PLAAF vs. USAF

[desimorty]

Since we have no offensive air force, if we start losing the air war against the US and US troops start landing in China, we've already lost, so might as well nuke them and take them down with us.

You've lost jets.
You haven't lost land or territories. So the war is still on.
To the PLA, the PLAAF is nothing more than a child that hasn't matured.
The PLA takes into consideration that the PLAAF, and PLAN are not capable of protecting China, yet.
China's nuclear policy is no first use.
If they intended on first use, they wouldn't make their ICBM's mobile.
They would have made silos instead.

 

[iPakMan]

Since we have no offensive air force, if we start losing the air war against the US and US troops start landing in China, we've already lost, so might as well nuke them and take them down with us.

China holds 1/5th of humanity, even if you lost any future war with USA, why would you want billions of people to parish?

 

[below_freezing]

China holds 1/5th of humanity, even if you lost any future war with USA, why would you want billions of people to parish?

To make the 1/15th of humanity that started the war to perish as well. Israel knows what it is like to lose a war and be at the mercy of others. WW2 was a dark time for both Chinese and Israelis. Please don't forget. There is a Chinese saying：宁可玉碎，不为瓦全。Better to be a broken jade, than a complete stone.

 

[iPakMan]

To make the 1/15th of humanity that started the war to perish as well. Israel knows what it is like to lose a war and be at the mercy of others. WW2 was a dark time for both Chinese and Israelis. Please don't forget. There is a Chinese saying：宁可玉碎，不为瓦全。Better to be a broken jade, than a complete stone.

Israel never lost a war. Israel did not even exist during WW2. It was the Jewish population of Europe that felt the "warmth" of Europe not Israelis.
I would imagine it would never come to it since using so many Nuclear weapons would lead to Nuclear winter and no one exactly wants that. Well maybe Iran, hoping to bring the messiah and whatnot.

 

[gambit]

You've lost jets.
You haven't lost land or territories. So the war is still on.
To the PLA, the PLAAF is nothing more than a child that hasn't matured.
The PLA takes into consideration that the PLAAF, and PLAN are not capable of protecting China, yet.
China's nuclear policy is no first use.
If they intended on first use, they wouldn't make their ICBM's mobile.
They would have made silos instead.

The 'invasion' argument is nothing more than an excuse to respond with using nuclear weapons. We do not need to invade mainland China to destroy the PLAN and the PLAAF or at least render both useless. Without both, the PLA is nothing more than a land defense force.

 

[mil-avia]

Anyone else see something wrong in this picture?

F-22 image in question explained in this link

 

[mil-avia]

Only one side tailplane deflected by F-22 (part 2) : Link, Link :

1000 x 667

www .defence talk .com/pictures/march-field-airfest-2008/p32549-usaf-f-22a-raptor-stealth-fighter.html

www .defence talk .com/pictures/data/4865/March_08_F-22A_Raptor_735-A.jpg

1600 x 1200

(defence talk without a space in between not allowed here)

 

[mil-avia]

Only one side tailplane deflected by F/A-18 fighter older variant : Link, Link :

1024 x 768

 

[mil-avia]

Post # 232 F-22 smaller photo link

 

[mil-avia]

Light Blue Area of Ocean Shows Portions of the Western Pacific That Are Most Vulnerable to China’s Missile, Aircraft, Covert Operative, and Computer Network Attacks :

SOURCE: Entering the Dragon’s Lair, 2007.

 

[indianpatriot]

TOO LARGE ARMY IS LIKE ONE BIG TARGET FOR AIRFORCE...so it results in huge causalities....its always better to have a small but efficient army...thats why even thought India has similar population its army in front foot is half of China...

 

[applesauce]

TOO LARGE ARMY IS LIKE ONE BIG TARGET FOR AIRFORCE...so it results in huge causalities....its always better to have a small but efficient army...thats why even thought India has similar population its army in front foot is half of China...

oh please india's army is not better in terms of efficiency than china's, not in efficiency, not in quality of armament, not in supply lines, and not in quality of training

 

[indianpatriot]

oh please india's army is not better in terms of efficiency than china's, not in efficiency, not in quality of armament, not in supply lines, and not in quality of training

well that depends on your perception of Indian Army ... I meant Relatively though...IF CHINA HAS A SMALLER ARMY IT WILL BE RELATIVELY MORE EFFICIENT.As far as Quality of Indian Army is concerned your perception will help us in our future wars with China.

 

[below_freezing]

well that depends on your perception of Indian Army ... I meant Relatively though...IF CHINA HAS A SMALLER ARMY IT WILL BE RELATIVELY MORE EFFICIENT.As far as Quality of Indian Army is concerned your perception will help us in our future wars with China.

In 1962, our GDPs were about the same, and our degree of industrial independence was similar, though China was ahead slightly.

In 2011, our GDPs are different by 4x, our degree of industrial independence is not even comparable.

 

[mil-avia]

Nellis air combat training system :