What's new

PLA not combat ready now, or any time soon

First of all, believe me nobody in this world is trying to pass themselves off as Chinese AT THIS MOMENT. I have no clue why you think I am Japanese. I have not said one thing that makes China look bad or anything.

Second, your arguments on destroying japan just reinforces my fear that much like the first Sino Japanese war. Most Chinese were saying Japan was nothing to fear, even when Li hong zhang explained the difference between Chinese and Japanese ships and the rampant corruption that was going on in the navy.

Now I am not saying China will lose in a full conflict, but looking at how China Japan conflict will most likely be a few minor to major sea battles, that may result in a landing by the Chinese. China will pay too much a price for the victory. Unlike China's southern neighbors Japan is technologically advanced and can make new warships in a hurry if needed and have a history of Sea battles. Losing more men in any war involving China will be looked at the same as losing and thus be counter productive.

One small thing I read pointing to Japanese WW2 failure was fire extinguishing abilities not proficient and thus Americans got an small edge and took advantage. Small things like this matters on the sea. Especially now software are involved every small thing counts.

I am just as patriotic as you, just because I say somethings are wrong and needs improvement doesn't mean traitor.

Yep, keep saying you are strong with mental masturbation, while the China of 2013 is still the China of 1893.

BTW, we Chinese have our joy to see your tiny island keeping suffering from the continuation of the nuclear radiation leak.

At the time your island sunk at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean, we will still be here to witness it, loser. :coffee:
 
I don't think he is fake Chinese. All he is saying is that the PLA is not ready for war yet and anyway, China still needs modernization of military.

Idk about him but i m sure ur definitely Chinese....:lol:
 
@cnleio
It's sort of out there and I am not suggesting it, but it's just a scenario to keep the military on their toes. With recent events, it points to China will finally start to sent out military. Despite what it will say, the timer has started.
U prepare for another COLD WAR ? B.S!

1.3billion Chinese ppl only agreed the developments of today China and CCP's correct political orientation. If China economy crash, don't believe today Chinese ppl(special youngs) willing to live in a poor conditons like the N.Korea. These Chinese have experienced Mao‘s "great cultural revolution" and Deng's "reform and open up", experienced “tian an men events” and "2008-BeiJing olympic games", they definitely know what importance for a developing country.

"China will finally start to sent out military" Yep prepare to kiss S.U's as$h@le. China could sent out PLA only when to protect our lands and our ppl. And i had said do not dream to fight for N.o1 superpower, just focusing on developing ourselves when U.S crash China will be.

Right now, before China economy surpassing United State of America, we should all embrace the principle that development is the absolute truth. Former S.U ignore it and believe she's strong enough then swept into the history garbage by her own ppl.


BTW without strong national economy support, ur foreign military actions just gutting state tax and robbing ppl's wealth, maybe could win a battle but finally lose whole war.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, I apologize in advance to people from other countries. The poster is not a representative of Chinese thought and should not be mistaken as a representation of the average Chinese citizen.

BTW, WHAT I WROTE BELOW IS JUST FAKE SCENARIOS AND DOESN'T MEAN THAT WAR IS SOMETHING I THINK SHOULD HAPPEN.

PLA isn't combat ready. It's been ages since the last war, and since modernization no wars.

Here is the thing with wars. It rarely comes when you are 100% percent prepared. Did USSR enter WWII fully prepared? Did US enter WWII with combat experience?

China have no experience with the weapons, and it's not just weapons, the command structure is also not the best.

I would like to point there is something called TRAINING. You know, the thing that ensure that your soldiers are physical fit and trained to use their weapons, as well as mentally fit for tactics and strategies. Since the PLA has one of the harshest training regiment in the world, I doubt they have "no experience" with their weapon.

J-20 even when ready won't be combat ready, J-10s have more experience but in a real situation is tough to say.

I am sorry, I must have missed something. Are you saying that without PLA can't fight without J-20? Because you know, throughout the entire existence of PLA, it fought numerous battle with no air superior. In fact, all major conflicts of PLA are fought when PLA has distinct disadvantage in equipment. (Because in the situations where PLA actually has advantage in equipment, it typically end up crushing the opponent so quickly that the conflict doesn't move pass the skirmish stage)

Navy is even less ready, since there is no history of Chinese naval power ever.
I would like to ask exactly where did you learn your history and I would like to send some flowers to your history teacher as consolation, because he/she is probably crying right now. There is no history of Chinese naval power? The Chinese always has a navy. Even the late-Qing dynasty or KMT has a navy. PLA's navy may be small in the 50s, nonetheless it is still present. In fact, the PLA navy is establish as early as September of 1950. This might come as a surprise for you, but PLA has been operating naval warships for more than 60 years.

The way I see it, China has a few options. Within the next decade to two, China cannot fight US or even Europeans.
...You do realize we fought US and Europeans successfully more than 60 year ago when Chinese industry production is less than 1% of US right? When people are talking about China "not ready" they mean power projection. This means the PLA is not in a hurry to lay siege to some middle eastern countries or European nations. On the home turf and within the range of land base conventional missiles, PLA has no problem handling US or the European.

China could have a few limited scale war, Sudan is one that comes to mind, China can help reunited it, maybe sent a few military attache and weapons to see how best to be used.

Nor Korean could also be used as a test of a full scale war against a numbers army and how the new systems would perform, and how troop deployments and stuff would work out. Occupation could also be considered to have some experience in that.

Burma has already landed bombs in China, maybe in the name of peace, China could occupy Burma and see how it would do against a somewhat competent Army. Also be able to deploy navy for landings and stuff.

Maybe a few limited scale sea battles in South China sea and see how best to deploy and what to improve.

A few more possibilities are there what with the situation in Africa, Indian Maoists, Iraq security, finish off the Syrian rebels. Defend Palestine against Israel, and so on.

And this is why some random guy off the street should not decide national policy.

First of all, believe me nobody in this world is trying to pass themselves off as Chinese AT THIS MOMENT. I have no clue why you think I am Japanese. I have not said one thing that makes China look bad or anything.

Second, your arguments on destroying japan just reinforces my fear that much like the first Sino Japanese war. Most Chinese were saying Japan was nothing to fear, even when Li hong zhang explained the difference between Chinese and Japanese ships and the rampant corruption that was going on in the navy.

Now I am not saying China will lose in a full conflict, but looking at how China Japan conflict will most likely be a few minor to major sea battles, that may result in a landing by the Chinese. China will pay too much a price for the victory. Unlike China's southern neighbors Japan is technologically advanced and can make new warships in a hurry if needed and have a history of Sea battles. Losing more men in any war involving China will be looked at the same as losing and thus be counter productive.

One small thing I read pointing to Japanese WW2 failure was fire extinguishing abilities not proficient and thus Americans got an small edge and took advantage. Small things like this matters on the sea. Especially now software are involved every small thing counts.

I am just as patriotic as you, just because I say somethings are wrong and needs improvement doesn't mean traitor.

Ah, so I was mistaken, you are not actually Chinese. I thought the English is kinda...off.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With the recent events in Korean Peninsula and the rise of China, the combat prowess of PLA has been the topic of many debates. There are all sorts of speculations ranging from ready, just waiting for the order to not ready, decades away. Since China has not gone to war against a target of relevance in the past few decades, there is not definite answer to this debate. However, I would like to list a few facts:

1. Despite not in war, the PLA has been quite busy in the past decade. Remember, PLA's duty is not limited to combat. It is also responsible of disaster relief such as flood and earthquake. In 2008 Sichuan earthquake, 50,000 PLA soldier was dispatched within 24 hours of the earthquake. In fact, when it is discovered that the road collapsed and inaccessible via vehicle, two regiments of PLA troops, leaded by two major-generals, managed to forcefully marched through mountainous terrain and reached the disaster sites. Both the response speed and dedication should be a good indicator on the PLA mobilization capacity and morale. Similar, in the great flood of 98, the PLA soldiers and CCP members are the first ones to the dams and last ones to leave, even forming human barriers to stop the flood. Quite a lot of these soldiers are so called only child and it doesn't seem to stop them from serving their country and protect its people.

2. PLA is also far from lacking combat experience. Drug trafficking and insurgency, while not as big as problem in China comparing to many countries. It nonetheless exists. Part of PLA's duty is to handle such threats.
 
Well, I apologize in advance to people from other countries. The poster is not a representative of Chinese thought and should not be mistaken as a representation of the average Chinese citizen.



Here is the thing with wars. It rarely comes when you are 100% percent prepared. Did USSR enter WWII fully prepared? Did US enter WWII with combat experience?



I would like to point there is something called TRAINING. You know, the thing that ensure that your soldiers are physical fit and trained to use their weapons, as well as mentally fit for tactics and strategies. Since the PLA has one of the harshest training regiment in the world, I doubt they have "no experience" with their weapon.



I am sorry, I must have missed something. Are you saying that without PLA can't fight without J-20? Because you know, throughout the entire existence of PLA, it fought numerous battle with no air superior. In fact, all major conflicts of PLA are fought when PLA has distinct disadvantage in equipment. (Because in the situations where PLA actually has advantage in equipment, it typically end up crushing the opponent so quickly that the conflict doesn't move pass the skirmish stage)


I would like to ask exactly where did you learn your history and I would like to send some flowers to your history teacher as consolation, because he/she is probably crying right now. There is no history of Chinese naval power? The Chinese always has a navy. Even the late-Qing dynasty or KMT has a navy. PLA's navy may be small in the 50s, nonetheless it is still present. In fact, the PLA navy is establish as early as September of 1950. This might come as a surprise for you, but PLA has been operating naval warships for more than 60 years.


...You do realize we fought US and Europeans successfully more than 60 year ago when Chinese industry production is less than 1% of US right? When people are talking about China "not ready" they mean power projection. This means the PLA is not in a hurry to lay siege to some middle eastern countries or European nations. On the home turf and within the range of land base conventional missiles, PLA has no problem handling US or the European.



And this is why some random guy off the street should not decide national policy.



Ah, so I was mistaken, you are not actually Chinese. I thought the English is kinda...off.

You are right I am can't represent average Chinese, because I grew up with western ideologies. However I seen Chinese ideologies at work before, and while I still believe Chinese system and thought should be maintained, I am also comfortable with a more western approach.

Did you know how many men USSR lost? Do you want that with China? People keep trying to ignore my point that in a prolong fight China CAN win prepared or not. However, I believe, the wars China will face in the future is more like Prussian wars, total war BUT not prolonged and not too much loses.

Training is not real war, look at USSR in Afghanistan and America in Vietnam. In war unexpected things can happen. Also they don't use weapons made in China mostly.

As to no air superiority, are you drunk? In today's battle field no air superiority or at least parity the PLA will be sitting ducks, you want to lose 300 thousand like Korea again?

Besides in a war with smaller powers losing more men means defeat. Nobody look to US and USSR as definite winners in their wars. And china needs to win decisively to assert Hegemony.

To the history point, I know Chinese history, European history, Korean and Japanese history as well as American history. Yea I know about Zhenghe's fleets and Beiyang fleet as well as PLA fleets, I also know Zeng guofan won the Taiping rebellion due in part to his stronger navy.

However, can those be considered a history of navies? the only one that could count is Zhenghe, his navy is the largest at the time. Do you know about Western naval fights? I know them, do you know since when England, Spain has been capable of sending armies around the world. Do you know why Philippines is called the Philippines? In comparison China has no naval history. I'm assuming you want to be able to defend against US and not Philippines.

China right now has no problem defending on home land, but a power is suppose to project power, it's this short sightedness I hate about the Chinese way of thinking.

To your successful wars against the Europeans, you just mentioned the thing I hate the most, China counts Korea as victory when MacArthur was fired for wanting to use total war. You count Sino Japan as Chinese victory when there are more than a million heavily armed Japanese army in china at the time of surrender. Is there any other wars I missed? Black flags don't count, that's not a war that's a joke.
 
its not the question of capability but intention..with the growth rate china simply cannot afford to loose it.this is a crucial time for china a decade from now china cannot grow at this rate so this is the best time to cash and ur rulers know it pretty well.
 
You are right I am can't represent average Chinese, because I grew up with western ideologies. However I seen Chinese ideologies at work before, and while I still believe Chinese system and thought should be maintained, I am also comfortable with a more western approach.
So we are in agreement. Your opinion doesn't represent the Chinese and your ideologies are not Chinese.

Did you know how many men USSR lost? Do you want that with China? People keep trying to ignore my point that in a prolong fight China CAN win prepared or not. However, I believe, the wars China will face in the future is more like Prussian wars, total war BUT not prolonged and not too much loses.
I would like to point to out every single post regarding to "outlasting the enemy" has the assumption that the opponent is US. As in, the current superpower and currently the strongest military power in the world. Understandably, a conflict of this level will not be short term.
I am not sure WHICH Prussian war you are talking about. Because while Austro-Prussian War matches the "short" description, the Franco-Prussia war matches the "spread influence" part better, but it is certainly not short. Of course, Prussia fought a lot of wars, you gonna have to be more specific than that. Regardless, you are talking about a nation that is 348,702 square km in size at its greatest (after the unification) and significantly smaller than beforehand. Prussia simply doesn't have the strategic depth and reserve to engage in a prolong conflict. In comparison, in 2012, US and China accounts for 65.7% of the total industry output of the entire world. (US: 29929.7 (19.1%) vs China: 57690.8 (46.6)) Are you seriously gonna argue their conflict is gonna be the same scale as a third rate European nation?
Training is not real war, look at USSR in Afghanistan and America in Vietnam. In war unexpected things can happen. Also they don't use weapons made in China mostly.
You mean the USSR in Afghanistan where the opponent is trained by US, armed by Chinese and financed by British and French? Or you mean the American in Vietnam in which the Americans are not even allow to enter North Vietnam territory by Chinese?
I am not sure where did the weapon comment come from.

As to no air superiority, are you drunk? In today's battle field no air superiority or at least parity the PLA will be sitting ducks, you want to lose 300 thousand like Korea again?
Yeah, because J10, J11 and Su-27 doesn't exist. J8, J7 also doesn't exist. Consider the J6 held up pretty well against F4, I am pretty comfortable with J10, J11 and Su-27.
Besides in a war with smaller powers losing more men means defeat. Nobody look to US and USSR as definite winners in their wars. And china needs to win decisively to assert Hegemony.
No, the fundamental reason US achieved superpower status at the end of WWII is because it had the number 1 industrial production in the world since 1900. USSR, by the 60s, had the second largest industrial production of the world. Their military capacity is simply an extension of their industry might. In fact, WWII delayed US' ascend to superpower because while European nations are weakened by the war, it also disrupted the world financial system so US cannot bring its economic might to bear.
To the history point, I know Chinese history, European history, Korean and Japanese history as well as American history. Yea I know about Zhenghe's fleets and Beiyang fleet as well as PLA fleets, I also know Zeng guofan won the Taiping rebellion due in part to his stronger navy.

However, can those be considered a history of navies? the only one that could count is Zhenghe, his navy is the largest at the time. Do you know about Western naval fights? I know them, do you know since when England, Spain has been capable of sending armies around the world. Do you know why Philippines is called the Philippines? In comparison China has no naval history. I'm assuming you want to be able to defend against US and not Philippines.
Erm, I would like to point out Zhenghe's fleet is a exploration/diplomatic envoy/trading fleet. His ship can fight, but navy is not the job description of that fleet. In fact, Zhenghe's fleet is, at best, a minor branch of the Ming maritime force. Better known battle for the Ming navy can be observed in 1591 and 1592 where the Ming navy defeated Portugal. Defeating the naval force of Netherland in 1602 and 1633 respectively. Remember, Netherland navy was one of the best in Europe back then.
What exactly do you mean naval history? Do you mean the length of the country possess a navy? The industry might to produce and maintain such a navy? Because US doesn't have really have a "naval history" either before WWII. In fact, its navy at the beginning of WWII can, in many part, being considered to be outdated comparing to the Japanese or the British and the British has more than 300 years of global domination than US.
China right now has no problem defending on home land, but a power is suppose to project power, it's this short sightedness I hate about the Chinese way of thinking.
You are seriously saying China's priority to secure the ability to depend homeland first and then consider projecting that power to be "short-sighted"? I apologize if I am wrong, but I am gonna take a wild guess that you are young, probably born in the past decade or late 90s.
When industrial revolution happened, China, for a number of reasons, not the least is the semi-colonial structure of governing by Qing dynasty, began to lag behind in the world. This begun to shown since the opium war in 1839. In the ensuing century (until PRC's founding in 1949), China were not able to industrialize and had been vulnerable to foreign invasions. In fact, even after the founding of PRC, the threat of military invasion was a persistent threat over China. Luckily, due to the military strength of PRC and emphasis on industrialization, China eventually began to catch up. However, it was not until the collapse of USSR in 1991 where the sword of Damascus which was foreign invasion was finally removed from China. Of course, it was not until 2002 where China finally reached number 5 in world GDP. (Of course, it has pushed back down to 6th place in 2003 and 2004, China's place in top five global economic power is not truly secured until 2005).
In short, it isn't so much as short-sighted. It is more like that China was not CAPABLE of project its power previously.
I have heard similar, childish arguments such as "if Deng's economic reform and opening up policy is so good, why didn't China do the same thing in 1950s? Mao must be very bad at economics!" This is absolute non-sense because the situation in 1980 was not at all applicable in 1950. In 1980s, China already has a complete industry base. This means while the Chinese industry in 1980s is still technologically behind in many aspects, it has developed enough to compete in the global without getting crushed by foreign competition. In 1950s, the Chinese industry doesn't really exist and if the market was opened back then, the Chinese industry would have been destroyed by the foreign products.
To your successful wars against the Europeans, you just mentioned the thing I hate the most, China counts Korea as victory when MacArthur was fired for wanting to use total war. You count Sino Japan as Chinese victory when there are more than a million heavily armed Japanese army in china at the time of surrender. Is there any other wars I missed? Black flags don't count, that's not a war that's a joke.
Well, of course, you hate Korean war. Korean war meant PLA kicking UN force all the way from Chinese border down to 38 degree parallel and it marked the end of a century where Europeans can walk all over the Chinese. The Chinese are proud of it, so you must have hated it.
 
"PLA not combat ready now, or any time soon"??

these are thoughts of those people that know very little, if anything, about China.

I can tell you that at present China has the capacity, and the balls, to kick every butt in this world, Russia and US included.

Maybe at the end we'll be annihilated, but it's assured that all our enemies will accompany us to hell.


its not the question of capability but intention..with the growth rate china simply cannot afford to loose it.this is a crucial time for china a decade from now china cannot grow at this rate so this is the best time to cash and ur rulers know it pretty well.

dream all u can .ur country is not foolish to loose $ 75 billion trade and its growth rate..and its proved by the latest announcements of ur leaders.they want peace and not warmongers like you

Do you really think China wouldn't go war only for this puny reason? hope you're kidding.
When a dog want to byte you, are you ready to fight or do you prefer counting the money in your pocket first?
The enemy's destruction worth more than money.

Ah, in the case you don't know, India is on top of our list.
 
So we are in agreement. Your opinion doesn't represent the Chinese and your ideologies are not Chinese.


I would like to point to out every single post regarding to "outlasting the enemy" has the assumption that the opponent is US. As in, the current superpower and currently the strongest military power in the world. Understandably, a conflict of this level will not be short term.
I am not sure WHICH Prussian war you are talking about. Because while Austro-Prussian War matches the "short" description, the Franco-Prussia war matches the "spread influence" part better, but it is certainly not short. Of course, Prussia fought a lot of wars, you gonna have to be more specific than that. Regardless, you are talking about a nation that is 348,702 square km in size at its greatest (after the unification) and significantly smaller than beforehand. Prussia simply doesn't have the strategic depth and reserve to engage in a prolong conflict. In comparison, in 2012, US and China accounts for 65.7% of the total industry output of the entire world. (US: 29929.7 (19.1%) vs China: 57690.8 (46.6)) Are you seriously gonna argue their conflict is gonna be the same scale as a third rate European nation?

You mean the USSR in Afghanistan where the opponent is trained by US, armed by Chinese and financed by British and French? Or you mean the American in Vietnam in which the Americans are not even allow to enter North Vietnam territory by Chinese?
I am not sure where did the weapon comment come from.


Yeah, because J10, J11 and Su-27 doesn't exist. J8, J7 also doesn't exist. Consider the J6 held up pretty well against F4, I am pretty comfortable with J10, J11 and Su-27.

No, the fundamental reason US achieved superpower status at the end of WWII is because it had the number 1 industrial production in the world since 1900. USSR, by the 60s, had the second largest industrial production of the world. Their military capacity is simply an extension of their industry might. In fact, WWII delayed US' ascend to superpower because while European nations are weakened by the war, it also disrupted the world financial system so US cannot bring its economic might to bear.

Erm, I would like to point out Zhenghe's fleet is a exploration/diplomatic envoy/trading fleet. His ship can fight, but navy is not the job description of that fleet. In fact, Zhenghe's fleet is, at best, a minor branch of the Ming maritime force. Better known battle for the Ming navy can be observed in 1591 and 1592 where the Ming navy defeated Portugal. Defeating the naval force of Netherland in 1602 and 1633 respectively. Remember, Netherland navy was one of the best in Europe back then.
What exactly do you mean naval history? Do you mean the length of the country possess a navy? The industry might to produce and maintain such a navy? Because US doesn't have really have a "naval history" either before WWII. In fact, its navy at the beginning of WWII can, in many part, being considered to be outdated comparing to the Japanese or the British and the British has more than 300 years of global domination than US.

You are seriously saying China's priority to secure the ability to depend homeland first and then consider projecting that power to be "short-sighted"? I apologize if I am wrong, but I am gonna take a wild guess that you are young, probably born in the past decade or late 90s.
When industrial revolution happened, China, for a number of reasons, not the least is the semi-colonial structure of governing by Qing dynasty, began to lag behind in the world. This begun to shown since the opium war in 1839. In the ensuing century (until PRC's founding in 1949), China were not able to industrialize and had been vulnerable to foreign invasions. In fact, even after the founding of PRC, the threat of military invasion was a persistent threat over China. Luckily, due to the military strength of PRC and emphasis on industrialization, China eventually began to catch up. However, it was not until the collapse of USSR in 1991 where the sword of Damascus which was foreign invasion was finally removed from China. Of course, it was not until 2002 where China finally reached number 5 in world GDP. (Of course, it has pushed back down to 6th place in 2003 and 2004, China's place in top five global economic power is not truly secured until 2005).
In short, it isn't so much as short-sighted. It is more like that China was not CAPABLE of project its power previously.
I have heard similar, childish arguments such as "if Deng's economic reform and opening up policy is so good, why didn't China do the same thing in 1950s? Mao must be very bad at economics!" This is absolute non-sense because the situation in 1980 was not at all applicable in 1950. In 1980s, China already has a complete industry base. This means while the Chinese industry in 1980s is still technologically behind in many aspects, it has developed enough to compete in the global without getting crushed by foreign competition. In 1950s, the Chinese industry doesn't really exist and if the market was opened back then, the Chinese industry would have been destroyed by the foreign products.

Well, of course, you hate Korean war. Korean war meant PLA kicking UN force all the way from Chinese border down to 38 degree parallel and it marked the end of a century where Europeans can walk all over the Chinese. The Chinese are proud of it, so you must have hated it.

What is "Chinese"? We drive Lambos and Fords, wear Prada and Calvin, Drink Coke and Vodka, Live in Apartments and Villas. What is "Chinese" any more? You use the internet and English, how "Chinese" are you?

The US is the reigning world Super power, the current boss of the world. The only one standing in the way and the only one capable of challenging China and to an extent contain China.

Austro-Prussian war could have been long, but Bismark wanted Austria as an Allie later so didn't invade Vienna. Also feared French intervention. Prussian military doctrine under Roon and Moltke was first rate, the world copied. How is it a third rate Euro nation?

Besides, Austro-Prussian war was used to compare an imaginary Sino india or Sino Japan conflict that would decide China's dominance in Asia once and for all. As long as the US isn't involved, and China doesn't invade New Delhi, India could be excluded of an Asian Alliance while at the same time be an Allie for future.

Any war China fight, if fought, will be against US weapons, depends on the nation as to how much of it and how advanced it will be. So your comment that smaller nations are armed by bigger nations apply to China too.

As to the weapons comment, I mean Chinese armies knows about Chinese weapons how are they going to react against foreign weapons?

As to Air superiority I am not too worried, but US has Carrier groups and air bases around the world, it'll be at least tough for China to match it if it wants to project power. The plane quality and pilot quality is not as big as the west make it out to be, but Planes can't fly forever. They need to land sometime.

US had the number one production before going into WW2 and wasn't far WW1, though can't remember if they were number one or not at that time. If not at least close. It's the 2 World wars. Chang was the China theater commander, Asian commander was MacArthur, while the Allied forces were headed by Eisenhower. It's this position that made US a super power. Not all economy, if it were than China should at least match Europe in ambitions and power.

Chinese naval history is non existent, did you know Zhu yuanzhang had a rule that no one is to sail in the sea? Including fisher mans? Zhenghe's fleet is the biggest wooden fleet in the world and armed to the teeth, and thus could be considered a military fleet.

Portugal was a million miles a way and smaller than one Chinese province, you really call that a victory?

IF China's opponent to world power is a small island than China don't need to worry too, but it's a country that can match our production maybe exceeds it.

China needs to project power, because China has every limited resources despite it's large size. Securing Chinese home land is good, but at some point the military needs to keep up with the economy. Sure I was born at the very end of the 1980s, but that doesn't mean anything.

I never said China could completely open up earlier and never said that Deng wasn't effective. I also never suggested that China do anything right now, but maybe in 10-30 years. Though I got to say that China already showed signs of competence under Chang and was halted by Mao. But what happened happened, so no use regretting the past. Even you got to admit, Mao is not an economic genius, like the great leap forward is the stupidest thing thought up by man.

Korean war, you realize MacArthur couldn't bomb China and thus destroy Chinese airfields in China. MacArthur wasn't given enough resources to fight an opponent more than 4 times his size. You realize North Koreans were better armed than PVA right? You realize China lost 300,000 men compare to under 50,000 even though out numbered 4-1.

Being in the West made me realize one thing, a person's country is very important. I hope China would be strong with all my heart. You are in the US according to your flag, you should know how the West look at China regardless of true or not, and how Chinese look at US.

Perception is very important, If China is to be seen as a dominate power it cannot be proud of victories that are archived by massive loses.
 
What is "Chinese"? We drive Lambos and Fords, wear Prada and Calvin, Drink Coke and Vodka, Live in Apartments and Villas. What is "Chinese" any more? You use the internet and English, how "Chinese" are you?

The US is the reigning world Super power, the current boss of the world. The only one standing in the way and the only one capable of challenging China and to an extent contain China.

Austro-Prussian war could have been long, but Bismark wanted Austria as an Allie later so didn't invade Vienna. Also feared French intervention. Prussian military doctrine under Roon and Moltke was first rate, the world copied. How is it a third rate Euro nation?

Besides, Austro-Prussian war was used to compare an imaginary Sino india or Sino Japan conflict that would decide China's dominance in Asia once and for all. As long as the US isn't involved, and China doesn't invade New Delhi, India could be excluded of an Asian Alliance while at the same time be an Allie for future.

Any war China fight, if fought, will be against US weapons, depends on the nation as to how much of it and how advanced it will be. So your comment that smaller nations are armed by bigger nations apply to China too.

As to the weapons comment, I mean Chinese armies knows about Chinese weapons how are they going to react against foreign weapons?

As to Air superiority I am not too worried, but US has Carrier groups and air bases around the world, it'll be at least tough for China to match it if it wants to project power. The plane quality and pilot quality is not as big as the west make it out to be, but Planes can't fly forever. They need to land sometime.

US had the number one production before going into WW2 and wasn't far WW1, though can't remember if they were number one or not at that time. If not at least close. It's the 2 World wars. Chang was the China theater commander, Asian commander was MacArthur, while the Allied forces were headed by Eisenhower. It's this position that made US a super power. Not all economy, if it were than China should at least match Europe in ambitions and power.

Chinese naval history is non existent, did you know Zhu yuanzhang had a rule that no one is to sail in the sea? Including fisher mans? Zhenghe's fleet is the biggest wooden fleet in the world and armed to the teeth, and thus could be considered a military fleet.

Portugal was a million miles a way and smaller than one Chinese province, you really call that a victory?

IF China's opponent to world power is a small island than China don't need to worry too, but it's a country that can match our production maybe exceeds it.

China needs to project power, because China has every limited resources despite it's large size. Securing Chinese home land is good, but at some point the military needs to keep up with the economy. Sure I was born at the very end of the 1980s, but that doesn't mean anything.

I never said China could completely open up earlier and never said that Deng wasn't effective. I also never suggested that China do anything right now, but maybe in 10-30 years. Though I got to say that China already showed signs of competence under Chang and was halted by Mao. But what happened happened, so no use regretting the past. Even you got to admit, Mao is not an economic genius, like the great leap forward is the stupidest thing thought up by man.

Korean war, you realize MacArthur couldn't bomb China and thus destroy Chinese airfields in China. MacArthur wasn't given enough resources to fight an opponent more than 4 times his size. You realize North Koreans were better armed than PVA right? You realize China lost 300,000 men compare to under 50,000 even though out numbered 4-1.

Being in the West made me realize one thing, a person's country is very important. I hope China would be strong with all my heart. You are in the US according to your flag, you should know how the West look at China regardless of true or not, and how Chinese look at US.

Perception is very important, If China is to be seen as a dominate power it cannot be proud of victories that are archived by massive loses.

I do believe I answered in one of the PDF thread once. Ming dynasty does not forbid all ships from trading. It just forbid PRIVATE ones. Essentially, it is policy of monopolizing the oversea trade income to the government. Ming rulers may not be very advanced scientifically by today's standard, but they are far from stupid.
Portugal was also, at the time, one of the major European naval powers. Portugal is also NOT small at the time. In that time period, Portugal has already started colonizing the American continents. It is certainly not "the size of a province".
As for Korean war casualties, China-UN death+wound ratio is about 1.3:1 according to figure release by US and China. (US figures has more death and less wounded, Chinese figures has more wounded and less death, but the overall number matches). I am not sure where did the 4-1 ratio come from, because US certainly did not fought in the Korean alone.
What I learned during my time in US is that for China to develop and grow in the future, it must have the CORRECT perception of its competitions. The perception must correct, not more and not less. For example, what should be the Chinese perception of US military? If the threat is underestimated, then you won't able to adequately prepare yourself. If the threat is overestimated, then you will be wasting vital resources that can be used somewhere else.
As for the original topic of this thread, PLA certainly have lots of room for improvement in the future, but at the same time, it is certainly not incompetent as you described.
 
Incompetent? Hardly, just not enough to match US in an experience kind of way. I been reading a lot of posts that said China's weapons are better and this and that and just thought I mention that Real combat experience is non existent and room for improvements in the non technological parts are still needed
 
China holds more military exercises than all of its Asian neighbors combined, and has the second largest defence budget in the world. The readiness level is unprecedented. Was China ready in the Korean War? No, but it fought the UN to a stalemate. Was China ready against Vietnam in 1979 after the Cultural Revolution? No, but China fought anyway. Was the Chinese navy ready for battle in 1988? No, half of its guns malfunctioned, but it still won the battle anyways.

War sometimes comes to you and all you can do is fight it. Refusing to engage when it comes because you think you are not ready is a sign of cowardice.

P.S. China is the second largest economy in the world with largest industrial output. The Chinese military has more modern equipments than all of Asia (excluding U.S.) put together. If China isn't ready for potential conflict, no one in Asia is.
 
And here I am thinking how nice it is that the world's two oldest civilizations - India and China have had only one minor skirmish in 1962 and have peacefully co-existed for 5000 years. Isn't it good that China is not a trigger happy cowboy nation?

And here I am thinking how nice it is that the world's two oldest civilizations - India and China have had only one minor skirmish in 1962 and have peacefully co-existed for 5000 years. Isn't it good that China is not a trigger happy cowboy nation?
 
Back
Top Bottom