US: If China goes to war we will make it go back 100 years

[gambit]

No i clearly know what i am talking about as i read about it before, i just want to know what you are talking about beyond the bombings of obsolete Iraqi command and control systems.

Obsolete? By whose standards? Yours? So even if the Iraqi military's command and control structures are not as technologically sophisticated as ours, does it mean it does not work? Are you opining from experience?

As far as the Iraqi air defense radar goes...The main goal is efficiency reduction. The degree of that reduction depends on the methods employed.

- Denial
This is where those radar stations are destroyed.

- Prevention
This is where the fear of destruction discourage transmissions. No transmit, no air defense possible.

- Disruption
This is where the control centers, and there are many of them, have their communications to each other destroyed or degraded. The inability for a networked air defense system to communicate with each other allows the attackers to exploit inevitable radar coverage gaps and bypass the entire air defense system altogether.

In Desert Storm, there were combinations of the above three in different areas of Iraq. US Army Apaches destroyed some, not all, Iraqi air defense radars at crucial border points, creating coverage gaps for the incoming greater air forces. But roughly at the same time, F-117s already penetrated Iraqi air space despite air defense radar coverage.

How would the USA disable the Chinese sattelite and radar system,...

For radars, it will be variations of what were proven with Desert Storm. For satellites, China does not have as much satellites as the US and therefore does not receive the same amount of space based intelligence. The effectiveness of what is received is debatable, of course.

What logistical means could USA win a war against a country with 70+ submarines and thousands of airplanes and thousands of military bases?

In a total war, short of nuclear exchanges, many of those submarine bases would be targeted and attacked by US air power. Same for air bases. During the bombing campaign in Yugoslavia, B-2s from Whiteman AFB flew non-stop from CONUS to Europe and back. Not a single loss.

USA have never fought against jets in 4th generation in any war scenario i believe,...

And you believe wrong. The reason why Desert Storm was such a success was because the US fought many '4th generation' wars in intense and highly realistic exercises. What you and others repeatedly failed to understand is that in the dependency of long distance awareness via radar detection, in war games, we in the EW business consider a radar 'hit' is just as good as bullet. The only thing left are the actual bullets and missiles themselves and in that we leave to other people experts in those fields. It is precisely because of the repeated argument -- the US have never fought -- that so many 'analysts' ended up with so many eggs on their faces when Desert Storm ended with US troops were more in danger of fratricide than from the Iraqi military.

If there is a total war between US and China, short of a nuclear exchange, elements of the PLA will suffer the same results as elements of the Iraqi military.

 

[gambit]

hahahha everyone laughing on US and its propganda today! such a BS country i have ever seen... not a single nation respect americans today..

We do not care for your respect, only your fear...

a country who even cant do anything against Isreal... hhahaha and US will send China back 100 years ?? a country who even under $$$ of loan from the same country hahahah man laughing on US and US people and US govt!

In a total war between US and China, all bets and debts are off the table...

 

[gambit]

...considering that the F-22 is really not as stealthy and efficient as all the hype that goes with it.

This tells me you have been suckered.

I will go as far as to say that they are no planes on earth that could evade modern day radars.

Is this opinion from experience?

USA lost 2 so called stealth planes in Serbia,...

Wrong...And this topic have been debated and debunked to death here. It was not two 'stealth' aircrafts but one F-16 and one F-117. NATO flew about 40,000 sorties over Yugoslavia and lost two fighters. May be this is an air defense combat record to boast about where you are from, but not in ours.

with many more casualties against 1960's soviet systems, how would they fare against the Chinese air defense.

How many more? Sources please. You do know what 'sources' are, no?

 

[gambit]

You'll have to excuse his ad hominem attacks, he gets cranky sometimes.

Calling someone as not knowing what he is talking about is not a personal attack. Often by evidences, it is a statement of fact. And I do not get 'cranky'. I get amused, quite easily by many of the comments here...

 

[gambit]

don't worry about gambit. he learned gambit physics, instead of real physics in school before he dropped out to become a US army janitor.

At least my physics do not include Photochop as you boys do with 'Chinese' physics.

he can't answer your question.

I answered many questions well enough. One of you bailed this forum because he could not support his argument while the rest of you wisely remained silent. Since I have been participating here, the number of fantastic Chinese weapons systems claim dropped dramatically.

 

[Swatwolf]

Gambit, i do not have the time nor will to go through your lawyer style attacks, again i said bring scientific facts to the table, the fact you said this:

"- Prevention
This is where the fear of destruction discourage transmissions. No transmit, no air defense possible.

- Disruption
This is where the control centers, and there are many of them, have their communications to each other destroyed or degraded. The inability for a networked air defense system to communicate with each other allows the attackers to exploit inevitable radar coverage gaps and bypass the entire air defense system altogether."

"For radars, it will be variations of what were proven with Desert Storm. For satellites, China does not have as much satellites as the US and therefore does not receive the same amount of space based intelligence. The effectiveness of what is received is debatable, of course."

"And you believe wrong. The reason why Desert Storm was such a success was because the US fought many '4th generation' wars in intense and highly realistic exercises."

Shows you absolutely is making things up as you go. I do not argue with lawyers, but lets just put it into perspective the last paragraph i quoted, i said no 4th generation jet has ever shot down another 4th generation jet in a real war, and you seems to have taken it as a 4th generation war. Your definition of 4th generation war is as flawed and as fantastical as everything you said my friend. Here's a link to 4th generation war to help you understand...
Fourth generation warfare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Again substance.

 

[oct605032048]

save it please they even fail to do that 60 years ago. And free press is not as fancy as it used to be to everyone. Just look how the gentlemen from almost every government deal with the wikileaks.

 

[Swatwolf]

Gambit has not been very helpful with his military theologies, I need a real expert who knows the functioning of such systems not a preacher, when I talk about radar system Gambit says we could destroy them with jets (like in Iraq). If i ask him how would your Jets get pass the enemies anti-aircraft systems, he will tell me easy we destroy their radars, or we use stealth fighters, when i tell him there is no jets that are undetectable, he tells me it's all rumors, so i ask him again how do you bypass enemies anti-aircraft systems?

then he gave me stuff like "- Prevention
This is where the fear of destruction discourage transmissions. No transmit, no air defense possible."
<--very very unhelpful and almost comical.

and another "- Disruption
This is where the control centers, and there are many of them, have their communications to each other destroyed or degraded. The inability for a networked air defense system to communicate with each other allows the attackers to exploit inevitable radar coverage gaps and bypass the entire air defense system altogether."

So i will just ask him again how do you take out Chinese command and control and main hardware supplies deep in the heartland when you can't even convince me you could get pass their coastal defense. Next he will tell me, we can send refuelling jets deep inside China and refuel our fighter jets there or if all else fails we use ICBMS. We also have aircraft carriers, supposedly these behemoths are immune to submarines and cruise missiles or even ballistic missiles and are untrackable, because Saddam shot at us with scuds and 95&#37; of them strayed of target and hit Kuwait.

And we haven't even dealt with electronic warfare and such that would add another level of calculus into any such war, but everything Gambit sees is in black and white and he still would not answer how the USA would counter any asymmetrical threats to their basses in Guam and Okinawa, and other asymmetrical threats like electronic warfare etc.

I stand by my logic that the only way USA could do massive harm to China is to bombard their coastal cities with nuclear tipped missiles from their nuclear submarines.

 

[below_freezing]

i can answer that:

in gambit physics, US weapons don't have real constraints. everyone else has real constraints.

 

[ao333]

At least my physics do not include Photochop as you boys do with 'Chinese' physics.


I answered many questions well enough. One of you bailed this forum because he could not support his argument while the rest of you wisely remained silent. Since I have been participating here, the number of fantastic Chinese weapons systems claim dropped dramatically.

What about Vietnamese weapons? I heard they clot more often than my toilet.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Gambit, i do not have the time nor will to go through your lawyer style attacks, again i said bring scientific facts to the table, the fact you said this:

"- Prevention
This is where the fear of destruction discourage transmissions. No transmit, no air defense possible.

- Disruption
This is where the control centers, and there are many of them, have their communications to each other destroyed or degraded. The inability for a networked air defense system to communicate with each other allows the attackers to exploit inevitable radar coverage gaps and bypass the entire air defense system altogether."

"For radars, it will be variations of what were proven with Desert Storm. For satellites, China does not have as much satellites as the US and therefore does not receive the same amount of space based intelligence. The effectiveness of what is received is debatable, of course."

"And you believe wrong. The reason why Desert Storm was such a success was because the US fought many '4th generation' wars in intense and highly realistic exercises."

Shows you absolutely is making things up as you go. I do not argue with lawyers, but lets just put it into perspective the last paragraph i quoted, i said no 4th generation jet has ever shot down another 4th generation jet in a real war, and you seems to have taken it as a 4th generation war. Your definition of 4th generation war is as flawed and as fantastical as everything you said my friend. Here's a link to 4th generation war to help you understand...
Fourth generation warfare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Again substance.

Kosovo War: 6 MIG 29's shot down; 4 by USAF F15's, 1 USAF F16 and 1 Dutch F16
Desert Storm: 5 MIG29's shot down by USAF F15's.

I think its about time we call a spade a spade and accept that the US enjoys complete superiority when it comes to their military machine. Not only do they possess the finest technology in the world which is decades ahead than their closest adversaries, they are very well trained and know how to employ their technology. If a limited war breaks out between China and the US which is extremely unlikely, US Navy and US Air Force will prevail due to their superior technology and training. But enough with these hypothetical scenarios, chances of a war breaking out between China and the US are close to nill. China is growing and spending huge amounts of money on their military, but they started focussing on their military in the Mid 90's while the US started building up their military after 1941. So their is a gap of almost 50 years so no wonder the US is ahead, but the Chinese are closing in fast and i have no doubt in the next 20 years they will be the only power than can match the might of US Military.

 

[ao333]

Kosovo War: 6 MIG 29's shot down; 4 by USAF F15's, 1 USAF F16 and 1 Dutch F16
Desert Storm: 5 MIG29's shot down by USAF F15's.

I think its about time we call a spade a spade and accept that the US enjoys complete superiority when it comes to their military machine. Not only do they possess the finest technology in the world which is decades ahead than their closest adversaries, they are very well trained and know how to employ their technology. If a limited war breaks out between China and the US which is extremely unlikely, US Navy and US Air Force will prevail due to their superior technology and training. But enough with these hypothetical scenarios, chances of a war breaking out between China and the US are close to nill. China is growing and spending huge amounts of money on their military, but they started focussing on their military in the Mid 90's while the US started building up their military after 1941. So their is a gap of almost 50 years so no wonder the US is ahead, but the Chinese are closing in fast and i have no doubt in the next 20 years they will be the only power than can match the might of US Military.

Gambit is Vietnamese.

 

[below_freezing]

Kosovo War: 6 MIG 29's shot down; 4 by USAF F15's, 1 USAF F16 and 1 Dutch F16
Desert Storm: 5 MIG29's shot down by USAF F15's.

I think its about time we call a spade a spade and accept that the US enjoys complete superiority when it comes to their military machine. Not only do they possess the finest technology in the world which is decades ahead than their closest adversaries, they are very well trained and know how to employ their technology. If a limited war breaks out between China and the US which is extremely unlikely, US Navy and US Air Force will prevail due to their superior technology and training. But enough with these hypothetical scenarios, chances of a war breaking out between China and the US are close to nill. China is growing and spending huge amounts of money on their military, but they started focussing on their military in the Mid 90's while the US started building up their military after 1941. So their is a gap of almost 50 years so no wonder the US is ahead, but the Chinese are closing in fast and i have no doubt in the next 20 years they will be the only power than can match the might of US Military.

being ahead in of itself doesn't mean much. they were 50 years ahead in korean war, vietnam war, still lost both. now they're less ahead, far less ahead. we didn't start in 90's either; our important achievements like ballistic missiles, nuclear submarines, first independently made tank, first destroyer, first independent plane, etc. all were made during chairman Mao's term in 60's and 70's! that was only 10-15 years after the US made their first nuclear submarines and ballistic missiles.

 

[Hyde]

US: If China goes to war we will make it go back 100 years

Tells about American's insecurity... nothing more than that

Who is going to fight against China

 

[gambit]

Gambit, i do not have the time nor will to go through your lawyer style attacks, again i said bring scientific facts to the table, the fact you said this:

"- Prevention
This is where the fear of destruction discourage transmissions. No transmit, no air defense possible.

- Disruption
This is where the control centers, and there are many of them, have their communications to each other destroyed or degraded. The inability for a networked air defense system to communicate with each other allows the attackers to exploit inevitable radar coverage gaps and bypass the entire air defense system altogether."

"For radars, it will be variations of what were proven with Desert Storm. For satellites, China does not have as much satellites as the US and therefore does not receive the same amount of space based intelligence. The effectiveness of what is received is debatable, of course."

"And you believe wrong. The reason why Desert Storm was such a success was because the US fought many '4th generation' wars in intense and highly realistic exercises."

Shows you absolutely is making things up as you go. I do not argue with lawyers, but lets just put it into perspective the last paragraph i quoted, i said no 4th generation jet has ever shot down another 4th generation jet in a real war, and you seems to have taken it as a 4th generation war. Your definition of 4th generation war is as flawed and as fantastical as everything you said my friend. Here's a link to 4th generation war to help you understand...
Fourth generation warfare - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Again substance.

A 'fourth generation' aircraft is a technical descriptor. A 'fourth generation' warfare is a mode of conflict where there is an asymmetrical disparity between the parties. The fact that you are trying to conflate the two tells me you really do not know what you are talking about and that you are way over your head here.