Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

China Can Sink American Ships Faster Than America Can Replace Them

Discussion in 'Free Fire Zone' started by CAC, Mar 16, 2021.

  1. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    24,171
    Likes Received:
    1,489
    Location:
    Finland
    I recall China attacked Vietnam ca 1980. China could not reach its targets and the war ended quickly. Maybe just a reminder who is the top dog.
     
  2. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    256
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    1. as usual, people do not think in realistic terms = a think tank is not reality
    2. the US military has numerous countermeasures for anti-ship missiles
    3.. it says ''long war with China'''/''major war''''....this has many what ifs/questions
    a. what's the objective
    b. what's the war for?
    c. are allies involved
    4. the Israelis won against all odds-many times = -so, numbers are not exactly what determines a winner
    they were:
    -outnumbered in all categories
    -''surrounded''
    -had a narrow front
    5. most wars are contained/not total
     
  3. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    256
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    1. the US beat one of the largest and more importantly - war experienced armies in the world --and they did it ''fast!!''..... the Iraqi military had many years of war experience --on their terrain !!

    2. you forget history
    --the Dems really screwed up with Vietnam --and bombing Laos--bombing and burning civilians--one of the biggest/scandalous/murderous military and political screw ups ever--and '''lost'' the war
    a. NVietnam's military very outdated--yet the US did not beat them
    the US had:
    a monumental technological advantage = did not win
    air and naval supremacy = did not win

    3. Dems:
    --Bay of Pigs---great embarrassment and failure
    --Operation Eagle Claw--mucho embarrassment and failure

    [​IMG]





    .
     
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2021
  4. R Leonard

    R Leonard Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Messages:
    939
    Likes Received:
    594
    Location:
    The Old Dominion
    Well, the Iraqi army under Saddam was so smart that their idea of war, witness their war with Iran and how they hunkered down a la Kuwait, was to go out in the desert and try to fight WW1 all over again . . . talented bunch, eh? Their vaunted abilities and fearsomeness was a product of their propaganda and then gullible western journalists who proclaimed the pending mother of all slaughters of US/coalition forces.
     
  5. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    256
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    ...not just the Iraqis ......the Arabs [ many countries] lost to the outnumbered/etc Israelis--many times.....however, it also shows how good the Israelis were/are
    ...Syria got a major a$$ whooping in the air, by Israel
    ..etc
     
  6. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    9,378
    Likes Received:
    2,185
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Only after pounding them from the air for over a month straight. The US had air superiority and never lost it. Heck, it was hardly challenged...So. Much for largest.

    The cough "war experienced" soldiers were surrendering to TV news crews. So much for their "war experience."

    That was the one where Nixon bailed out of with his tail between his legs...Right?

    They were? The AK-47s wer modern enough. The artillery and mortars were no Joke either...not to mention th he SAMs.

    Where was this monumental technological advantage? A blue water navy, but Vietnam was not a blue water war...Was it?

    SAMs & AAA denied. US air supremacy. As stated above, Vietnam was not reliant on a blue water navy for survival.
     
  7. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    9,378
    Likes Received:
    2,185
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Curious...What US Forces fought at the Bay of Pigs?

    Eagle Claw? The US military defeated itself without even engaging Iranian forces.

    Dems
    - Berlin Airlift
    - Cuban Missile Crisis
    - Bin Laden
    - Libya/Quadaffi
     
  8. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    24,171
    Likes Received:
    1,489
    Location:
    Finland
    As I understood Israel was also lucky that the Arabic countries did not attack together but one at a time, which was very suitable to Israel if they had to fight its neighbours. The same actually happened in Russia where white generals attacked the communists without co-operation separately ca 1917-1918. One white general at a time lost his battle.
     
    CAC likes this.
  9. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    256
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    ...actually, in the October War, the Syrians and Egyptians attacked at the same time ....etc
     
  10. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    256
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    ....the Dems embarrassed the US and failed with the Bay of Pigs
    ....Carter was CINC for Eagle Claw--it was too complex....
    ....your Dem list is totally irrelevant----you brought up the Repubs beating up countries with outdated military--and plain and simple = it's the Dems that caused one of the greatest military failures and unnecessary loss of life for civilians and our military in an unnecessary war ..the Dems couldn't even beat a country with an outdated military, after pounding them with more bombs than used in WW2
    etc etc
     
    ColHessler likes this.
  11. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    24,171
    Likes Received:
    1,489
    Location:
    Finland
    Well, their attack was missing something. Too much belief in their offensive?

    Yom Kippur War - Wikipedia

    The war began with a massive and successful Egyptian crossing of the Suez Canal. Egyptian forces crossed the cease-fire lines, then advanced virtually unopposed into the Sinai Peninsula. After three days, Israel had mobilized most of its forces and halted the Egyptian offensive, resulting in a military stalemate. The Syrians coordinated their attack on the Golan Heights to coincide with the Egyptian offensive and initially made threatening gains into Israeli-held territory. Within three days, however, Israeli forces had pushed the Syrians back to the pre-war ceasefire lines. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) then launched a four-day counter-offensive deep into Syria. Within a week, Israeli artillery began to shell the outskirts of Damascus, and Egyptian President Sadat began to worry about the integrity of his major ally. He believed that capturing two strategic passes located deeper in the Sinai would make his position stronger during post-war negotiations; he therefore ordered the Egyptians to go back on the offensive, but their attack was quickly repulsed. The Israelis then counter-attacked at the seam between the two Egyptian armies, crossed the Suez Canal into Egypt, and began slowly advancing southward and westward towards the city of Suez in over a week of heavy fighting that resulted in heavy casualties on both sides.

    Other than a flurry of Syrian missile attacks on Ramat David airbase and surrounding civilian settlements during the first days of the war,[56] the fighting took place in Sinai and the Golan Heights, territories that had been occupied by Israel since the end of the Six-Day War of 1967, and in the later stages, on the west side of the Suez canal in Egypt and in areas of the Golan beyond those held by Israel prior to the outbreak of war.

    Final situation on the Egyptian front
    By the end of the war, the Israelis had advanced to positions some 101 kilometres from Egypt's capital, Cairo, and occupied 1,600 square kilometres west of the Suez Canal.[242] They had also cut the Cairo-Suez road and encircled the bulk of Egypt's Third Army. The Israelis had also taken many prisoners after Egyptian soldiers, including many officers, began surrendering in masses towards the end of the war.[243] The Egyptians held a narrow strip on the east bank of the canal, occupying some 1,200 square kilometres of the Sinai.[243] One source estimated that the Egyptians had 70,000 men, 720 tanks and 994 artillery pieces on the east bank of the canal.[244] However, 30,000 to 45,000 of them were now encircled by the Israelis
     
  12. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    256
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    ..they lost all the wars, more or less......so, yes, that would be a good thread on why
     
  13. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    9,378
    Likes Received:
    2,185
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Embarassments? Like...
    Nixon's "Peace with Honor" that wasn't.
    Reagan - Iran-Contra.
    Bush II's Gulf War II and later his "Mission Accomplished" speech on Gulf War 2...Turned out to be several years to early.

    The mission was fairly simple...Life makes it complex...The civilian bus, the gasoline smuggling tanker, weather, mechanical problems, the President's decision to abort, and the final collision of the RH-53 & EC-130.

    The equally complex Son Tay Raid, during Vietnam went off without a hitch...Problem was the prisoners had been moved a few months before.

    Really? Why? Your list only includes Dem failures, but excludes successes. Thus, I listed some Dem successes.

    Please keep up with the conversations. My response was to ColHessler's post
    Are you talking about WW2? Yeah, that was a totally unnecessary war....

    Again, I have asked you to show this. To refresh your memory
    So where is your evidence?

    Most of the bomb tonnage fell on the South, not the North. Also, NVN did not have the industrial infrastructure or much else that would be directly affected by heavy bombing.
     
  14. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,441
    Likes Received:
    256
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    yes, and I'm replying to your post--so please keep up ......
    ..plain and simple, any way you cut it, the Dems made one of the biggest mistakes/etc
    ..yes, they were bombing the enemy...and still could not defeat them with the enormous advantages of air and naval superiority----choppers gave them a monumental advantage
    --so, any way you cut it, your point about the Dems is ludicrous/etc
     
  15. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    9,378
    Likes Received:
    2,185
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    South Vietnam was the enemy? Who knew?

    Name them...3rd time I have had to ask you.

    Vietnam was not a blue ocean war.

    11,800 choppers were sent to Vietnam...Roughly half of those were lost.

    Advantage...only for scrap metal dealers.
     
  16. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    9,378
    Likes Received:
    2,185
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    China did at that, but the question remains...What were China's targets?

    Perhaps, targets is not a good word to use, as I don't think they had targets per se...Perhaps goals would be better.
    China wanted to force Vietnam to withdraw their military from China's ally - Cambodia. This was China's major goal, and it failed - While the Vietnamese did withdraw some forces from Cambodia to confront the Chinese invasion, a great many remained in Cambodia.

    China could not risk a long war, nor could they capture much Vietnamese territory, as either would elicit a strong Soviet response. As such, China stayed as long as they thought they could without drawing a Soviet or International response, before packing up and going home(and taking everything of value from the captured territories. Border clashes would flare up throughout the 80s, until the two nations normalized relations in 1991.
     
    Kai-Petri likes this.
  17. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    24,171
    Likes Received:
    1,489
    Location:
    Finland
    Something I don´t understand. Showing muscle power to the world?

    South China Sea: Beijing's military bases in disputed waters would be very difficult to defend, report claims - CNN

    Hong Kong (CNN)Beijing has spent years turning islands and reefs in the South China Sea into military bases and airstrips -- but such territory could be vulnerable to attack and nigh indefensible in the event of war, a new report has warned.

    The bases are "lonely in the distant sea," and far from both the Chinese mainland and other islands in the vast disputed waters, which span some 3.3 million square kilometers (1.3 million square miles), said Naval and Merchant Ships, a Beijing-based magazine published by the China State Shipbuilding Corporation, which supplies the People's Liberation Army.
    "Islands and reefs in South China Sea have unique advantages in safeguarding national sovereignty and maintaining a military presence in the open sea, but they have natural weaknesses with regard to their own military defense," it added.
    China claims almost all of the South China Sea, and since 2014 has built up tiny reefs and sandbars into man-made artificial islands heavily fortified with missiles, runways and weapons systems -- prompting outcry from the other governments. At least six other governments also have overlapping territorial claims in the contested waterway: the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei and Taiwan.

    "Even if the support fleet rushes at the fastest speed, it will take more than a day to reach it," the report noted.

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

    South China Sea: Satellite images show China building ‘full-blown military bases’ on artificial islands

    February 21, 2021

    China building ‘full-blown military bases’

    The images show the construction in seven areas between May 2020 and February 2021.

    [​IMG]

    Beijing views the South China Sea as a crucial part of its maritime territory, not only serving as a bastion for its seaborne nuclear deterrent based on Hainan island but also as a gateway for the Maritime Silk Road, part of China's Belt and Road Initiative.

    The South China Sea is critical, for example, for the future success of China's Greater Bay Area economic development plan, into which Hong Kong is incorporated.

    China's plan for populating the South China Sea was launched in 2012 when "Sansha City", the administrative centre for all Chinese-claimed features in the South China Sea on Woody Island in the Paracels, was upgraded from county to prefecture-level status.
     
    CAC likes this.
  18. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    9,378
    Likes Received:
    2,185
    Location:
    Reading, PA
  19. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    7,132
    Likes Received:
    1,586
    Hmmm...Ithink a realistic though slightly pessimistic view...
    If I were at the table my two off the cuff ideas would be special forces insertion, from submarine. Or an undersea nuclear detonation to create a Tsunami big enough to engulf the islands...or know how to target the islands power supply...without power you have useless things...
     
    Kai-Petri likes this.
  20. Kai-Petri

    Kai-Petri Kenraali

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Messages:
    24,171
    Likes Received:
    1,489
    Location:
    Finland
    Hope this is not like the Hitler policy in the 1930´s. Invading areas claiming they belong to them one at a time and watching what the world is doing, poking the UN and the USA in the eye at the same time
     

Share This Page