

 

thirdly no i do not Underestimate China, China as a highly technological and advanced military, i'm just saying that it's not ready to fight a war of this scale against most major powers of the world with only Russia and Iran (debatable) as it's major allies

These Missiles cant be shot down, they are two fast, the only defence is possible Lazer technology which is currently not moving fast enough to make a difference any time soon. " This is why missiles like the DF-21D reportedly caused major changes in US strategy, because you can no longer deploy carriers anywhere close enough for them to actually be useful. -" China has carrier-killer missile, U.S. admiral says". The Washington Times.

The whole world is looking to China as an economic superpower. However, a war with the US would leave both sides broken and Russia knows that. I assure you they won't defend China for economic reasons. They have plenty of economic opportunities elsewhere that require less losses. If anything, I imagine Russia taking advantage of the situation and invading everything north of Belarus to connect their territories.

Carrier Killers are currently useless at ICBM type ranges without a satellite. Experts speculate that this very weapon would lead to ICBM exchanges, because you're right, Its our only defense against it.

The difference in air power is staggering. China has created a naval advantage, but I have no doubt that our air power alone would prevent any mainland invasion. They would never make it to our shores with conventional warfare.

I'm pretty sure Russia and China can't track NATO ships and subs 24/7 either.

As for the CSS 4, there is a lot of speculation that if it exists, it currently does not work as intended.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DF-5

In a event of a war China and the US will be like European state of old in the first and second world war, nether state will come out of it better.

There are more than one way to deploy the Carrier Killers, and the problem is when you have simple short range missile to ICBM to every fighter jet, it because just a matter of time before they start hitting carriers if they are deploy in Asia.

And oh no China is like 50 if not 100 years away from being able to invade the US Shores, China has created a defensive advantage at sea, but this alone wont win the war, but again the US would have to rely on US allies to station their plaines, as carriers in Asia would be too vulnerable.

Every Developed/developing nation can track ships (guess subs too) within their borders 24/7, this is why it was such a news headline, the fact they lose track of the carrier in the middle of Nato waters and with no Escort.... its just to dangerous.

the CSS-4 been devplyed since the 80s but the speculation was about the existents of a MIRV Upgraded verson of the CSS-4. Plus the CSS-4 (DF-5) will soon be replaced by DF-41

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the US Large navy would bring the Chinese trouble, which is why they developed Anti-ship ballistic missile. Also the US Tomahawks, Harpoons are not Anti-ship ballistic missile and will prove far less effective and time consuming than and actual Anti-ship ballistic missile.

Don't worry China will be more than an match for Subs in Guam armed with the Tridents, and again the Chinese military is estimated only to 10 years behind that of the United States, and being out numbered, you wont get very far. 

I think the Coalition would have a greater industrial and population advantage than China. You just combined the economical capabilities and population of the US, NATO (which consisted of 2 member states which have nuclear capabilities, 3 if you want to add one that can produce one in short order), Japan, The Phillipines, South Korea, and Taiwan. I think i'm pretty sure China is the one at an economical and population disadvantage.

 

 

Harpoons are anti-ship missiles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harpoon_(missile)

 

and apparently there is a version of the tomahawk designed for naval combat: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomahawk_(missile)#Variants

 

and although the naval tomahawks never enter combat. The US would sure as hell roll out it's blueprints and start manufacturing them once the war turns ugly

 

and don't worry about those ASBM's, the US has these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Ballistic_Missile_Defense_System

 

Google earth has to blur US and other nations research facilities, its not hard finding them in the 21st century, however after the first 24 hours of shoot each-others satellites down, it will be harder to find the relocated facilities.

and unlike the Chinese, the US could launch newer satellites: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vandenberg_Air_Force_Base

 

I doubt the Chinese or Russians could launch a strike mission on Vandenberg

 

These Missiles cant be shot down, they are two fast, the only defence is possible Lazer technology which is currently not moving fast enough to make a difference any time soon. " This is why missiles like the DF-21D reportedly caused major changes in US strategy, because you can no longer deploy carriers anywhere close enough for them to actually be useful. -" China has carrier-killer missile, U.S. admiral says". The Washington Times.

Ahem, the US could oh i don't know....speed up testing phase and mass produce these lasers in the event of a massive world war

 

Direct quotes from the news article: “The number of available shots is extremely high compared to a conventional system,” Bauer said. “Whatever we aim at is what we hit.”

 

Every Developed/developing nation can track ships (guess subs too) within their borders 24/7, this is why it was such a news headline, the fact they lose track of the carrier in the middle of Nato waters and with no Escort.... its just to dangerous.

 

really?: http://www.jakartagreater.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/radar-tni-au21.png

 

Indonesia's eastern regions has barely any radar coverage 

My point was during the world war 2, the US has a massive population compared to the axis, they weren't the most technologically advanced but they had the factories and the manpower, today China has taken over that role, its military might not be the most technologically advanced but they have the most factories and the manpower to have a larger war machine. Often who win wars isn't the one who is the most technologically advanced but who has the largest war machine, in which China will dwarf the US.

 

don't give me this bs Ahovking, China might get a higher industrial capacity than the US, but it would never dwarf the US in anyway possible (except population). The US is just too advanced for it's time that getting into conflicts with the US until at least 2020s-2030s is suicide (don't count me on the 2020s-2030s though, since i can't predict the future)

 

This situation is similar like in world war 1, Germany (China) might have a greater military and industrial capacity than Britain, France, and Russia (Coalition). But unfortunately they picked a fight with all of those countries at the same time. They win the opening battles but once the war turns into attrition Germany (China) can't win, they just fought too many countries at once (and that's what the US has on it's side)

Edited by Ax3hunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Coalition would have a greater industrial and population advantage than China. You just combined the economical capabilities and population of the US, NATO (which consisted of 2 member states which have nuclear capabilities, 3 if you want to add one that can produce one in short order), Japan, The Phillipines, South Korea, and Taiwan. I think i'm pretty sure China is the one at an economical and population disadvantage.

Thats a a great point, i didn't think of it that way, yet at the beginning of both world wars, the factions total industrial and population power doesn't seem to have much effect, it seems that actual national industrial and population power mattered more.

 

Harpoons are anti-ship missiles: http://en.wikipedia....rpoon_(missile)

and apparently there is a version of the tomahawk designed for naval combat: http://en.wikipedia...._Defense_System

Harpoons are anti-ship missiles yes but they are not Anti-ship ballistic missile.. these a big difference between the two.

http://en.wikipedia...._Air_Force_Base

I doubt the Chinese or Russians could launch a strike mission on Vandenberg

The Chinese can launch their own satellites? and so far only the US and China has shown and proven to be able to shoot down satellites at will.

Both sides have similar advance anti ballistic missile systems which are more than capable of intercepting each others missile.

the US doesn't any more have a large enough technology lead to hit anything in China.

Ahem, the US could oh i don't know....speed up testing phase and mass produce these lasers in the event of a massive world war

China could do the same, both sides with Lazer defence systems, very little will be hitting their targets. but i will agree the US would deploy a Lazer defence systems first giving the advance to the US for a while but while the testing phase is sped up, all China would need is the first few hours to mass deploy more than 100-300 and hit major targets.

In the first couple of weeks would result in Carrier after Carrier being hit by these ASBMs, then the US would deploy these lasers and a year or two later china would do the same..

Indonesia's eastern regions has barely any radar coverage

ok, Most, i know a few developing and even a developed counties that has gaps in their detecting systems, but the majority of them can track ships within their borders 24/7.

don't give me this bs Ahovking, China might get a higher industrial capacity than the US, but it would never dwarf the US in anyway possible (except population). The US is just too advanced for it's time that getting into conflicts with the US until at least 2020s-2030s is suicide (don't count me on the 2020s-2030s though, since i can't predict the future)

This situation is similar like in world war 1, Germany (China) might have a greater military and industrial capacity than Britain, France, and Russia (Coalition). But unfortunately they picked a fight with all of those countries at the same time. They win the opening battles but once the war turns into attrition Germany (China) can't win, they just fought too many countries at once (and that's what the US has on it's side)

I never said china would win the world war.. so don't put words in my mouth. And like Germany in world war 2 who was the most advanced military, economical (not the largest but advanced) nation in the world (jets, rockets etc) what matters isn't technological superiority but your War machine (Industrial output + population).

China could defend itself against the US, most systems and weapons almost if not as good as the US counterpart, the USis not too advanced, its as simple as that, But china would lose, not because the was to US too advanced but it was, like Germany outnumbered and overpowered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Chinese can launch their own satellites? and so far only the US and China has shown and proven to be able to shoot down satellites at will.

Both sides have similar advance anti ballistic missile systems which are more than capable of intercepting each others missile.

the US doesn't any more have a large enough technology lead to hit anything in China.

 

I've got a feeling there would be the first development of space warfare in a world war 3 scenario (in order to protect it's satellites, the US would deploy some sort of a defense system in space to protect it's launched satellites from getting shot down, China would send some sort of a space warship to destroy the defense system, the US would deploy it's own starships and BAM space warfare baby)

 

 

China could do the same, both sides with Lazer defence systems, very little will be hitting their targets. but i will agree the US would deploy a Lazer defence systems first giving the advance to the US for a while but while the testing phase is sped up, all China would need is the first few hours to mass deploy more than 100-300 and hit major targets.

In the first couple of weeks would result in Carrier after Carrier being hit by these ASBMs, then the US would deploy these lasers and a year or two later china would do the same..

 

There's AEGIS preventing most of it's missiles to hit US carriers, and then there's NORAD for the missiles bound for continental US

 

 

I never said china would win the world war.. so don't put words in my mouth. And like Germany in world war 2 who was the most advanced military, economical (not the largest but advanced) nation in the world (jets, rockets etc) what matters isn't technological superiority but your War machine (Industrial output + population).

China could defend itself against the US, most systems and weapons almost if not as good as the US counterpart, the USis not too advanced, its as simple as that, But china would lose, not because the was to US too advanced but it was, like Germany outnumbered and overpowered.

 

I'm not claiming that China will win the war. I'm saying that China wouldn't dwarf the US in anything besides population

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a feeling there would be the first development of space warfare in a world war 3 scenario (in order to protect it's satellites, the US would deploy some sort of a defense system in space to protect it's launched satellites from getting shot down, China would send some sort of a space warship to destroy the defense system, the US would deploy it's own starships and BAM space warfare baby)

The US would never develop space warfare its to dangerous, the US and USSR didnt and the US and China wont...whats more worst than a world war 3? a militarized space.

There's AEGIS preventing most of it's missiles to hit US carriers, and then there's NORAD for the missiles bound for continental US

Your missing the point, AEGIS nor the NORAD can affectively defenced against weapons like ASBMs. Its why " This is why missiles like the DF-21D reportedly caused major changes in US strategy, because you can no longer deploy carriers anywhere close enough for them to actually be useful. -" China has carrier-killer missile, U.S. admiral says". The Washington Times."

I'm not claiming that China will win the war. I'm saying that China wouldn't dwarf the US in anything besides population

China wouldn't dwarf the US in War machine because too advanced, it has the factories and the manpower the US has, it will be able to build more aircraft carriers then the US can because it has more factories and more men to deploy.. its war machine has to be bigger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The US would never develop space warfare its to dangerous, the US and USSR didnt and the US and China wont...whats more worst than a world war 3? a militarized space.

 

But the US and the USSR tensions never escalated into a hot war. And we're discussing world war 3 so yeah i predict space warfare, and how come it's too dangerous? warfare is always dangerous no matter what the terrain is. 

 

 

Your missing the point, AEGIS nor the NORAD can affectively defenced against weapons like ASBMs. Its why " This is why missiles like the DF-21D reportedly caused major changes in US strategy, because you can no longer deploy carriers anywhere close enough for them to actually be useful. -" China has carrier-killer missile, U.S. admiral says". The Washington Times."

 

Apparently AEGIS is designed for that exact purpose: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Ballistic_Missile_Defense_System

 

it was designed to provide defense against ballistic missiles. And apparently a standard US carrier strike group has at least a Squadron of these ships in escort of the US carriers

 

and there's also the coalition ships.....no need for explanation for that (they will defend the US carriers in world war 3)

 

 

China wouldn't dwarf the US in War machine because too advanced, it has the factories and the manpower the US has, it will be able to build more aircraft carriers then the US can because it has more factories and more men to deploy.. its war machine has to be bigger.

 

Nazi (and Imperial) Germany doesn't have more manpower than the coalition they're fighting against. And how much of a thorn that country alone has given to Europe in the last 50 years of the last Century. The US would be a really big thorn to China, combine that with American allies and.....well you know how it goes

Edited by Ax3hunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the US and the USSR tensions never escalated into a hot war. And we're discussing world war 3 so yeah i predict space warfare, and how come it's too dangerous? warfare is always dangerous no matter what the terrain is.

Both the USSR and US like both the USSR and China as well as just about every country on earth want space demilitarized, we have and handful of International treaties governing space limit or regulate conflicts in space and limit the installation of weapon systems.

US can and has had the opportunity as well Russia has, to done to deploy weapon systems, especially nuclear weapons in space, Both didn't and have even limited their capabilities in regard to the International treaties, The cold war was a war with no fighting both scrambled to gain the upper hand yet no side deploy weapon systems in space. 

The problem is once you militarised spaces you wont be able to stop other nations from doing the same, the result is every nation will then have global reach something that is currently monopolised to a few nations, and no don't the US wants to keep that global monopolised.

 

Apparently AEGIS is designed for that exact purpose: http://en.wikipedia...._Defense_System

 

it was designed to provide defense against ballistic missiles. And apparently a standard US carrier strike group has at least a Squadron of these ships in escort of the US carriers

 

and there's also the coalition ships.....no need for explanation for that (they will defend the US carriers in world war 3)

According to Roger Cliff, a senior political scientist at the RAND Corporation, while the SM-3 would have limited effectiveness against ASBMs, the U.S. arsenal has a "variety of potential countermeasures" and the "kill chain" of a potential DF-21D attack would be so "complicated" that it would provide a "number of opportunities to defeat the attack".

The problem with the DF-21D is if they deployed them on mess and launch them on mass.. this could overwhelm our ability to exploit the "kill chain" of a potential mass DF-21D attack. - "Ballistic and Cruise Missile Threat"

Your posting basic knowledge of US carrier strike group, their ability and structure, AEGIS is limited effectiveness against ASBMs, and would have to reply "variety of potential countermeasures" and the "kill chain" which is as easy as to attack as it to defend.. and With china as modern as it is, the US will find it hard killing the "kill chain" of 50 DF-21D in 45seconds, regardless of the number AEGIS systems they have.

 

Nazi (and Imperial) Germany doesn't have more manpower than the coalition they're fighting against. And how much of a thorn that country alone has given to Europe in the last 50 years of the last Century. The US would be a really big thorn to China, combine that with American allies and.....well you know how it goes

The fact is China has more manpower and factories than the US, US was able to out produce japan in carriers and replace fallen troop faster than Germany could, its advantage as its large population and its factories.. this advantage has now been shifted to China.

Add allies can change the balance, however in a world where china is over taken the US has the number one most largest and important trading/investment partner, i dont see the world flocking to the US to aid it, i also see US allies like Australia and the EU continually decrease their military size and neglect their militaries.. i can say with experiences the Australia is nothing more than a scouts, and unlike in world war 2 where we operated 2 aircraft carriers, in world war 3 if nothing changes, we will be operating with paper knife.. the US allies i dont think will be as ready or up to date as the US will be.   

As as world war 2 showed Germany was far more advamce than the US or the Uk and still lost.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact is China has more manpower and factories than the US, US was able to out produce japan in carriers and replace fallen troop faster than Germany could, its advantage as its large population and its factories.. this advantage has now been shifted to China.

Add allies can change the balance, however in a world where china is over taken the US has the number one most largest and important trading/investment partner, i dont see the world flocking to the US to aid it, i also see US allies like Australia and the EU continually decrease their military size and neglect their militaries.. i can say with experiences the Australia is nothing more than a scouts, and unlike in world war 2 where we operated 2 aircraft carriers, in world war 3 if nothing changes, we will be operating with paper knife.. the US allies i dont think will be as ready or up to date as the US will be.   

As as world war 2 showed Germany was far more advamce than the US or the Uk and still lost.. 

 

I doubt Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and the Phillipines would ally themselves to China. 

 

http://www.voanews.com/content/china-rejects-obamas-stance-on-japan-island-dispute/1899198.html

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/11/26/world/asia/china-us-b52s/

 

It's not the best source i can find. But once i have reliable sources i'll send it to you

 

And one of the reasons Germany lost is because their allies are crap and they're practically fighting the whole world at that point. The US now has alliances with most of the major European and Asian countries and is now working ties with India by selling them harpoons. Those countries the US allied with are really good militarily (except the Phillipines) as far as i know and has fledging economies that can turn into a war footing in a couple of years. 

 

I tend to think things in the long run Ahovking. It doesn't matter if China can sink a majority of the US Pacific fleet when you have that many countries fighting against you

Both the USSR and US like both the USSR and China as well as just about every country on earth want space demilitarized, we have and handful of International treaties governing space limit or regulate conflicts in space and limit the installation of weapon systems.

US can and has had the opportunity as well Russia has, to done to deploy weapon systems, especially nuclear weapons in space, Both didn't and have even limited their capabilities in regard to the International treaties, The cold war was a war with no fighting both scrambled to gain the upper hand yet no side deploy weapon systems in space. 

The problem is once you militarised spaces you wont be able to stop other nations from doing the same, the result is every nation will then have global reach something that is currently monopolised to a few nations, and no don't the US wants to keep that global monopolised.

 

there's only 5 countries capable of launching spaceships right now: USA, China, Russia, EU, and Japan. And only 1 of these managed to land a manned spacecraft to the moon multiple times. I think the major powers would monopolize space for a long time

According to Roger Cliff, a senior political scientist at the RAND Corporation, while the SM-3 would have limited effectiveness against ASBMs, the U.S. arsenal has a "variety of potential countermeasures" and the "kill chain" of a potential DF-21D attack would be so "complicated" that it would provide a "number of opportunities to defeat the attack".

The problem with the DF-21D is if they deployed them on mess and launch them on mass.. this could overwhelm our ability to exploit the "kill chain" of a potential mass DF-21D attack. - "Ballistic and Cruise Missile Threat"

Your posting basic knowledge of US carrier strike group, their ability and structure, AEGIS is limited effectiveness against ASBMs, and would have to reply "variety of potential countermeasures" and the "kill chain" which is as easy as to attack as it to defend.. and With china as modern as it is, the US will find it hard killing the "kill chain" of 50 DF-21D in 45seconds, regardless of the number AEGIS systems they have.

 

can i get a source for this? Although Roger Cliff didn't mention any ASAT missiles that can reliably destroy these kill chains by shooting down their satellites.

Edited by Ax3hunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now