What's new

First Sino-American War will Inflict Catastrophic Losses on China, says Rand Report

US is deploy military at our door step...and you expect us to talk peace with them? LMAO. With a simple deployment of the Chinese civilian 981 oil rig near Vietnam, you Vietnamese already cried for wolf and aggressively burn Taiwanese factory...so don't pretend you guys react better then us, it is pure hypocrisy. If American really want peace with China, they should have been neutral over SCS and Diaoyu Island, but the way they instigate as stir up trouble don't inspire peace but war.
You talk as if we do not know what it is like to have opposition non-military and military forces at our doorstep. I take it world history is not taught in China ? But of course, if it is Chinese history, then it is world history. Is that it ?

Basically, what you are, and have been, saying is that if the US want peace with China, then the US should have let China do anything to anyone. China being an aggressor is normal. Now we are clear.

No, the SCS is not yours.

global_sea_trade_routes_152-788_zpsdkc6l7tm.jpg


The red lines are commonly used sea lanes. We will not allow China to bully other Asian countries into submission.

You want a fight ? The US will use as much diplomatic measures as possible. It took two US Presidents before Iraq was invaded and Saddam Hussein removed from power. So we will not be rash, as many of you erroneously believes. You want a fight ? You got one coming. And it will not be pleasant for you. All those plans for the PLAN ? China will be restarting them once we are done with it.
 
.
You talk as if we do not know what it is like to have opposition non-military and military forces at our doorstep. I take it world history is not taught in China ? But of course, if it is Chinese history, then it is world history. Is that it ?
There

Basically, what you are, and have been, saying is that if the US want peace with China, then the US should have let China do anything to anyone. China being an aggressor is normal. Now we are clear.

No, the SCS is not yours.

global_sea_trade_routes_152-788_zpsdkc6l7tm.jpg


The red lines are commonly used sea lanes. We will not allow China to bully other Asian countries into submission.

You want a fight ? The US will use as much diplomatic measures as possible. It took two US Presidents before Iraq was invaded and Saddam Hussein removed from power. So we will not be rash, as many of you erroneously believes. You want a fight ? You got one coming. And it will not be pleasant for you. All those plans for the PLAN ? China will be restarting them once we are done with it.


There you're if American is consider China aggressor, what is the point to talk peace with them, we rather don't waste our time and prepare for eventual war...and you don't came to bullsh1t as we're the ones who like to have war with US as per your first statement on post #74.
 
.
There you're if American is consider China aggressor, what is the point to talk peace with them, we rather don't waste our time and prepare for eventual war...and you don't came to bullsh1t as we're the ones who like to have war with US as per your first statement on post #74.
He talks with a big mouth. I see alot of over confidence in his tone. Maybe he is hoping for our tough Trump-like American president in the year 2020 beyond to fulfill the role of complete punishment of China.
 
.
The best strategy here is time elastification.

Become water.

For at least next five years there will be tremendous pressure from NE and southern neigbour.

China must show Virtue...manage the patriotic feelings of the people and manage the provocations of the troublemakers.

This is going to push Chinese diplomacy to its limits. Which is a good thing. A great powers must have great diplomacy otherwise it has no right to be called as such.
Not sure what country do you come from.

But before you said these words, please refer to your religious beliefs swear: your country with virtue.

Although you are very clever conceals the nationality...
 
.
There you're if American is consider China aggressor, what is the point to talk peace with them, we rather don't waste our time and prepare for eventual war...and you don't came to bullsh1t as we're the ones who like to have war with US as per your first statement on post #74.
But China is the aggressor. When China claimed the entirety of the SCS as hers, what else is there to 'consider' ? In our response, did we say the South China Sea will now be the Far East American Sea ? No, we say that despite the 'China' tag, the SCS belongs to the world. Not to China. Not to Asia. But to the world. You do not like it ? Tough shit.

As for negotiations, I do support any kind of talk between China, the US, and any country that have interests of any level in the SCS. But that does not mean we should be idle as we talk. While the case is going thru the international arbitration system, I fully support a strong US military presence to let China know that if China want to fight, the first casualty will be the PLAN. Not the US Navy. Those artificial islands you PDF Chinese boasts about ? Without the PLAN and money from China, the sea will reclaim them. A fight between the two navies are more real than the experimental Chinese hypersonic missile that you juveniles crows about. The only thing hypersonic is the hot air from the PDF Chinese.
 
.
You talk as if we do not know what it is like to have opposition non-military and military forces at our doorstep. I take it world history is not taught in China ? But of course, if it is Chinese history, then it is world history. Is that it ?

Basically, what you are, and have been, saying is that if the US want peace with China, then the US should have let China do anything to anyone. China being an aggressor is normal. Now we are clear.

No, the SCS is not yours.

global_sea_trade_routes_152-788_zpsdkc6l7tm.jpg


The red lines are commonly used sea lanes. We will not allow China to bully other Asian countries into submission.

You want a fight ? The US will use as much diplomatic measures as possible. It took two US Presidents before Iraq was invaded and Saddam Hussein removed from power. So we will not be rash, as many of you erroneously believes. You want a fight ? You got one coming. And it will not be pleasant for you. All those plans for the PLAN ? China will be restarting them once we are done with it.
That is to say, China should ensure that Guam, freedom of navigation in Hawaii? Or we can put the warships into the west coast of the United States 12 miles?

US any war, illegal invaded Vietnam, countries such as grenada and Haiti. Even if they are small and weak does not pose a threat to US, also did not have territorial disputes with US. US still illegal invasion, now US don't invade others.

How ridiculous, said US in justice... US arms dealers in laughter. US to stop the invasion, Money where are from?

Lovely US baby, if the US to stop the invasion of sovereign state, so have peace in the world.

Don't forget to al qaeda and the taliban and ISIS is also made in you.

US invading sovereign countries, don't need any reason, regardless of the international law, and even don't comply with the UN resolution. Are you saying China bully its neighbours?? Oh, baby, go back to ask your President, why you invaded Vietnam, panama and grenada, Haiti, Cuba, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yugoslavia...

Then say these.
537d162fx7d8fd017a135&690.jpg
 
.
But China is the aggressor. When China claimed the entirety of the SCS as hers, what else is there to 'consider' ? In our response, did we say the South China Sea will now be the Far East American Sea ? No, we say that despite the 'China' tag, the SCS belongs to the world. Not to China. Not to Asia. But to the world. You do not like it ? Tough shit.

As for negotiations, I do support any kind of talk between China, the US, and any country that have interests of any level in the SCS. But that does not mean we should be idle as we talk. While the case is going thru the international arbitration system, I fully support a strong US military presence to let China know that if China want to fight, the first casualty will be the PLAN. Not the US Navy. Those artificial islands you PDF Chinese boasts about ? Without the PLAN and money from China, the sea will reclaim them. A fight between the two navies are more real than the experimental Chinese hypersonic missile that you juveniles crows about. The only thing hypersonic is the hot air from the PDF Chinese.

I think I know what the course of action will be for the US navy.
But China is the aggressor. When China claimed the entirety of the SCS as hers, what else is there to 'consider' ? In our response, did we say the South China Sea will now be the Far East American Sea ? No, we say that despite the 'China' tag, the SCS belongs to the world. Not to China. Not to Asia. But to the world. You do not like it ? Tough shit.

As for negotiations, I do support any kind of talk between China, the US, and any country that have interests of any level in the SCS. But that does not mean we should be idle as we talk. While the case is going thru the international arbitration system, I fully support a strong US military presence to let China know that if China want to fight, the first casualty will be the PLAN. Not the US Navy. Those artificial islands you PDF Chinese boasts about ? Without the PLAN and money from China, the sea will reclaim them. A fight between the two navies are more real than the experimental Chinese hypersonic missile that you juveniles crows about. The only thing hypersonic is the hot air from the PDF Chinese.

Both navies will have casualties, it's just that on the Chinese camp most probably it will be little bit higher but then again you can never predict a war, a war has its own dynamics which is closely linked to economy. I think China can afford to lose a few vessels which will be replenished pretty fast given the Chinese industrial capacity but the question is, in the long run will it produce the kind of result the Chinese leaders are seeking and what will it mean for the US economy?
 
.
I think I know what the course of action will be for the US navy.


Both navies will have casualties, it's just that on the Chinese camp most probably it will be little bit higher but then again you can never predict a war, a war has its own dynamics which is closely linked to economy. I think China can afford to lose a few vessels which will be replenished pretty fast given the Chinese industrial capacity but the question is, in the long run will it produce the kind of result the Chinese leaders are seeking and what will it mean for the US economy?

Rand is creating propaganda to delude those stooges.

They still want to make those stooges to blindly believe that the US is invincible.
 
.
Both navies will have casualties, it's just that on the Chinese camp most probably it will be little bit higher but then again you can never predict a war, a war has its own dynamics which is closely linked to economy. I think China can afford to lose a few vessels which will be replenished pretty fast given the Chinese industrial capacity but the question is, in the long run will it produce the kind of result the Chinese leaders are seeking and what will it mean for the US economy?
There is no 'little bit' and 'probably' about it.

Any shooting fight between the USN and the PLAN will be disastrous for the PLAN. When it comes to a disaster, there is no degree involved. Either it is a disaster, or it is not. Just because China have an industry that is capable of producing ships, that does not guarantee the Chinese leadership will remain the same after the PLAN is defeated. We can either sink or seriously damage a ship in one day, but it will take months to build its replacement. If the PLAN loses enough ships, how will China patrol and defend her coastline ? Sailors that survive will talk, so what will they say to their replacements about that fight with the Americans ?

The PDF Chinese that blathers about China's industrial might have no idea on what effects combat have on a person's psyche. None of them ever served. The loudest noise any of them ever experienced is probably at a concert or a car backfire. They do not know what it is like to feel yourself briefly stunned just from gunfire. War and combat are not how movies portrays. In the movies, the hero calmly walks away from the explosion, looking mightily badass. In real life, an explosion WILL knock you on your back or belly, however you were at that time. So what you do think those PLAN sailors will experience when their ships are under bombardment from a foe who has 100 hundred times the knowledge of modern naval warfare over them ?

After this defeat, do you really believe that China's leadership will be let off the hook ?

Here is what WILL happen...

From a position of strength, the US and allies, regionally and in the UN, will present to China an offer she cannot refuse. Either China officially renounce all future claims to the SCS or the SCS will come under de facto possession of the US, of which, the USN will have an even greater presence than today. Do not focus on our economy. What do you think will happen to China's economy ?

Rand is creating propaganda to delude those stooges.

They still want to make those stooges to blindly believe that the US is invincible.
Am sure there is a Chinese RAND equivalent. But you can also be sure that this Chinese RAND are not as blind as you PDF Chinese are when it comes to US. No, we are not invincible. But we are working hard to get there.
 
.
There is no 'little bit' and 'probably' about it.

Any shooting fight between the USN and the PLAN will be disastrous for the PLAN. When it comes to a disaster, there is no degree involved. Either it is a disaster, or it is not. Just because China have an industry that is capable of producing ships, that does not guarantee the Chinese leadership will remain the same after the PLAN is defeated. We can either sink or seriously damage a ship in one day, but it will take months to build its replacement. If the PLAN loses enough ships, how will China patrol and defend her coastline ? Sailors that survive will talk, so what will they say to their replacements about that fight with the Americans ?

If the combat was to take place in deep sea, say the Mid Pacific, I wouldn't refute what you've just said but that is not going to happen for I don't think the Chinese leaders are that naive. If the Chinese leaders are smart and I believe they are, they'll keep their vessels within the range of their fighter jets based on land. It's all about air support and I'm sure you know it.

The PDF Chinese that blathers about China's industrial might have no idea on what effects combat have on a person's psyche. None of them ever served. The loudest noise any of them ever experienced is probably at a concert or a car backfire. They do not know what it is like to feel yourself briefly stunned just from gunfire. War and combat are not how movies portrays. In the movies, the hero calmly walks away from the explosion, looking mightily badass. In real life, an explosion WILL knock you on your back or belly, however you were at that time. So what you do think those PLAN sailors will experience when their ships are under bombardment from a foe who has 100 hundred times the knowledge of modern naval warfare over them ?

The same applies to the US sailors as well, do you think the US navy is going to fight this war with WW-II veterans. The US soldiers not the sailors are battle hardened and even that number is not that significant. On top of that the US has no experience of fighting a war directly against a super power, it fought wars against petty thugs like Noriega and Saddam. If you think that experience will help the US forces to fight China then I must say that you're in for a rude surprise.



After this defeat, do you really believe that China's leadership will be let off the hook ?

There's no precedence of Chinese people blaming their leaders but there's precedence of impeachment of its President in the US. I think the likelihood is greater that something will go wrong and either Obama or Hillary will face the same fate as Nixon did.


Here is what WILL happen...

From a position of strength, the US and allies, regionally and in the UN, will present to China an offer she cannot refuse. Either China officially renounce all future claims to the SCS or the SCS will come under de facto possession of the US, of which, the USN will have an even greater presence than today. Do not focus on our economy. What do you think will happen to China's economy ?

Why isn't the US making the offer now? You know, as far as I know the US generals do not think the way you do, they are more or less pragmatic, over confidence is not one of their vices. Just let me tell you this much, a war, specially a war between two almost equally powerful rivals, has its own dynamics, one can never predict the out come the way you've done it. Wisen up and let go your super power ego, China is no Iraq!



No, we are not invincible. But we are working hard to get there.

It's so typical of the Americans, they show arrogance in the most modest way. If you consider weapons as everything in a conflict you're already there but if look at the human side of the equation you're never going to make it the way you've been going.
 
.
seapower.jpg


US_Carrier_Group.jpg

U.S. Aircraft Carrier Group heading to South China Sea


A war between China and the United States will be a conventional war in which China will suffer very severely, whether the war takes place in the next few years or by 2025, said a new report by U.S. global policy think tank the Rand Corporation. There is no possibility of a Chinese victory in this war.


The "First Sino-American War" will only be fought in the air, at sea and in cyberspace. Its likely battlefields will be the South China Sea, the East China Sea and the Chinese mainland.


It will be the first conflict involving the U.S. and China since the Korean War from 1950 to 1953 that ended in an Armistice.


The First Sino-American War will see U.S. aircraft and missiles strike the Chinese mainland while China will be unable to attack the continental United States because it lacks the long-range strategic weapons such as aircraft carriers and long-range supersonic bombers to do so. China can only use cyber warfare against the American homeland.


Rand predicts the war will end in a bloody stalemate that will have catastrophic consequences for the economies of both the U.S. and China -- and the world.


There is also the likelihood of a Second Sino-American War.


"Each side's increasingly far-flung disposition of forces and growing ability to track and attack opposing forces could turn much of the Western Pacific into a 'war zone,' with grave economic consequences," said the study.
"It is unlikely that nuclear weapons would be used: Even in an intensely violent conventional conflict, neither side would regard its losses as so serious, its prospects so dire, or the stakes so vital that it would run the risk of devastating nuclear retaliation by using nuclear weapons first."


Rand also assumes that "China would not attack the U.S. homeland, except via cyberspace, given its minimal capability to do so with conventional weapons. In contrast, U.S. nonnuclear attacks against military targets in China could be extensive."


Rand believes American losses in this war will be significant, but Chinese losses might well be catastrophic.




"As of 2015, U.S. losses of surface naval and air forces, including disabled aircraft carriers and regional air bases, could be significant, but Chinese losses, including to homeland-based A2AD systems, would be much greater. Within days, it would be apparent to both sides that the early gap in losses favoring the United States would widen if fighting continued."


The reports said that as of 2015, "the longer a severe war dragged on, the worse the results and prospects would be for China.


"By 2025, however, inconclusive results in early fighting could motivate both sides to fight on despite heavy losses incurred and still expected. Although prospects for U.S. military victory then would be worse than they are today, this would not necessarily imply Chinese victory."

This is something similar to what I had heard on this forum in a video in which Russian expert said that China will loose war against US in very first hour of starting the war.

There was an another news in which it was revealed that china shall loose 40% of its navy in an effort to sink one US Aircraft career.

Rand is creating propaganda to delude those stooges.

They still want to make those stooges to blindly believe that the US is invincible.

It seems that you are finding it difficult to accept the truth.
 
.
There is no 'little bit' and 'probably' about it.

Any shooting fight between the USN and the PLAN will be disastrous for the PLAN. When it comes to a disaster, there is no degree involved. Either it is a disaster, or it is not. Just because China have an industry that is capable of producing ships, that does not guarantee the Chinese leadership will remain the same after the PLAN is defeated. We can either sink or seriously damage a ship in one day, but it will take months to build its replacement. If the PLAN loses enough ships, how will China patrol and defend her coastline ? Sailors that survive will talk, so what will they say to their replacements about that fight with the Americans ?

The PDF Chinese that blathers about China's industrial might have no idea on what effects combat have on a person's psyche. None of them ever served. The loudest noise any of them ever experienced is probably at a concert or a car backfire. They do not know what it is like to feel yourself briefly stunned just from gunfire. War and combat are not how movies portrays. In the movies, the hero calmly walks away from the explosion, looking mightily badass. In real life, an explosion WILL knock you on your back or belly, however you were at that time. So what you do think those PLAN sailors will experience when their ships are under bombardment from a foe who has 100 hundred times the knowledge of modern naval warfare over them ?

After this defeat, do you really believe that China's leadership will be let off the hook ?

Here is what WILL happen...

From a position of strength, the US and allies, regionally and in the UN, will present to China an offer she cannot refuse. Either China officially renounce all future claims to the SCS or the SCS will come under de facto possession of the US, of which, the USN will have an even greater presence than today. Do not focus on our economy. What do you think will happen to China's economy ?


Am sure there is a Chinese RAND equivalent. But you can also be sure that this Chinese RAND are not as blind as you PDF Chinese are when it comes to US. No, we are not invincible. But we are working hard to get there.

Here is what IS happening:

America keeps talking while China keeps militarising the SCS islands.

Try and stop it if you've got the balls son :coffee:
 
. .
If the combat was to take place in deep sea, say the Mid Pacific, I wouldn't refute what you've just said but that is not going to happen for I don't think the Chinese leaders are that naive. If the Chinese leaders are smart and I believe they are, they'll keep their vessels within the range of their fighter jets based on land. It's all about air support and I'm sure you know it.
And you think we are dumb ? :lol:

If there is a shooting fight between US and China, it will be over the SCS issue. It will not be over mainland China because the US have no ambition on mainland China. On the other hand, since China does have ambitions in the SCS, as in effectively calling it territorial waters, the fight will be between navies and guess what...We have aircraft carriers and China does not.

The same applies to the US sailors as well, do you think the US navy is going to fight this war with WW-II veterans. The US soldiers not the sailors are battle hardened and even that number is not that significant. On top of that the US has no experience of fighting a war directly against a super power, it fought wars against petty thugs like Noriega and Saddam. If you think that experience will help the US forces to fight China then I must say that you're in for a rude surprise.
This is why just as no one should take the PDF Chinese seriously on military issues, no one should take their suck-ups seriously as well.

We are not talking about individual combat experience, oh clueless one.

We are talking about INSTITUTIONAL experience. Not only that, we are not talking about combat experience that happened sixty yrs ago but 20 yrs ago. Sailors on a ship may not have direct combat experience, but they would have the experience of how a ship like theirs would perform in combat. Each sailor would know from his predecessor on how to perform his/her duties under combat conditions. How to quickly load the guns, or set the hoses to fight fires, or how to manipulate the radar stations, etc...etc...There is a limit on how you can replicate these things in peace time. And when you have the experiences of your immediate ancestors to draw upon, that is an advantage that cannot be quantified. Now you add in naval air power to the mix.

The PLAN in the SCS will be sunk. Simple as that.

It's so typical of the Americans, they show arrogance in the most modest way. If you consider weapons as everything in a conflict you're already there but if look at the human side of the equation you're never going to make it the way you've been going.
That is deliciously ironic considering it has been YOU and the PDF Chinese who have been making the most noise about hardware. But when I brought up the human side of the warfare equation, as in how we have more than the Chinese, you dismissed it.

Intellectual consistency have never been with the PDF Chinese and their suck-ups.
 
.
And you think we are dumb ? :lol:

If there is a shooting fight between US and China, it will be over the SCS issue. It will not be over mainland China because the US have no ambition on mainland China. On the other hand, since China does have ambitions in the SCS, as in effectively calling it territorial waters, the fight will be between navies and guess what...We have aircraft carriers and China does not.

So, you think I was talking about mainland China. If that was not dumb what is? Read my post carefully wise guy.


We are not talking about individual combat experience, oh clueless one.

Do you think I was talking about the experience of one individual US soldier in Iraq? Is this the level of the American wit? I'm truly disappointed!

We are talking about INSTITUTIONAL experience. Not only that, we are not talking about combat experience that happened sixty yrs ago but 20 yrs ago. Sailors on a ship may not have direct combat experience, but they would have the experience of how a ship like theirs would perform in combat. .

Just how do they get the experience of what it really feels like? Simulators can never mimic reality and if your GI Joes can get it without direct combat experience why can't the Chinese?


Each sailor would know from his predecessor on how to perform his/her duties under combat conditions. How to quickly load the guns, or set the hoses to fight fires, or how to manipulate the radar stations, etc...etc...
.

Wake up wise guy, the Chinese have been watching you ever since the Korean War. Why do you think there are war colleges? Apart from that drills are designed for taking care of exactly that kind of inexperience. Of course, when fresh, sailors are a bit clumsy but if they go through the drills properly the clumsiness doesn't last long.



The PLAN in the SCS will be sunk. Simple as that.

I will be really happy if the US top dogs think like you. It will make the task easier for the Chinese.



That is deliciously ironic considering it has been YOU and the PDF Chinese who have been making the most noise about hardware. But when I brought up the human side of the warfare equation, as in how we have more than the Chinese, you dismissed it.

Where did I talk about hardware in this topic? Show it if you can. When I talked about the human factor I meant the morale of the sailors not training or experience.

Intellectual consistency have never been with the PDF Chinese and their suck-ups.

If it makes you feel better, okay, we're 'dumb' and you're INTELLECTUALLY SUPERIOR.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom