 |
| |
|
|
Sikander
|
 |
Boulder, Colorado, United Snakes of America
Jan 2000
time: 22:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Except that nuking land targets, specially ones near civlian areas were the possiblity of massive civlian damage is significant plays an etirely different PR story than hitting a purely military target were the collateral damage is minimal. |
People are going to hold the country that threw the first nuke responsible for the larger exchange. Besides which we could use tactical nukes / enhanced radiation weapons to limit collateral damage.
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
The idea of a succesul blockade of China that would bring her down is absurd. China can feed itself, and her Asian neighbors, who have now a huge stake with their largest trade partner would not let their economies sink for Taiwan. China would still be able to import energy and goods from the outside by land. Certainly the shortage of various raw materials would hurt grealty as would the cut off of foreign investment, but the notion that the US could pull of a blockade that woul;d bring China to stavation is pure fantasy. |
Thinking that we couldn't do so is fantasy. Sea power and air power are our specialties. We won't bother blasting track, we'll destroy bridges and engines. We'll destroy refineries, collapse tunnels, and blast pipelines where they cross rivers. We'll sink river craft. We'll blast hydroelectric dams, We'll isolate China from the outside and then we'll go to work on their internal communications. Starvation is rarely the result of lack of food, it is the inability to distribute it. But I doubt that it would come to that, as the resource crunch and the systematic destruction of infrastructure will likely take the wind out of their sails.
We don't have to deny western China oil / resources, it does them little good there. The vast majority of their population is within easy range of our aircraft, and they will be cut off without a doubt.
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
No I didn't. I said China will be willing to go farther than we are. For all the bluster from our leaders, lets not kid ourselves, Taiwan is not of particular interest to the American people, while it has huge significance for the Chinese. The Chinese are certainly willing to lose more, pay more, than Americans are for it, and unlike the US, Chinese governments don;t have to worry about an electorate disinchanted. |
Am I the only person here who lived during the Cold War? We stood toe to toe with a much more powerful state in relative military terms for 50 years and covered states much less important to us under our nuclear umbrella. Hell, we even fought wars for states that mattered much less to us at the time.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Patroklos
|
 |
Back home in good ole Norfolk VA
Dec 2001
time: 05:37
|
|
quote:
We don't have to negotiate for that. We can just default on those notes. |
That would cause a lot of economic problems, now if China voluntarily forgives the debt (hey, they sign the treaty too) then no problems at all, except for China.
quote:
The US doesn't have many planes that could easily and on a regular basis hit targets in Central Asia. One mission, fine, but after that the air defenses around it would be radically increased and trying to send any more long range bombers in would be less and less effective. |
Maybe for WWII era airforces, your ignorance shows glaringly. We have bombers that can fly around the world GePap, let alone just from Japan to China. And we have a good many of them, a lot completely invulnerable to Chinese air defense. Which of course as stated would cease to exist in a weak or so, or at the very least will be more than consumed with defending itself, let alone strategic targets.
Then there are cruise missiles.
quote:
The cost of keeping the pipe repaired would be minimal. You can;t possibly think it otherwise. Its a pipe, for heaven's sake. |
Perhaps you should look into how long it took to build the thing in the first place. Of course that was when the rest of their country wasn’t going up in smoke.
It all comes down to one factor GePap. We are capable of unleashing a whirlwind of destruction of China itself, and besides a limited nuclear first strike that would precipitate China disappearing entirely, they have nothing they can do to America directly.
Economically yes, we would be hurting, but to no greater extent than themselves and indeed the rest of the world. And since in any realistic scenario China starts hostilities, the wraith is on China’s head.
quote:
The power of airforces against mountains is far less than against those in open plain |
A patently false comment. Are you telling me that if I isolate a convoy of troops to already known avenues of advance (passes of Afghanistan) inside an area already 100miles narrow, that is somehow harder than attacking over 1000s of miles anywhere within it. Besides the fact that it is doubtful anyone’s heavy equipment could make the trip, they would be the most restricted to predictable and very small target zones. Go ahead and send a few hundred thousand irregulars. Those that survive the cold to get incinerated from the air, or survive that too will simply starve to death when they reach the desert beyond with no hope of resupply from China itself. Doesn’t matter anyway, most of the Chinese army that is worth a damn would have drowned in the straights of Taiwan anyways. Remember Taiwan, the actual objective of the war.
quote:
As long as they keep getting refuled from the air at regular intervals. And again, B-2 are expensive and rare. |
Luckily for us those regular intervals would be a few hundred miles West of Guam and then Afghanistan. Notice, not within China or anywhere near there pathetic power projection abilities.
quote:
nope, not with enough manpower ready to do it. Two nights at most. And if you think we would have 15 stealth bombers hitting either a pipeline or a railroad on the same night and on a regular basis, I think you are in dreamland. |
You mean the manpower that is sitting on the other side of the bridge that no longer exists. But as pointed out already, we don’t have to blow up very much of the pipeline, just the parts over rivers and mountains. And I doubt we would use stealths for the pipeline, That would probably fall to cruise missiles. The stealths will be blowing up things like refineries and pumping stations and collection points that make the pipelines irrelevant anyways.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dis
|
 |
Las Vegas, Nevada
Feb 2000
time: 21:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sikander
People are going to hold the country that threw the first nuke responsible for the larger exchange. Besides which we could use tactical nukes / enhanced radiation weapons to limit collateral damage.
Thinking that we couldn't do so is fantasy. Sea power and air power are our specialties. We won't bother blasting track, we'll destroy bridges and engines. We'll destroy refineries, collapse tunnels, and blast pipelines where they cross rivers. We'll sink river craft. We'll blast hydroelectric dams, We'll isolate China from the outside and then we'll go to work on their internal communications. Starvation is rarely the result of lack of food, it is the inability to distribute it. But I doubt that it would come to that, as the resource crunch and the systematic destruction of infrastructure will likely take the wind out of their sails.
We don't have to deny western China oil / resources, it does them little good there. The vast majority of their population is within easy range of our aircraft, and they will be cut off without a doubt.
Am I the only person here who lived during the Cold War? We stood toe to toe with a much more powerful state in relative military terms for 50 years and covered states much less important to us under our nuclear umbrella. Hell, we even fought wars for states that mattered much less to us at the time. |
I don't know, China really gave us a beating in the Korean war. I can't see us doing anything to the chinese.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by lord of the mark
are people still J**king off about a straights war??
IF Taiwan behaves, no UDI or anything, a Chinese attack on Taiwan will look awfully aggressive, and will ruin their developing relations with southeast asia, and send India running to the arms of Uncle Sam. Why would they do it unless they had a major internal legitimacy crisis on their hands? And if they did, wouldnt that play into US options as well? |
India already has run into the arms of Uncle Sam, he pays better.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
If the chinese ever want to conquer someone, they'll just start walking.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuà Rénmín Gònghéguó
Mar 2000
time: 06:37
|
|
What happens to the Earth's momentum when all Chinese start walking into the same direction in one moment?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37.
Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
19-07-2005 06:46
are we dead yet?
)
|
|