Political Crossfire Forums

[Ju&Johnson]

There is a question confused me: which country will give up first if the war broken out between PRC,ROC(TAIWAN) and USA?

[Dhammalover]

you gotta clarify. There are far too many variables to just say who would give up first. War like everything in life is not that simple.
Who would start? Who would get the jump? Technology, manpower, strategy, there are just so many variables you cant really say.

If you posed a question like "who would win in a air war between PRC and USA. I could maybe give you an answer. Or naval or army but all out war, too much.
Set the scenario, set the battespace, then that would be a valid question.
I can tell you this, man for man, technology against technology the PRC cannot hold a candle to the US. The U.S. is far superior technologically to China. However, the PRC has the potential to put hundreds of millions into uniform so I think a key question would be "what would win, brain or brawn?"

[johnz]

For the USA to declare war on China it would have to sacrifice its wealth and status as one of the leaders of the modern world.

Frankly they would'nt be a winner but two losers, China would be in ruins and the American dollar would be worthless leaving the USA to be a third world desolate backwater.

[TwinkieDP]

Ju&Johnson wrote: There is a question confused me: which country will give up first if the war broken out between PRC,ROC(TAIWAN) and USA? If , and thats a big IF, U.S. does declare war on China, it will most likely be the U.S. that gives up first.

Why? Firstly, the Americans would be the aggressors, and the Chinese would see this as a case of defending their homeland against invaders. Given the military might of the U.S. many Chinese would die, but the political will to continue such a war would be on China's side. Also, do not forget about the Nukes that China possesses, or Russia and North Korea as a potential Chinese ally. The Nukes China possess will most like be used to destroy any invading force rather than attack U.S. mainland.

Although this is a highly unlikely situation, the question you have to ask yourself is, if China invades Taiwan, and our President declares war on China, would you sign up to fight for Taiwanese independence??

[dgs_vex]

war with china will only happen if we have a crazy president like my roommate here who says hes gonna run for president and legalize weed and blow up the world one day. i highly doubt it, he failed his SAT so many times. and i think he comes on this forum too. if you read this post, tell you i said "hi".

do you preffer "bad" or "crazy"?

[mr_FOBolous]

LOL!!! china and the US will NEVER go to war against each other. they both need each other too much economically. they're each other's biggest business partner and if it isn't for China, the US will be in a really BIG debt and won't have any money to support the war in iraq because China is the biggest buyer of American Government Bond behind Japan. and they both know it's against each other's best interest to fight each other. the ROC (Taiwan) will never have the guts to go to war against China...especially after a recent statement given in taiwan by the US government to warn the taiwanese president that the US will NOT support any movement toward independence and will not help Taiwan in a war if Taiwan provokes China in any way.

[Chow440104]

If Taiwan and China ever go to war, then Taiwan would give up first. The Taiwanese army is known for being weak. If Chinese forces can by pass the Taiwanese navy and land some troops on Taiwan, the war would be over for them.

[KOV-14]

China's military equipment = "MADE IN CHINA" (used to be Russian made but China is replacing them with their own.)

America's equipment = "MADE IN USA"

America WINS!

Seriously,

China has a lot of infantry but they woud never be able to land on US soil alive so it doesn't really matter unless the US is forced to send in its troops into China before bombing the heck out of their defenses.

While the US has many allies, China has pretty much none. Russia is even getting tired of China.

I simply do not see how China would ever stand a chance against the US. But I also don't see how Taiwan could ever defeat China.

Don't call me an arrogant American. I'm not American.

[dgs_vex]

reading documents of fas.org i found out that they are developing a class of subs that would be able to put 3/4 of the US in danger from international threats. but of course the sub was broke. china suks at reverse engineering. they even have our blue prints for F-16 and yet their J-10's crash like hell. maybe its because their using Russian made jet rockets for propulsion?

other than that. Russia is coming out with this one other plane that is suppose to surpass the specs of the new F-22. but i think the project got scrapped too.

[Akajjred]

Ju&Johnson wrote: There is a question confused me: which country will give up first if the war broken out between PRC,ROC(TAIWAN) and USA?

China... One reason USAF. The US would RULE the skies, and bomb any target they saw fit. China would be on the defensive. The US would never have to bring its army. How could China stop the B-2, F-22, or even the B-52 and F-15 for that matter?

[mr_happy]

Local superiority of force.


China has the larger army on paper. However, the US has much better mobility and communications. This would result in battles that gave the US a drastic advantage. Once Chinese reinforcements arrived the battle would be over and the Chinese would be in full retreat. If the Chinese managed to concentrate its armor and infantry despite attacks by air, sea, and armored harrassing forces, then force the US in a pitched battle, it would be a hard fight. But, the Chinese would be hardpressed to ever be able to concentrate their forces while under constant attack and bombardment.

[superskippy]

If it's nuclear?

The result is this: China is utterly ruined, and I mean completely no cities, no population centers, nothing. At least 900,000,000 dead in waves of nuclear salvo's. China cannot compete with the enormous quantity and quality of US nuclear weapons and delivery systems.

The US suffers enormous loss Hawaii is destroyed and turned to radioactive slag, Seattle, San Franciso, San Diego, Sacrimento, Los Angelas, and most cities on the US west coast and a little bit deeper would be in ruins. South Korea would be obliterated as nuclear strikes would hit there to harm US forces. Japan would also suffer heavily due to holding US troops in close proximity.

Taiwan would not exist a few nuclear weapons would destroy it.

North Korea would probably be caught in the crossfire by a US nuclear weapon if South Korea was it.

The war would last a few hours at the most, and yet still be the most destructive in the history of the world.



If it WASNT a nuclear exchange things would be different.

I would bet that the US would opt to not launch an invasion of China for quite a while instead opting to fight them through air campaigns and naval supermacy and occupying border nations to keep China isolated.

China would lose the air war there is no doubt about that, and once it loses air combat ability China becomes a US playground. Taiwan would never fall since China would never get the required 200,000 troops and combat support equipment to land perfectly and establish a beachhead without suffering those heavy losses in the straits.

And the fact that the US 7th Fleet would prevent a crossing.

Once air control is established and a naval blocked exists I would guess a tactic of indirect warfare would emerge. Keep China isolated and bomb it's industrial and economic sectors to oblivian, and let China fall from starving itself as well as economic deprivation.

Unless China plans on maintaing a 9,000 mile long supply line through Russia to keep all of China alive, assuming of course Russian cooperation, they would be doomed. In this case China's own strength and power would destroy itself, the only country capable of aiding them with supply is India and they are not only opposed to China but allies of the United States.


If it was just Taiwan against China it would be a stalemate if it happened today.

Before you respond just read on, China has a massive army this is true, but Taiwan has a massive army as well between 400,000-700,000 trained and US equipped and supplied troops. They both have comparable Air Forces, China has more but most of them are not fighter aircraft and are not comparable to the advanced quality of Taiwans planes.

Also China's Navy would have to get their entiry troop fleet across the straits without any heavy losses of troop transports. China also quite frankly has almost no effective troop transport ability, it cannot project it's power across the straits. The biggest ship they have which they have only a few of can carry when overloaded around 1,200-1,800 men and are very lightly armed.

China would have to get 200,000 men across the straits without taking any damage to their troop transports, as well as create a landing zone and hold it in a very tiny area while being outnumbered and outgunned (Ironic isnt it?), and keep that bridgehead alive and supplied across a battlezone in the straits of Taiwan.

Taiwan has an excellent Airforce and quite a few good antiship missile boats even if they only sink 2 or 3 major transports the tide is turned in Taiwans favor.

China wouldnt get to take hold of Taiwan and Taiwan would of course never be able to land in China.

[superskippy]

I put so much effort into this post someone better respond or ill never come here again!

:lol: :lol:

[Tepic]

superskippy wrote: I put so much effort into this post someone better respond or ill never come here again!

:lol: :lol:

Well, on the nuclear option ... wouldn't the number of weapons required to turn China into radioactive slag produce a nuclear winter, snuffing out life across the rest of the globe too?

[superskippy]

Why? How many nuclear weapons have been tested to date? Over a 2,000 megatons worth of detonations and probably in the hundreds when it comes to actual bomb explosions. Why has none of this caused a nuclear winter?

Nuclear winter is an unproven theory and when held up to our common knowledge and the multitude of nuclear tests it simply doesnt hold that much water.

[Tepic]

superskippy wrote: Why? How many nuclear weapons have been tested to date? Over a 2,000 megatons worth of detonations and probably in the hundreds when it comes to actual bomb explosions. Why has none of this caused a nuclear winter?

They weren't all launched at the same time; and they weren't launched at flammable targets which would produce lots of soot, like cities. (Except two). It's not a certainty, but I don't think it would be wise to dismiss the theory yet.

Quote: Nuclear winter is a hypothetical global climate condition that is predicted to be a possible outcome of a large-scale nuclear war. It is thought that severely cold weather can be caused by detonating large numbers of nuclear weapons, especially over flammable targets such as cities, where large amounts of smoke and soot would be injected into the Earth's stratosphere.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_winter

[superskippy]

The theory is basically a crock theory concerning weather. It assumes that the yield of the explosives will be so powerful that it will cause massive dust and soot clouds to rise into the atmosphere.

First off it revolves around being used at cities to cause the soot, that is a ridiculous notion. The blast from a nuclear weapon doesnt cause fire or damage against what it strikes it eviserates them.

You have more of a chance of this occuring through firebombings due to obvious reasons, it meets the same criteria needed for Nuclear Winter and produces more soot and smoke.

But lets get back to the topic at hand and religate this to another thread if need be?

[antonio62]

superskippy wrote: The US suffers enormous loss Hawaii is destroyed and turned to radioactive slag, Seattle, San Franciso, San Diego, Sacrimento, Los Angelas, and most cities on the US west coast and a little bit deeper would be in ruins.

As well as some land further into America which would be affected by the radiation. It wouldn't be ruined but the place would be evacuated and food production would be impossible. It wouldn't be a huge amount of land but certainly some.

Quote: starving itself as well as economic deprivation.

It has enough food for its self by a long way.

Apart from those minor things excellent post.

[superskippy]

Really China is food self sufficient? I thought for sure they imported farming machinery as well as other impliments. But with economic deprivation logically wouldnt food prices be hit hard?

Thanks for the compliment btw.

[TwinkieDP]

superskippy wrote: Really China is food self sufficient? I thought for sure they imported farming machinery as well as other impliments. But with economic deprivation logically wouldnt food prices be hit hard?

Thanks for the compliment btw. China produces more than enough to feed its population. But that doesn't mean they are not looking to continually improve the efficiency of their agricultural production. The problem is not that there isn't enough food, but that money is concentrated in such few hands that many live a poor lifestyle.