Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/coul...ampaign=social

    While China has a larger military than the United Kingdom, it does not have the logistical capability to deploy, support and sustain those forces overseas in large numbers. Professor Malcolm Chalmers, director of UK Defence Policy Studies at the renowned Royal United Services Institute, says Britain would have a clear advantage in a straight fight at an equidistant location.


    I think he might have a point. I believe that, though it will never be a one on one fight, Britain has the capacity not to invade and dominate China physically, but could impose casualties and strategic defeats so significant, that China would have to submit defeat. Though it would be difficult, we would be able to project a capable expeditionary force that is effective and equipped, and keep them supplied. China could not do that and could not sustain itself in a theatre of operations in the long term.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Can't see a war of that nature ever happening. Though I agree with the conclusions. China has a disturbing foreign policy that will bring it into conflict with a range of powers, but it will all be based near to China. Making the point of the article moot.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Can't see a war of that nature ever happening. Though I agree with the conclusions. China has a disturbing foreign policy that will bring it into conflict with a range of powers, but it will all be based near to China. Making the point of the article moot.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    That's true. China tends to think much more long term than westerners, and I can't see them getting involved in any dispute outside the South China Sea where they will have the home advantage. That said, I can't see many countries wanting to either 1) get involved or 2) if they do get involved, side with China.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by AlwaysWatching)
    That's true. China tends to think much more long term than westerners, and I can't see them getting involved in any dispute outside the South China Sea where they will have the home advantage. That said, I can't see many countries wanting to either 1) get involved or 2) if they do get involved, side with China.
    It's interesting just how poor Chinese foreign policy has been in the region. Globally they have shown an instinct for buying off elites and collecting friends through investment. But in the immediate region there has been no attempt to make alliances, alienating every potential partner with claims to basically the entire area. They have been so brazen they have almost succeeded in pushing historical enemies such as Japan and south Korea together. Remarkable really.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    No because
    1) It would never be 1 on 1
    2) Even if it was, China's army dwarfs Britain's and although you make a good point about logistics, in actuality the entire war would be settled on who is willing to press that button to kill millions.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kyou)
    No because
    1) It would never be 1 on 1
    2) Even if it was, China's army dwarfs Britain's and although you make a good point about logistics, in actuality the entire war would be settled on who is willing to press that button to kill millions.
    It was less of speculation of Britain's ability to invade China or vice versa, but Britain's ability to fight a Falkland's style campaign against China. The latter is far more likely, given the fact that China is expanding territorially in the South China Sea. I can't see any reason for China to go nuclear in such a scenario, even if it did lose.

    If it was an expeditionary Island retaking type of conflict, I think Britain has a good chance if it acted quickly before China had the chance to fortify and entrench. A rapid reaction and then consolidation by airborne and naval forces would be possible, and if successful, would not be easily retaken by China since it has not Blue water capabilities. If they wanted that Island for resources, the last thing they would do is nuke the place.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlwaysWatching)
    It was less of speculation of Britain's ability to invade China or vice versa, but Britain's ability to fight a Falkland's style campaign against China. The latter is far more likely, given the fact that China is expanding territorially in the South China Sea. I can't see any reason for China to go nuclear in such a scenario, even if it did lose.

    If it was an expeditionary Island retaking type of conflict, I think Britain has a good chance if it acted quickly before China had fortified and entrenched.
    True, however you still can't detract from the fact that Chinas army can have huge losses and still have the manpower to fight.

    Also, I think that it's more of who can threaten the other the most with nuclear weapons, in which i think China has both a bigger military and better nuclear weapons
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    The majority of people here can't even tie their own shoes...

    of course we'd lose.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Britain is literally a pea shaped island, how on earth would they be able to take down China?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kaeden)
    The majority of people here can't even tie their own shoes...

    of course we'd lose.
    We aren't discussing all out warfare.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Valyrian)
    Britain is literally a pea shaped island, how on earth would they be able to take down China?
    That isn't the proposition of the article. Read the article, it's not that improbable it may at first appear.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    What about the nuclear deterrent?

    Or does that just stop them nuking us.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kyou)
    True, however you still can't detract from the fact that Chinas army can have huge losses and still have the manpower to fight.

    Also, I think that it's more of who can threaten the other the most with nuclear weapons, in which i think China has both a bigger military and better nuclear weapons
    It can have billions of men, but unless they are all willing to swim an ocean, it doesn't mean anything. As soon as Britain has retook the said Island and fortified it, it will be unlikely that China will be able to retake it. It's small naval force would have been already destroyed during the initial invasion by the British, and any civilian vessels commandeered would not sail without naval protection or a significant amount of refitting and armament, so could not land a significant amount of troops or resupply men and machine.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    What about the nuclear deterrent?

    Or does that just stop them nuking us.
    Nuclear deterrent protects homeland integrity through deterrence, I'm more on about small scale expeditionary conflicts over resource rich Islands.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlwaysWatching)
    We aren't discussing all out warfare.
    The next world war will be interesting.
    Thing there would literally be no humans left, though.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlwaysWatching)
    Nuclear deterrent protects homeland integrity through deterrence, I'm more on about small scale expeditionary conflicts over resource rich Islands.
    Well in that case I wont be fighting. Other people can die making other people rich.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlwaysWatching)
    That isn't the proposition of the article. Read the article, it's not that improbable it may at first appear.
    And I'm asking when would there ever be a moment where Britain decides to take down China as a whole and win against a Chinese army that is literally a thousand times larger than Britains army, even if Britain took down loads of Chinese soldiers it still wouldn't be that effective and the reserve army would probably exceed the amount of deaths anyway so it wouldn't be a loss. China wouldn't even bother fighting at an equidistant location so the whine article is pointless.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Valyrian)
    Britain is literally a pea shaped island, how on earth would they be able to take down China?
    Lol, in what way is Britain shaped like a pea?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dr Pesto)
    Lol, in what way is Britain shaped like a pea?
    It just is ok
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hellodave5)
    The next world war will be interesting.
    Thing there would literally be no humans left, though.
    That's assuming there is one.

    This is not guaranteed. Indeed, fatalism about war was probably the biggest cause of world war one (and somewhat therefore its child, world war two).

    In my opinion, world war one was caused by lazy fatalism about the inevitability of war, and an attendant lack of will to do anything to stop it.

    Whenever I feel despair at the state of the current world, I look back for the state of countries relations before world war one, and I think that it's literally such a RELIEF how far we are from that now.

    People talk about complacency, but fatalism is probably even more dangerous, and we should never forget that.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.