Scroll to see replies
Original post by recall113
Trump even tweeted accusing China of blatant provocation. China possibly feels confident at this point in this military capability to wage war against the US if it wants to.
Two things:
1. China has no war strategy. Why fight the world when you can buy it?
2. China has zero wartime experience in its officer corps, whereas the United States has been more or less continuously at war for the last 70 years and has combat experience in every single part of its armed forces. China would be utterly outclassed, especially at sea.
Original post by Trinculo
Two things:
1. China has no war strategy. Why fight the world when you can buy it?
1. China has no war strategy. Why fight the world when you can buy it?
Actually, you have no clue of China's strategy so stop pretending you're in the inner circle of the Chinese government,
Original post by recall113
Actually, you have no clue of China's strategy so stop pretending you're in the inner circle of the Chinese government,
And do you?
You'd assume they have a war strategy of going into a fight with a rookie army made up of people with no experience against the best funded, best armed and most experienced armed forces in the world, using weapons and equipment with no operational history?
That would make the enormous assumption that the Chinese government is made up of complete morons.
>Sends drone near China's sea border
>China is provoking us
>China is provoking us
Original post by recall113
Actually, you have no clue of China's strategy so stop pretending you're in the inner circle of the Chinese government,
It's not all that difficult to work out what a general idea of PRC's strategy would be from open source material.
1) Hacking/Cyber warfare
It's no secret that the PLA has units of hackers that deliberately target the USA, NATO & surrounding Asian nations like Vietnam. PLA Unit 61398 is the only one the PRC openly admit to having & they, for obvious reasons, don't reveal details about their cyber ops.
It's easy to find reports on how the PRC has stolen data from US companies from all industries but primarily from defence firms. Just a superficial glance at PLAAF's J-31 stealth fighter shows that technology has been stolen from the Lockheed-Martin's F-35 program.
Spoiler
It's certainly a fair assumption that a massively co-ordinated cyber-attack against US defences would preceed any military action the Chinese might decide to undertake.
2) Denial of Space
The PRC demonstrated in 2007 that it has the capability to destroy satellites in orbit. You can guarantee US intelligence gathering satellites, GPS, military command and control satellites etc would all be targeted by missiles, ground based lasers or cyber-attacks.
3) Targeting of US CVs
The Chinese DF-21 & DF-26 missiles (and the satellite system that supports them) have been developed to specifically target US Navy aircraft carriers. As the PLAN is still tiny compared to the vast US Navy, only these missiles & perhaps some of their newest submarines pose a credible threat to shipping in the region. Therefore, the priority for the Chinese would be the destruction of carriers in the region. Without its carriers, the US Navy would find its ability to project power in South China Sea & western Pacific very difficult indeed.
4) Neutralise US bases in the western Pacific
Along with the DF-26 IBM, the PRC would launch an overwhelming amount of cruise missiles at the US military facilities on Guam and Okinawa. Andersen AFB has the capacity to support American stealth aircraft like F-22s & B-2s but lacks a large number of hardened aircraft shelters. Both Andersen & Kadena AFBs would get hit by large amounts of IRBMs & cruise missiles. The destruction of the runways alone at both these bases would limit the USAF's capability to respond effectively.
More accurately described as a test for a newly elected President that they cannot get a read on.
It wasn't that close, don't overstate. And don't confuse an underwater remote testing kit for a UCAV.
Original post by xbiostudentx
>Sends drone near China's sea border
>China is provoking us
>China is provoking us
It wasn't that close, don't overstate. And don't confuse an underwater remote testing kit for a UCAV.
Original post by Drewski
More accurately described as a test for a newly elected President that they cannot get a read on.
It wasn't that close, don't overstate. And don't confuse an underwater remote testing kit for a UCAV.
It wasn't that close, don't overstate. And don't confuse an underwater remote testing kit for a UCAV.
Reverse the countries and you know what would've happened. US would've seized the Chinese drone from just heading in their direction.
US hegemony is ending. Good riddance.
Original post by recall113
Trump even tweeted accusing China of blatant provocation. China possibly feels confident at this point in this military capability to wage war against the US if it wants to.
How do you get to the idea of war? is that what China is looking for?
Would this be a land war or one at sea? If its the former where would they be invading? The USA.
If its the latter, then how many aircarft carriers do they have?
Original post by xbiostudentx
Reverse the countries and you know what would've happened. US would've seized the Chinese drone from just heading in their direction.
US hegemony is ending. Good riddance.
US hegemony is ending. Good riddance.
Reverse the countries and the capability doesn't exist.
And, prove it. Show when the US has done that previously.
Despite your (unfounded) opinion the US isn't that provocative.
Original post by Drewski
Reverse the countries and the capability doesn't exist.
China has UAVs.
Original post by Drewski
Despite your (unfounded) opinion the US isn't that provocative.
Despite your (unfounded) opinion the US isn't that provocative.
Of course.
Not like Iran, Russia and China are being surrounded.
if ww3 happens it better happen during my exams
joking btw.
joking btw.
Original post by xbiostudentx
China has UAVs.
So does Amazon.
It's the capability that we're interested in.
Of course.
Not like Iran, Russia and China are being surrounded.
Not like Iran, Russia and China are being surrounded.
Yes, because that's new.
And it's not as if China isn't being provocative by claiming territorial waters far in excess of the UN agreement, or reclaiming islands and building military bases on them in other country's waters. No, that's perfectly benign.
Original post by Drewski
Yes, because that's new.
And it's not as if China isn't being provocative by claiming territorial waters far in excess of the UN agreement, or reclaiming islands and building military bases on them in other country's waters. No, that's perfectly benign.
Yes, because that's new.
And it's not as if China isn't being provocative by claiming territorial waters far in excess of the UN agreement, or reclaiming islands and building military bases on them in other country's waters. No, that's perfectly benign.
They're not provoking the US.
US is not the world police anymore.
Original post by xbiostudentx
They're not provoking the US.
And if you believe that then I'm sure Father Christmas is going to bring you something nice next weekend.
Original post by Trinculo
And do you?
You'd assume they have a war strategy of going into a fight with a rookie army made up of people with no experience against the best funded, best armed and most experienced armed forces in the world, using weapons and equipment with no operational history?
That would make the enormous assumption that the Chinese government is made up of complete morons.
You'd assume they have a war strategy of going into a fight with a rookie army made up of people with no experience against the best funded, best armed and most experienced armed forces in the world, using weapons and equipment with no operational history?
That would make the enormous assumption that the Chinese government is made up of complete morons.
PRSOM.
Original post by Tempest II
It's not all that difficult to work out what a general idea of PRC's strategy would be from open source material.
1) Hacking/Cyber warfare
It's no secret that the PLA has units of hackers that deliberately target the USA, NATO & surrounding Asian nations like Vietnam. PLA Unit 61398 is the only one the PRC openly admit to having & they, for obvious reasons, don't reveal details about their cyber ops.
It's easy to find reports on how the PRC has stolen data from US companies from all industries but primarily from defence firms. Just a superficial glance at PLAAF's J-31 stealth fighter shows that technology has been stolen from the Lockheed-Martin's F-35 program.
It's certainly a fair assumption that a massively co-ordinated cyber-attack against US defences would preceed any military action the Chinese might decide to undertake.
2) Denial of Space
The PRC demonstrated in 2007 that it has the capability to destroy satellites in orbit. You can guarantee US intelligence gathering satellites, GPS, military command and control satellites etc would all be targeted by missiles, ground based lasers or cyber-attacks.
3) Targeting of US CVs
The Chinese DF-21 & DF-26 missiles (and the satellite system that supports them) have been developed to specifically target US Navy aircraft carriers. As the PLAN is still tiny compared to the vast US Navy, only these missiles & perhaps some of their newest submarines pose a credible threat to shipping in the region. Therefore, the priority for the Chinese would be the destruction of carriers in the region. Without its carriers, the US Navy would find its ability to project power in South China Sea & western Pacific very difficult indeed.
4) Neutralise US bases in the western Pacific
Along with the DF-26 IBM, the PRC would launch an overwhelming amount of cruise missiles at the US military facilities on Guam and Okinawa. Andersen AFB has the capacity to support American stealth aircraft like F-22s & B-2s but lacks a large number of hardened aircraft shelters. Both Andersen & Kadena AFBs would get hit by large amounts of IRBMs & cruise missiles. The destruction of the runways alone at both these bases would limit the USAF's capability to respond effectively.
1) Hacking/Cyber warfare
It's no secret that the PLA has units of hackers that deliberately target the USA, NATO & surrounding Asian nations like Vietnam. PLA Unit 61398 is the only one the PRC openly admit to having & they, for obvious reasons, don't reveal details about their cyber ops.
It's easy to find reports on how the PRC has stolen data from US companies from all industries but primarily from defence firms. Just a superficial glance at PLAAF's J-31 stealth fighter shows that technology has been stolen from the Lockheed-Martin's F-35 program.
Spoiler
It's certainly a fair assumption that a massively co-ordinated cyber-attack against US defences would preceed any military action the Chinese might decide to undertake.
2) Denial of Space
The PRC demonstrated in 2007 that it has the capability to destroy satellites in orbit. You can guarantee US intelligence gathering satellites, GPS, military command and control satellites etc would all be targeted by missiles, ground based lasers or cyber-attacks.
3) Targeting of US CVs
The Chinese DF-21 & DF-26 missiles (and the satellite system that supports them) have been developed to specifically target US Navy aircraft carriers. As the PLAN is still tiny compared to the vast US Navy, only these missiles & perhaps some of their newest submarines pose a credible threat to shipping in the region. Therefore, the priority for the Chinese would be the destruction of carriers in the region. Without its carriers, the US Navy would find its ability to project power in South China Sea & western Pacific very difficult indeed.
4) Neutralise US bases in the western Pacific
Along with the DF-26 IBM, the PRC would launch an overwhelming amount of cruise missiles at the US military facilities on Guam and Okinawa. Andersen AFB has the capacity to support American stealth aircraft like F-22s & B-2s but lacks a large number of hardened aircraft shelters. Both Andersen & Kadena AFBs would get hit by large amounts of IRBMs & cruise missiles. The destruction of the runways alone at both these bases would limit the USAF's capability to respond effectively.
They're not exactly going to get ahead by simply copying US designs (They were rumoured to have done this with their J20 too). The J31 isn't really a top class plane, so I hear anyway. I believe it was primarily built to be exported to neighbours.
Air-to-Air refuelling would work I suppose?
Original post by xbiostudentx
China has UAVs.
Of course.
Not like Iran, Russia and China are being surrounded.
Of course.
Not like Iran, Russia and China are being surrounded.
That is hardly news though is it? It's been that way since the end of WWII and provoking Russia/China isn't their purpose.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Trinculo
Two things:
1. China has no war strategy. Why fight the world when you can buy it?
2. China has zero wartime experience in its officer corps, whereas the United States has been more or less continuously at war for the last 70 years and has combat experience in every single part of its armed forces. China would be utterly outclassed, especially at sea.
1. China has no war strategy. Why fight the world when you can buy it?
2. China has zero wartime experience in its officer corps, whereas the United States has been more or less continuously at war for the last 70 years and has combat experience in every single part of its armed forces. China would be utterly outclassed, especially at sea.
If China is smart, it won't fight the Americans with military power because it can't win. It will use the power of public opinion just like North Vietnam did during the Vietnam War.
In the VW, America won every significant military engagement, including the Tet Offensive but it lost the war of public opinion because the North Vietnamese use the fact that the war was being beamed into every American living room every night to make it seem the Americans were losing thousands of men for no gain at all.
Original post by cbreef
PRSOM.
They're not exactly going to get ahead by simply copying US designs (They were rumoured to have done this with their J20 too). The J31 isn't really a top class plane, so I hear anyway. I believe it was primarily built to be exported to neighbours.
Air-to-Air refuelling would work I suppose?
They're not exactly going to get ahead by simply copying US designs (They were rumoured to have done this with their J20 too). The J31 isn't really a top class plane, so I hear anyway. I believe it was primarily built to be exported to neighbours.
Air-to-Air refuelling would work I suppose?
It certainly takes some of the strain of your R&D teams if you can give them a set of blueprints for them to work with. It gives the Chinese the chance to catch up with the West at a far quicker rate than they would otherwise do. Plus, they don't necessarily have to be superior aircraft (they probably won't be superior to the F-22 or F-35) but geography certainly favours China should a conflict erupt over Taiwan or islands in the South China Sea.
There seems to be conflicting reports about the J-31 - some say it's export only while others suggest the PLAN is interested in it. Currently the PRC only has one aircraft carrier but they are expanding with another two under construction from what I gather. They're currently using the J-15 fighter on the Liaoning.
I'd have thought the USAF has enough tankers to create an air bridge over the Pacific but it'd be a bit of logistical nightmare to get & keep an effective amount of combat aircraft in the battlezone if the Navy has lost a carrier or two & Andersen & Kadena are both too battle damaged.
I know RAND did a war game scenario with a Chinese invasion of Taiwan which is open source. I can't remember exactly what it said but the gist of the report was that even if the USAF's F-22s & F-35s were indestructible & every missile they fired shot a PLAAF fighter down then they'd still lose. All the PLAAF needed to do was hit the bases & any tankers in the area - the former they can do with long range missiles while the latter they can do by overwhelming the tanker's fighter escort
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- An Idea for a movie about Angor Watt
- How do your family get warm in winter
- Unethical American Surveillance Recently,
- AQA AS Biology paper 2 2019
- As Biology Paper2 2019 Q2.3
- A-Level NEA Product Design. Ideas??
- Good pranks to play on friends on holiday
- Would you rather...
- English books set in Japan/China for NEA English Literature A-Level
- India vs China (Alone) - Which Is Safer??
- If you could travel anywhere where would it be? And why?
- why does Billie Eilish look sad?
- People have been stealing in our canteen because free school meal allowance dropped
- Will World War 3 happen soon?
- I need help!!!! (A level law)
- Roedean vs. Benenden
- Any girls USE lynx THEMSELVES?
- PCR test for travel
- Foreskin issues
- Uk sanctions china
Latest
Last reply 1 minute ago
LSE Economic history departmentLast reply 1 minute ago
Amazon Project management apprenticeship 2024Last reply 2 minutes ago
Official UCL Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entryPosted 9 minutes ago
Best SEO Service Company In USALast reply 12 minutes ago
Official: University of Aberdeen A100 2024 Entry ApplicantsLast reply 13 minutes ago
BA (hons) Philosophy at University of London/OU student finance queryLast reply 14 minutes ago
BTEC H/S Care Unit 4: Enquiries into Current Research in Health and Social CareLast reply 15 minutes ago
Latest time to apply for the means tested part of the maintance loanPosted 20 minutes ago
Dissertation survey https://forms.gle/GUYmoXv6ssRJumjH7Last reply 23 minutes ago
Official University College London Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 27 minutes ago
Student Finance applications for Part Time studentsTrending
Last reply 1 hour ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 hour ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 hours ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 4 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 hour ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 hour ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 hours ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 4 weeks ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
