Considering how fast the Chinese can build ships compared to Americans, does the West really have the edge against China?
Considering how fast the Chinese can build ships compared to Americans, does the West really have the edge against China?
Considering how fast the Chinese can build ships compared to Americans, does the West really have the edge against China?
>green water navy
>implying the water in China isn't eternally brown
Yeah
How will China be able to build ships when in the opening strikes of the war the US is going to completely swamp China's ship production facilities with Tomahawks?
Where as China will need to target both coasts of the US to do the same back?
Sounds like wishful thinking. The reality is here : https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/china-acquiring-new-weapons-five-times-faster-than-u-s-warns-top-official
Nothing about this is a surprise. When you have no weapons to obtain, and therefore no maintenance or logistics trail, you can afford to acquire weapons faster.
As the working reserves build, the rate of acquisition will sharply dive because operating costs are a thing.
>Where as China will need to target both coasts of the US to do the same back?
China will just stop selling us steel and then we can't build a fricking thing.
The US doesn't rely on Chinese steel and the supply is quite competitive. It can also simply choose to resume domestic steel production which is not particularly difficult as all the precursors abound in CONUS.
>It can also simply choose to resume domestic steel production which is not particularly difficult
Tell me you've never worked in a steel mill before.
Tell me YOU’VE never worked in a steel mill before. The blast furnaces never shut off (that would ruin them) they just idle. It’s quite literally a matter of turning a few valves to start producing again.
there's only 9 steel mills in the US which can make steel from ore. The 1980s steel crisis hammered the American steel industry.
Cool, now how many have BOFs. The scrap industry is fricking WILD with all of the “green” recycling initiatives.
so we're gonna go full WW2 again and do scrap drives so we'll have enough steel to make ships and tanks?
We won didn’t we?
If that's what it takes yes.
>US doesn't rely on Chinese steel
True. What you reley on are Chinese ship building equipments. Around 80-90% of all shipbuilding equipment at Newport News Shipbuilding, you knew the place where all your carriers are build, are chinese equipments.
Same issue SK shipyards are made in China
Nope lol.
052d 7500t
055 13000t
There's zero hope convincing anyone on this board that it might be better to prepare against a potentially matched adversary, everyone thinks the US still manufactures everything domestically like it's the 1950s and everyone still thinks china only makes cheap plastic mcdonlads toys like it's the early 2000s. Backwards thinking stuck in the past, really.
Basically almost the entire thread mentality can be summed up in
There’s a difference between preparing for a peer foe (which we did the entirety of the Cold War) vs listening to Chinese propaganda and taking it at face value
If there is a war with China then no more Australian Iron/Coal, which, surprise, are going to be looking for a new buyer.
Lol, wut?
We don't get much steel from China at all.
https://legacy.trade.gov/steel/countries/pdfs/imports-us.pdf
No wonder China wants to either turn Mexico against the US or bomb them
Mittal is A) Garbage and and B) Chinese controlled. Most "Canadian" steel is in fact relabled Chinese steel. This is obviously not a well published fact in the industry but examining the mill certs from their facilities will show this.
> China provides most of the USA's steel!
> What? No it doesn't.
> Yes it does! Your source is garbage and it is a fact that Canada steel is actually relabeled Chinese steel! NO I WILL NOT PROVIDE EVIDENCE FOR THIS CLAIM GO FIND OUT ABOUT IT YOURSELF!
Whatever you say, anon.
Bro why are you redditspacing?
You talk like a gay, and your shit is moronic.
If I were you, I'd like...Hahaa, you know? You know what I mean?
>redditspacing
Tourist detected.
Steel requires coal and iron...Guess what China imports from U.S. allies. I'm your scenario it's Chinese shipyards that grind to a halt.
China relies heavily on iron ore, coal and LNG from Australia. If war breaks out those ships are going to start delivering elsewhere.
Many other businesses will use it as an opportunity to gain market share when the PRC is embargoed. Plus, the Chinese steel market is oversaturated and most of them rely on government subsidies (some from trade taxes and tariffs). Any disruption and a lot of them will dissolve very quickly, leading to more unemployment, and the CCP's main fear of civil unrest.
On top of this, a good portion of Chinese steel is basically semi-refined scrap that's only good for re-smelting. I wouldn't want to bet my life on the build quality of a Chinese ship either.
>build quality of a Chinese ship either.
Who has the webm of the hatches opening and it flooding?
All the other replies succinctly refuted your claims, I’m just here to call you moronic.
Legit moronic. China can’t even supply enough decent quality steel for their own weapons.
One complication is there really isn't a difference between military and commercial shipbuilding facilities in China and an important thing will be how fast China can repair damage to the facilities in a war that goes on for years. These are big state-owned companies that are dual use.
Here's your friendly party cell in CSSC:
Of course if it went nuclear then RIP.
Yeah most of the world's merchant shipbuilding is China, South Korea and Japan and roughly even between them.
>westoid Black person worshipper thnks usa better
?
converts all cargo ships into aircraft carriers
china no1 suck it
literally what did the blackout refugee mean by this?
>there really isn't a difference between military and commercial shipbuilding facilities in China
That's not that uncommon.
The demand for capital ships is so low no shipyard can operate on navy contracts only.
Fincantintieri for example builds mostly cruise ships (twice the size of Gerald Ford class) and the occasional aircraft carrier when the stars align.
Why bother with shipyards when you can tomahawk the Three Gorges Dam?
>Why bother with shipyards when you can tomahawk the Three Gorges Dam?
At that point it just turns into a nuclear war and the world collapses.
tomahawks piloted by black people so its not a threat lol
or many we are already in your military, we come in as illegal migrations join up and well you can't say no cus then you are racist and anti diversity and anti immigration so checkmate usa we win
> tomahawks piloted by black people
Are you moronic?
tomahawks are a missile, not an aircraft moron
>tomohswks
>piloted
Thirdie detected. If you were white you’d know tomahawks were missiles even if only from movies
It's actually frightening to see how absolutely delusional and poorly misinformed many Americans are about US vs Chinese capabilities in China's littoral waters. It's especially disheartening if you're one of the people who would actually have to fight in this shit show.
The US maintains a massive naval advantage over China. However, in the most likely conflict between the two, one over Taiwan, that advantage is cut down significantly due to the arena in which we will be forced to fight.
Damage to infrastructure can be repaired. No initial cruise missiles strike is going to destroy China's ability to build ships. You would need to be continually hitting them.
Japan and ROK are very unlikely to go to war over Taiwan. They will assist, but they won't be combatants, nor would it necessarily be in US interests to expand the war by having them enter.
Somewhat. US commercial ship building is practically extinct, just 10 large ships last year, 0.4% of the world total. China has 44.2%, 100 times more. This doesn't matter for naval production now, but it would in the event of a longer war. Skilled labor and capital takes time, years, to produce.
ROK doesn't build as many ships as China. They built 32.2% of ships last year.China builds 33% more ships than them and no one else is even close (they are double Japan, who is third).
To continue:
Quantity matters when you are fighting in your own littoral and your opponent needs carriers to launch sorties over the contested area. The US does not have bases close enough to Taiwan to allow for sorties from there with any sort of ease. Aerial refueling during a war will be quite vulnerable. China has been building to play to their strength. The large volume of stealth missile boats will be very helpful in denying access to Taiwan. The J-20 is likewise not meant to compete with the F-22, but is a concept purpose built for their A2D2 strategy.
You can only intercept so many missiles at a time and you only have so many interceptors. In that regard, quantity is its own sort of quality.
>muh ballistic missile spam
Took you long enough
>long enough
They ain't long enough
They just ain't long enough
>The US does not have bases close enough to Taiwan to allow for sorties from there with any sort of ease. Aerial refueling during a war will be quite vulnerable. China has been building to play to their strength. The large volume of stealth missile boats will be very helpful in denying access to Taiwan. The J-20 is likewise not meant to compete with the F-22, but is a concept purpose built for their A2D2 strategy.
>You can only intercept so many missiles at a time and you only have so many interceptors. In that regard, quantity is its own sort of quality.
You forgot the war game (not done by the u.s.) where the u.s. submarine fleet basically destroys the entire invasion force with only 23% loses and the air force despite what you've said can hit China. Refueling B2s is a thing and Kadena is like 650km to Taipei well within the range of a stratotanker. But China can frick around and find out like Russia did.
Those war games deliberately leave out Chinese ASW capabilities which are a lot more developed than you'd think.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/41478/china-tested-an-ai-controlled-submarine-hunting-underwater-drone-a-decade-ago-report
Not to mention, how do you expect SSBMs to operate in the shallow waters of the strait? Very poorly, I'd imagine.
>shallow waters of the strait
tired of morons regurgitating the same nonsense every "china numbah wan" thread
nuclear subs only need about 40 fathoms, and most of the Taiwan strait is 70+ fathoms deep except literally on the coast
not that US nuclear submarines would ever need to enter the strait itself to operate or hit Chinese assets, they'd likely peekaboo around it
Okay. You try entering these waters when Chinese have every imaginable sensors and detection capability surrounding the strait and the coasts, lol. Or you get picked off by one of their autonomous underwater drones, whichever you prefer.
>Okay.
thank you for conceding that you are moronic, never ever claim SSBMs can't operate in "the shallow waters of the strait," which is not even shallow, again.
the rest of your post is arguing over capabilities China has never demonstrated, to the point that they've had to do entire security drills when US subs surface in the nearby side of the South Asian Sea unannounced and undetected - having passed "every imaginable sensor" without a sweat
I accept your surrender, no doubt your handler realized you were making a fool of yourself one inane post at a time
Saying SSBMs can (barely) fit in those waters is without point. No good if they get easily detected, losing the whole benefit of submarines. That is what people mean when they say SSBMs can not operate successfully in those waters, it's not a matter of physical impossibility like you think is the issue.
>That is what people mean when they say SSBMs can not operate successfully in those waters, it's not a matter of physical impossibility like you think is the issue.
>local moron barely learns that the Taiwan strait isn't "too shallow" and proceeds to double down
Virginias are only 10 meters and require ~7 fathoms (40 feet) under the keel to ward off undersea hills, this leaves 30-40 fathoms to submerge in almost all of the Taiwan strait
Virginias are damn near impossible to spot from around 10 fathoms (60 feet) in most choppy water
in other words, SSN have about a 3-4x envelope of what they "need" to operate in the strait stealthily, if that was ever necessary (it isn't), so stop pretending it is impossible and never ever bring up the point again
I don't care if you start making an argument about detecting subs visually from 30 fathoms deep or whatever, that's way less obnoxious & more accurate than the following moronation you uttered:
> how do you expect SSBMs to operate in the shallow waters of the strait?
>Very poorly, I'd imagine.
you IMAGINED wrong, stupid homosexual
>hurr durr we can into UUVs
because they have never demonstrated these capabilities in a coherent way, i.e. the PLAN are consistently shocked by the presence of US submarines in places they "aren't supposed to be"
I don't care if you can get something underwater, I care if that thing underwater operates and provides capabilities
China has shared one total UUV it has ever demonstrated... on land, in a parade
two UUVs were seen by satellite, but then the facilities working on them have been since repurposed
And why is it so obvious to you that UUVs are out of the grasp of the PLA? It's not as if it's a new or revolutionary concept, or that China somehow doesn't have the manufacturing or the talent to do so. In fact, China being the world's manufacturing center as well as one of the best places for AI research proves you wrong. The article certainly expects China to have this capability.
Nope they didn't they determined the Chinese would eventually start finding the subs but by that time the first ones would have run out of torpedoes and left the theater. They are shallow but they arent 15 meters shallow. The southeast portion is 200 meters deep.
>more chicom Black person talking points
I really hope you worthless ricel microdick elevator feeders try to take Taiwan so we can bomb you and YOU SPECIFICALLY into the dust. Everytime you stupid slant eyed fricks open your worthless crooked mouths I wish we'd napalmed you instead of vietnam.
>The US does not have bases close enough to Taiwan to allow for sorties from there
Its less than 400 miles from Kadena to Taiwan, are you fricking brain damaged? Do you think a 1998 Honda Civic has a greater range than an F-35 or something?
>Japan and ROK are very unlikely to go to war over Taiwan
I never said anything about a war over Taiwan. We are just talking about the capabilities of the US navy and Chinese navy in the event of a hot war. Should such a war occur (for whatever reason) Japan and Korea and obviously going to jump in on America's side because they don't want China to win (and a defeated America would also mean the total collapse of both the Japanese and Korea economies).
>However, in the most likely conflict between the two, one over Taiwan, that advantage is cut down significantly due to the arena in which we will be forced to fight.
the US never has to put a single carrier within 300 miles of the Chinese coast to exert pressure over the Southeast Asian Sea, the Chinese coastline, and Taiwan.
>Japan and ROK are very unlikely to go to war over Taiwan.
>expand the war
Absolutely delusional. The US is terrified of accidentally drawing in China's many allies such as... North Korea (free excuse to handle this problem), and Nigeria???
vs. Australia, the Philippines, Japan, Korea, Vietnam (maybe), Indonesia (maybe), the entirety of NATO (maybe, UK is most likely to get involved if anyone)
Yeah, so worried about "expanding" the war
Delusional, delusional, delusional. The whole thread is already based on a fantasy, that China has "fast" shipbuilding compared to the US (it does not in fact have "fast" shipbuilding - the Chinese are shitting out tonnage at roughly comparable speeds to the US, +/-10%, and retiring ships just as fast in the near future), you people compound this fantasy with ever more wishful thinking
They don't have to put a carrier within 300 miles. They can park themselves 3000 miles away if they want. But it still won't keep them safe from being targeted by DF-26s for example, which has an operational range exceeding 3000 miles. Even closer opens them up to other such assets in the PLA's inventory.
None of this makes carriers obsolete mind you, but expect them to be sunk. Recent war games by western think tanks certainly agree that this will most likely happen.
>but expect them to be sunk
How many DF-26s do you think it takes to sink a modern aircraft carrier?
Not many. Even then, sinking isn't necessarily the goal, mission kill is even easier and will be "good enough". This isn't the era of armored ships anymore, you'd be surprised how little it takes to knock out a ship these days.
DF-26s are ~$10M according to some estimates.
A single Nimitz carrier hosts ~$20 billion worth of infrastructures that can be sunk. Thats not including the loss of opportunity cost after the carriers are sunk and replacement will take a decade or so.
It will likely take ~500-1000 DF-26 will be required for each carrier. So $5-$10 billion worth of DF-26 missiles to sink $20 billion worth of infrastructure.
Can the Chinese trade economic wars? Very likely.
>muh ballistic missiles again
>It's especially disheartening if you're one of the people who would actually have to fight in this shit show.
Not disheartening for me
>Somewhat. US commercial ship building is practically extinct, just 10 large ships last year, 0.4% of the world total. China has 44.2%, 100 times more. This doesn't matter for naval production now, but it would in the event of a longer war. Skilled labor and capital takes time, years, to produce.
this wumao shill talking point again, can't you Black folk die?
We repair what we've got and we've got alot, it doesn't matter if China builds a bunch of commercial freighters, most of which they fricking lie about because those dirty chinks lie about everything.
Everytime I hear
>"China's economy is LARGEST IN THE WORLD FILTHY GWAILO"
I can only roll my eyes because that too, is a lie, and they're about 1/3rd of what they say they are.
you are exactly the type of dimwitted fool that
is talking about
>HUR DURR U DUMB CHINA SMALT!!11
No, I recognize worthless drolling wumao dogs like a liveleak logo finds it's way on to chinese media feeds.
You are worthless,
Your Navy is a joke
It doesn't matter how many ships you make, kyour craftsmanship is abysmal and you over report all the crap you say you make.
One look at your crumbling infrastructure, and shoddy construction throughout your thirdworld shithole larping as a global power is enough to t ell me your mechanized units are dogwater, I.E. the same shit you cretins slurp out of soup in gutters.
That's to say nothing about your loser boots on teh ground who are trained against fighting civies who don't fight back and shitthemselves when they had to fight vets of their own nation armed with a makeshift flamethrower
You morons can keep spamming this bullshit about chinese superiolity, but you worthless gormless Black folk will never be worht more than pocket lint.
>mutts
>muh russia!
>muh mexico!
Russia is being routed by a backwater 2nd world nation with American and NATO hand me downs, Mexico has to worry about their own shit and don't have a force that would matter to us.
China is about as "strong" as Russia which is, not at all, and YOUR WORTHLESS SUPER SONIC MEME MISSILES will fail just liek they did in Russia.
I seriously don't get how delusional you bug fricks are if you think you have any chance against America. You're losers, you've done nothing but lose for centuries and you will continue to dos so as the world pulls out of China because of the covid shit you instigated VIA that canadian theft.
I feel bad for Xi because he has to remould you worthless sacks of shit into something usable and he can't do it when all of you are SO FRICKING WORTHLESS.
>Your Navy is a joke
>your crumbling infrastructure, and shoddy construction
>thirdworld shithole larping as a global power
>loser boots on teh ground who are trained against fighting civies who don't fight back
That post about whatever americans say being nothing but projection still remains as true as ever, I see 草
I'd tell you to visit a regular Chinese city off the coast for a few days of vacation if you really think infrastructure is that bad versus what you see in a western coastal city like San Francisco, but that's getting off topic.
What I will say is that I hope the US Navy leadership is as dumb as you, thinking PLAN is a joke and nothing to worry about its shipbuilding capabilities and large, skilled talent pool. One which is very helpful for defense-related matters when the time comes for war.
What do you mean "we", wumao?
So US will be doing pre-emptive strikes against Chinese mainland?
Why would China need to strike the US coasts/factory? Us ship factory is slow and can only produce few ships a year. They only have to kill the ships near Chinese coast, in the 2000 km range of China's own coast. The time it takes to rebuild the ships in the US would be years even if we go full war mode. Meanwhile, Chinese missile factories can still continue to print out hundreds of missiles every few days
If the US does that then it's only fair game to expect similarly from china. I don't think americans are mentally prepared to see Guam or Hawaii surrounded and possibly occupied by PLAN, nor are they ready to see the US west coast heavily bombed by ballistic missiles. But that's what will almost assuredly happen if the US thinks bombing the mainland is a good idea.
China can't even occupy Kinmen let alone Hawaii. Learn from Russia and know your place, thirdie.
The last time they attempted to occupy Kinmen was back when Mao was in charge. For all practical intents and purposes, that might as well be ancient history to the PLA. The situation is vastly different now.
Taking into account Chinese manufacturing capability against the anemic manufacturing capabilities of the US, a protracted, attritional war where the US is unable to replace its own losses in time could very well lead to both Guam and Hawaii surrounded and blockaded without the US able to respond. In which case, capture is inevitable.
Okay. Then expect to lose every top 40 US city over Taiwan.
A nuclear exchange suits no one, China and the US included. It's in the best interests of everyone if a future conflict remained conventional, especially the US where I doubt the average voter wants to trade Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, Boston, Atlanta, etc. for Taiwan
Did you forget about the entire Cold War?
Like what was stated before- it's ancient history to the PLA, as far as their rate of advancement is concerned. And if your military strategy expect them to fight like they're still in the cold war era, then I have some seriously bad news for you.
Then why are you talking about 1960s tier countervalue attacks?
>Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, Boston, Atlanta,
The US would be better off if everyone living there died
>Guam or Hawaii surrounded and possibly occupied by PLAN
have a nice day moron, China wouldn't make it past Guam
>US west coast heavily bombed by ballistic missiles
Retaliation is not an option, the US is both "prepared" for this and willing to go straight to nukes, as the only country on the planet that has proven this willingness I am as aware as you are that Xi is not going to try lol
US hasn't fought a peer economic and military enemy, EVER. US public citizens/gov/military may not really be aware of the danger that we're stepping ourselves into
Even the fight against Japan/Germany in WWII, neither's economy powers combined were a match for the US, not by a long shot. US was multiple times more richer combined. Soviets couldn't match the US in economics either. China today is a peer economy and a possible peer military.
People forget what peer warfare looks like.
>China
>Peer
The Chinese fought the combined west to a stalemate during the Korean War. This was when China was dirt poor under Mao.
>combined west
expeditionary forces, less than 1/10th of the US' total overseas capable forces in the 1960s and <1/100th of allies (the peak British contribution was 15k men lmao)
>stalemate
to the US' predefined preferred border, the Kansas Line, 25km past the 38th parallel
China had to force North Korea to agree to the armistice because it was unwilling to lose untold thousands more men (NK even tried to false flag negotiations to keep the war going), while the US was only tentatively in favor given how weak China proved to be overall
have a nice day already and save us all the trouble
sorry, I couldn't hear you over the millions of dead Muslims (mostly starved/killed by other Muslims), can you cope a bit louder?
Does China have 500-1000 DF-26 in service for every US carrier? (no lol)
Can every single one pass AEGIS? (no lol)
Has DF-26 even been tested against seaborne targets moving 40 knots and capable of swerving? (no lol)
there are maybe 400 DF-26 total, and I'm being very generous here, before the PLARF went dark on deployment numbers they only had 16
at least you are realistic enough to avoid pretending carriers are made of paper, kudos for that
Do you really think the US will commit more troops to defend Taiwan, than it was able to deploy right on the heels of WW2 in Korea, when a huge chunk of US forces were still mobilised?
Also, the situation was so dire McArthur was begging for nukes to be deployed lol. Again, this was against MAO'S China. Not 21st century China, the largest economy in the world.
>we failed all our geopolitical aims in the MidEast and had to flee with our tail between our legs, but at least we killed a lot of civilians.
That's nice.
>Also, the situation was so dire McArthur was begging for nukes to be deployed
Thank god that didn't happen or North Korea would never have become the utopia it is today
>Can every single one pass AEGIS? (no lol)
US carrier strike groups have ~2-3 Aegis defense systems. 1 Tichondrea class and 2 Arleigh Burke. Each one system carries ~96 missiles. So in a hypothetical situation where there's perfect information, Chinese DF-26 has 1 in 288 chance. But given fog of war, electronics warfare, etc, the actual chance maybe much lower.
For example, Aegis system itself has ~80% interception rate. If you fire 50 missiles, it can intercept ~40 of them. Thats with perfect information during controlled tests. So whats to say China will only fire ~50 of the missiles and hope for 10 of them to land? Or they will fire 100 of them and hope 20 will land. Either way, its a numbers game, of which economics of scale is the king here.
the numbers you have given imply China will need to use 2/3rds of its nuclear stockpile and risk retaliation to sink US Pacific-only carriers, or every single DF-26 and conventional warheads to MAYBE sink a single US carrier... assuming DF-26 can even hit a moving naval target lmao
>even worse
1/3 of Europeans being willing to murder Chinese for no direct profit is insanely high
>Asked whether their country should cooperate with the United States in resisting China, 67% of Japanese and 77% of South Koreans agreed. (2022)
in summary, have a nice day delusional moron
>56% want only JSDF rear support to U.S. in event of Taiwan crisis
>Twenty-seven percent said the SDF should not work with the U.S. military
>Voters were also asked which of the two approaches they think Japan should prioritize for its national security: deepening the relationship with China through diplomacy and the economy or strengthening defense capabilities.
>Seventy percent selected “deepening the relationship with China,” far more than the 26 percent who chose “strengthening defense capabilities.”
>Asahi poll
>far left rag
>readers are anti-war & pro China
imagine my shock
>In a survey conducted late last year, 49% of respondents supported an expanded role in the alliance while 46% were against.
>This represents a reversal since the question was first posed in 2020. That year, only 41% were in favor of a bigger role while 53% were against.
you are making enemies by the minute through your putrid existence, most loyal son of China
China doesn't have a missile, doesn't have a ship, doesn't have rockets, doesn't have factories, doesn't have any capability. Cope harder, nerd.
>the numbers you have given imply China will need to use 2/3rds of its nuclear stockpile and risk retaliation to sink US Pacific-only carriers, or every single DF-26 and conventional warheads to MAYBE sink a single US carrier... assuming DF-26 can even hit a moving naval target lmao
Its called conservative estimation, you dumb moron.
There are people on this board that think that China doesn't have a missile, doesn't have a ship, doesn't have rockets, doesn't have factories, doesn't have any capability.
they have more DF-26s than the US has SM-3 and SM-6 interceptors combined. DF-26 isnt their only tool in their inventory either.
>they have more DF-26s than the US has SM-3 and SM-6 interceptors combined.
incorrect, and even if every single DF-26 hit with no use of AEGIS at all or damage control, it would sink MAYBE a single well prepared carrier
they're only 2kg conventional warheads, pre-war US carriers have tanked actual nukes and stayed floating
lol missing the point
and I won't educate you
they don't need to test against seaborne targets moving 40 knots. i don't think you realize just how slow carriers move relative to how absurdly fast hypersonic missiles can travel. It's a pointless argument to raise.
>It's a pointless argument to raise.
I'm glad, I hope PLARF is as fricking moronic as you are and has never tried to test an AShM at sea, the clarion call to execute designers when they realize every missile is missing by excess of 300 meters will be hilarious
you are mentally ill
>another chink-fographics
Oh wow, I'm so demoralized
>China today is a peer economy
in none of the ways that matter, yes
if China's demography was as rosy and their future as pleasant as it looked like it might be under Deng then I'd be worried, but we are not living with Deng's China, and even Deng's China needed to fudge numbers to seek investments. We live in rotting, aging, slave-labor China, where they taught every young Chinese to do science and math like a superman just so they could force them to work on farms instead, all the money meant to supply China's rise spent on buying party members mansions in the USA & Canada instead.
That's all future tense anyway - China today is by no means a peer and never has been.
>Okay. Then expect to lose every top 40 US city over Taiwan.
>A nuclear exchange suits no one, China and the US included
No one cares. China is not permitted retaliation to the US mainland. It's not fair, it's reality.
This all ignores the fact China does not have a credible nuclear threat while the US does, of course, but it doesn't matter one way or the other.
>I doubt the average voter wants to trade Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, Boston, Atlanta, etc. for Taiwan
You place the cart before the horse, if China tries to touch these cities, it is not about "Taiwan" anymore. Every Chinese dies. You see what happened to the Middle East over a few thousand Americans in New York, yes?
>You see what happened to the Middle East over a few thousand Americans in New York, yes?
The world did see lol.
NOOOOOOOOOOOO GWEILOOOO I AM DEMOLALIZED THE DLAGON IS LISING
That's the hilarious thing, you read about all the bravado from Americans online about their military capabilities and yet they become thrown out by goat herders wearing sandals in the end. So much for their military industrial complex
Americans definitely have a complex. Several, probably.
>thrown out
>only took power after we vacated the premises
And not one moment before.
Reading this parroting about Afghanistan is going to provide me with brain cancer someday. Just remember that when Russia fricked with Afghanistan, their whole country collapsed.
>muh toolibuuns!!!!!
>kick the shit out of 2 countries and operate with impunity for 20 years, get bored and leave
>"lol u lost!
Name LITERALLY one war China has won, ever, throughout its entire history. And no, the "winner" of some feudal war doesn't count
Korean War
They fought to defend the North Korean state against the combined might of the US military + other western coalition members and did so with barely any comparable equipment on their end. North Korea still exists entirely thanks to them. I'd say they won.
>zerg rush gets pushed back with ease
woah
That's why North Korea doesn't exist anymore, because it was a simple zerg rush that was pushed back with ease. Oh wait.
when was US trying to destroy North Korea?
See: UN offensive into North Korea, against multiple warnings from the PRC. What else do you think would trigger China's involvement? The first battles the coalition fought against the PLA were fought close to the yalu river, essentially the border between the north and China proper.
Was your history book in class missing pages?
North Korea invaded June 1950. They pushed the South Koreans back until the Americans came and landed on incheon September 1950.
By October 1950 US/UN took the north Korean capital of Pyongyang.
By November 1950 US/UN were close to taking all of Korea. That's when the Chinese came.
If it wasn't for millions of Chinese troops, North Korea would have lost in 5-6 months.
China doesn't get to define NK's war goals to cope with getting their shit slapped. They wanted to take SK and remove American influence from the entire region. Now SK, Japan and Taiwan are all allies with America, America has a ton of military bases and influence in the area and China has a crazy meth fueled tumor of starving inbreds worshipping a fatass on their border. No amount of movies aping bollywood without the soul or even self aware humor will change that.
China's war goals in the Korean War aren't exactly NK's war goals, they just share commonalities. They're different countries in case you did not know the difference. I suggest looking at a map of Asia to help you with your lack of thinking.
Yes, and because of Chinese involvement, they rescued their ally from becoming snuffed out with the west right at their doorstep. Your point doesn't contradict the fact that all of China's war goals were achieved, at the expense of the US-led coalition who tried to invade the north and failed.
>, at the expense of the US-led coalition
The US' war goals were achieved. Eliminating NK would have just been a neat bonus, just like establishing Taiwan as a free state turned out to be a free bonus.
>You are not worth my time
>I cannot defeat you
these are not the same statement; CPC pride is built on being the needy one nobody wants to deal with despite zero actual accomplishments.
There was legitimate consideration given to attempting an invasion into China proper to oust the communists, and you think, what, the west just got bored and decided to not even get rid of North Korea because reasons? Maybe it had something to do with the millions of Chinese soldiers and the hundreds of thousands of US casualties?
>and you think, what, the west just got bored and decided to not even get rid of North Korea because reasons?
Yes. Eliminating NK outright was not a high priority or the charter for UN intervention.
>Maybe it had something to do with the millions of Chinese soldiers and the hundreds of thousands of US casualties?
If I encounter a feral dog, am I obligated to put it down? The Chinese Spring offensive was a catastrophic failure while Basedang & Samichon are some of the most embarrassing defeats any force suffered since WWII ended. China was forced to accept the current status quo by repeated failures to take Seoul, and nearly every action following UN retreat was a Chinese offensive.
Did these offensives succeed? LOL, no.
Mao's "volunteer army" DID take on the exact war goals of North Korea, as China never formerly entered the war. This is a critical element that prevented the US from appropriately retaliating on Chinese soil (& led to the Taiwan situation we have today). North Korea & the PVA started the war to conquer South Korea and lost. The UN joined explicitly to protect South Korea's sovereignty
>The Security Council of the United Nations called upon the invading troops to cease hostilities and to withdraw to the 38th parallel. This they have not done, but on the contrary have pressed the attack.
>In these circumstances I have ordered United States air and sea forces to give the Korean Government troops cover and support.
>In these circumstances the occupation of Formosa by Communist forces would be a direct threat to the security of the Pacific area [...]
Truman.
I'm glad you think you're an authority on what the US' war goals were, but they were were clearly established prior to intervention.
>It's not fair for the coalition to try to wipe NK while the offensive is cheap, and then peace out back to their initial goal when it would take any real effort to force a total victory!
Doesn't matter, cry about it.
>formerly
formally, also thanks word filter I will be using "basedang" for that battle from now on
>they were were clearly established prior to intervention.
Which were extended after intervention. Which they failed to achieve after invading the north and getting pushed all the way back to the 38th parallel. Which you keep conveniently ignoring because it doesn't suit your narrative.
Not liking that the US got beaten back by an impoverished force without significant heavy weaponry, motor vehicles, or aircraft, making their entire offensive into North Korea in vain?
Like you said yourself, cry about it.
>Which were extended after intervention.
Your opinion.
>pushed all the way back to the 38th parallel
They literally just left in an orderly manner, Hungnam in particular was an unprecedented military action.
If China successfully held coalition forces at the Jan 15 line I'd call it a clear Chinese win, since they really wanted a split Korea anyway, but they didn't do that. It went straight back to the 36th.
At the same time, China "never went to war" in Korea (just tossed men into the PVA meatgrinder) because it was too terrified of US retaliation. So only NK's goals mattered, and NK failed utterly in conquering SK.
Cope about it some more.
Opinion? Really now?
I think you need to revisit whatever history lesson you learned from. You can start with basic article here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_offensive_into_North_Korea
I think you might be the most moronic anon I've encountered in at least the past 3 hours, fantastic work
I accept your concession, even if it took you several posts to demonstrate your remarkable poor reasoning to others. Embarrassing, if you ask me
I didn't concede anything, you failed to establish that new goals were set post-intervention and leaned on facts that were already established: the UN coalition forces swept NK so hard they tried to finish the job, then when it became too costly to win in this manner, they simply won in the way intended - to roughly the pre-war borders in an enforced peace, atop a mountain of Chinese and NK corpses
the stated goal of intervention does not magically change or become invalid because of facts on the ground, the stated goal was ACHIEVED - unlike NK's goals.
have a nice day homosexual
>the UN coalition forces swept NK so hard they tried to finish the job
Translation: they tried to conquer NK by adding a new war goal item to the original plan
>then when it became too costly to win in this manner
Translation: the UN coalition was soundly beaten back by a force composed of mainly light infantry and had to give up their added war goal of conquering the north
You are not very bright, are you?
>Translation: they tried to conquer NK by adding a new war goal item to the original plan
>war goal item
I guess we're playing fricking Hearts of Iron now, huh? Prove this occurred. A single quote, perhaps?
You still haven't shown anything to indicate that NK was going to be "conquered," let alone that the war's goals changed.
The fastest way to guarantee SK would be independent was to simply sweep NK's offensive forces in total, which happened way easier than expected until China had to bail them out. It's that simple.
> soundly beaten
Chinese forces fail to drive coalition forces off their stated goal for literally 2 years straight
what did Xi mean by this?
tl;dr
The action of invading the north speaks for itself as being a goal of both the west and MacArthur's ego. The action of the UN coalition having to hastily retreat and the status quo that China helped enforce remaining half a century later speaks for itself as well. You know this so you try to hide behind semantic games like a pathetic child
>The action of invading the north speaks for itself as being a goal of [...] MacArthur's ego.
Holy shit, you're almost there! If you just shit on MacArthur for being overzealous I wouldn't be arguing so much, but making a tactical mistake and taking a little punishment for it != losing a war.
>the west, conquer
Not even vaguely. Prove it. Where were the occupation forces? Why weren't there military police, just marines? It's almost as though X corps were just liberating villages, hunting NK goons, and leaving... because they were.
>status quo that China helped enforce
The status quo was enforced by the coalition against Chinese efforts, leading to 2 years of failed Chinese offensives. This is fact. It is also fact that China refused to declare a formal war or escalate, which in turn allowed the west to posture and keep to their initial goal.
China's only "win" is cost minimization for both parties, but it remains FACT that the PVAs, the volunteer armies, failed to deliver NK victory. Fomosa (Taiwan) was never invaded by Communists. South Korea is still independent. Total Coalition victory as stated from Truman's entry.
Mao just saw the writing on the wall, cut his losses & disowned his dead son body and soul.
You are such a dumb c**t I can't believe it.
Can you translate it to French for me?
If it was just MacArthur, but too bad it wasn't, the UN participants shares the blame for acting as his enforcer.
Quite frankly, I have better things to do with my time than continue to argue with a delusional bandit who can not effectively argue his claims while demanding the other side to do what he refuses. Continue refusing to acknowledge that, in China, the war is a successful turning point for its people after a 100+ years dark age- meanwhile the war is called the "Forgotten War" in the west. You're clearly happier to remain ignorant
>Continue refusing to acknowledge that, in China, the war is a successful turning point for its people after a 100+ years dark age- meanwhile the war is called the "Forgotten War" in the west. You're clearly happier to remain ignorant
It is astounding how integral failing to support North Korea is to the Chinese national identity, yes, but for the US & friends, Korea was just another Wednesday.
Perhaps if China had declared formal war and forced the US to commit more money, then we'd have a different conversation, but this did not occur. New lines in the sand would be drawn, but Mao was far too scared for that.
Truman said exactly what the US was there to do, and every box was checked. China never formally or even informally declared its goal, just establishing the PVAs but North Korea utterly failed, so China fails with it. Clear victors and even clearer losers.
You have no defense to these facts.
Ok I'll shorten it
Leave the god damn fricking farming equipment the frick alone
Stop filming them fricking your refugee women
Stop fricking sucking them off in the corner
Leave them alone they are meant to pick cotton not he filmed having sex with your refugee women
>and the hundreds of thousands of US casualties?
The US had 36k deaths and the Chinese had over 400k deaths. Thats sustainable. The US choosing to not fight anymore because their ally is safe and the prewar lines reestablished is different than backing down because they couldn’t. But you’ll never admit that
>The US choosing to not fight anymore
That's funny way to say losing.
" The Truman Administration abandoned plans to reunite North and South Korea and instead decided to pursue limited goals in order to avoid the possible escalation of the conflict into a third world war involving China and the Soviet Union."
Keep the goalposts moving mutt
That’s a funny way of saying the Chinese took more than 10 times the casualties in a shorter period of time. That’s unsustainable
The US war goals were not achieved, they made it their problem by pushing past the 38th parallel and failing to conquer North Korea due to China's involvement. You don't simply try to extinguish a sovereign state as a "neat bonus."
Before invading the north, yes, they did achieve their war goals after breaking out of the Pusan perimeter, but that's playing a disingenuous word game by saying this applies after they invaded the north. You cannot simply undo the lives, time, and equipment wasted on an effort that ended in failure like you can with empty rhetoric like yours.
>this post brought to you by the country which lost to rice farmers in Vietnam and tribespeople in Afghanistan
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-58349010
>invade two countries 10,000 km away
>occupy them for 2 decades
>meanwhile...
In 1985, a sampan carrying eight fisherman floated onshore the islet after its engine broke down and identified themself as civilians in emergency communication. The soldiers on the islet were told to kill them all. A couple of the fishermen took refuge in a cave. They kneeled and begged for mercy before being pushed to their deaths.
>Chinese fishermen
>Civilians
They are all economic warfare assets of the PLAN
>>this post brought to you by the country which lost to rice farmers in Vietnam
You mean China right?
Post K/D
the only legitimate concern with China is that there will be more bodies full of lead than lead to fill them with
>we are depleting the Americans' strategic bullet reserve! keep going!
China really isn't a peer, even in a vacuum
the recent study suggesting China's economy is 2/3rds the size it actually is aside, the country is simply too vulnerable to external trade routes which the US isn't. Which the US and its allies can take full advantage of
IF the US and China actually were economic peers (they're not), it still wouldn't matter as China's economy nose dives due to one of a million choke points it has (persian straight, Strait of Malacca, the entire indian ocean, etc) due to being unable to extend their force beyond their coastline
this isn't even mentioning all the countries that will sanction china in the event of a Taiwan invasion
the Korean war really was not the west at full strength, not even close
>persian straight, Strait of Malacca, the entire indian ocean
The US could do this, but don't pretend that this wouldn't immediately put the US on everyone's shitlist. Getting the Malacca strait alone involved is fricking with roughly 40% of the world's trade. I can't think of any faster way to get Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, India, Vietnam, etc. into the arms of China than by fricking with their trade.
People need their basic needs met before they embark on idealistic principles like protecting democracy or whatever it is the state department is insisting. I doubt sanctions against China would be effective for that reason, too many nations depend on Chinese trade. Sanctions against russia today are laughably ineffective and they're far less integrated into the global system than china is.
China would be sanctioned to hell and back as is, not to mention it pivoting to a wartime economy, so their exports wouldn't be particularly significant
but who says the US would frick over everyone's trade? It would likely specifically target chinese-bound war related resources, most notably oil/coal etc
Its not going to touch anything to India/etc unless its specifically oriented towards helping China in its war aims
this is also ignoring how the world would react to China invading Taiwan (which the world would receive a lot of warning for), which would drastically change the diplomatic environment against China as is
this is also ignoring how much fricking money those nations could make as manufacturing pivots away from China into those nations
Specifically targeting ships bound for china is not as practical nor easy as you'd think. Merchant vessels can lie, spoof their trackers, or simply tell US ships in the area to pound sand.
The US could enforce their ban against China by inspecting every ship and seizing what they deem to be defiant, but this ends up creating massive delays and now you've got the world's largest shipping traffic jam in the world. Basically shutting down the economies of hundreds of millions of people dependent on the strait to remain open (which include Japan and South Korea, by the way).
It also ties up US naval assets for something of remarkably dubious value instead of actually dealing with PLA / PLAN forces around Taiwan.
>this is also ignoring how the world would react to China invading Taiwan
I have zero doubts that the west and western-aligned nations like Japan would be furious but that leaves out the rest of the world.
Latin America, the entire African continent, the middle east, and Russia, of course. All who are either neutral to outright friendly with China thanks to their trading ties. Just ask what your average African feels about the west versus how they feel about China.
Again, material realities come before bleeding-heart idealism. If you don't recognize this, then you'll never get the global south to align with your interests. China understands this to an extent- does the west?
So China goes back to the stone age, quite based.
>China's economy is 2/3rds the size it actually is
Nightlight is economy? you are an absolute moron if you believe that paper.
The CIA think China's economy is 30-60% larger than the US, that China is hiding it's true size by exchange rate manipulation.
Alos, Malacca is fully under the cover of PLAAF and PLARF so any blockade is suicidal. It's just too close to China
>PLAN
>occupy Hawaii
go to bed, you're drunk
>I don't think americans are mentally prepared to see Guam or Hawaii surrounded and possibly occupied by PLAN, nor are they ready to see the US west coast heavily bombed by ballistic missiles.
Neither are you Chinese, as evidenced by how much you freak out when anyone points out that if you go to war with the USA you actually will take some damage.
I don't know why you think you'll just sink some boats and that'll be that.
No you don't understand, the King of Disproportionate Retaliation voted "most likely to turn random offending nations into blood and dust because one civilian boat got sunk" in the yearbook will spontaneously roll over to the combined might of a hundred ICBMs
Chinese have somehow deluded themselves into believing the US and Russia were playing nuclear chicken, and now they can just join in on the fun, not understanding how close the US' twitchy fingers always were to the trigger, and how desperately terrified Russia was of pushing too far
brief list of nuclear close calls:
>1956
US almost nukes Russia over the Suez (it turned out that the expected threat was just bad weather)
>1958
US almost nukes China over Taiwan (averted by ROC winning)
>1960
US almost nukes Russia (averted because Kruschev was coincidentally in the US at the time)
>1961 Jan
US almost nukes the US (just for fun)
>1961 Nov
US almost nukes Russia (EWS relay error)
>1962 Oct 25
US almost nukes itself and Russia at the same time (turned out to be a faulty alarm over a literal bear, clearly a Russian operative)
>1962 Oct 27
Rare Russian near miss (US was literally putting destroyers on top of a Russian nuclear sub lol)
>1962 Oct 28
US almost nukes Russia and China (just for fun)
>1965
US almost nukes Russia (freak mass power outage near the OEP mistaken as EMP briefly)
>1967
US almost nukes Russia (solar flare triggers early warning systems, jets with armed nukes before corrections came through)
>1969
US almost nukes North Korea (Nixon was drunk and the norks got uppity)
>1973
US & Russia almost nuke Israel, Russia, the US (Yom Kippur shenanigans, mostly Israel's fault but I wouldn't mess with Israel either to be quite honest)
>1979
US almost nukes Russia (NORAD computers got a bit fritzy, Soviets hear tale about some of the errors and shit themselves)
>1980
US almost nukes Russia (clandestine SLBM training by Soviets detected, briefly mistaken as preemptive strikes)
by 1981, Russians began to learn about the immense number of close calls and leaders grew increasingly paranoid themselves, culminating in insubordination of Russian nuclear forces and the collapse of the Soviet Union...
Can you figure out the trend? Catastrophe is forcing the US to act, Armageddon is putting the US in a position where it thinks action is even necessary. This goes for conventional war, too.
"Ah, yes, THIS is the country I want to start a Cold War with! They definitely don't mean it!" - fricking moron commies
>If the US does that then it's only fair game to expect similarly from china.
too bad you microdicked morons couldn't do anything to us.
>I don't think americans are mentally prepared to see Guam or Hawaii surrounded and possibly occupied by PLAN,
you could never manage it gutter drinker. Your boats couldn't make it, and your tech is years behind ours.
>nor are they ready to see the US west coast heavily bombed by ballistic missiles.
we are and we will beat your yellow asses red liek the chicom filth you are because our own shitty 80s tech still BTFO of your shitty super sonic meme missiles, which you couldn't even hit us with being you Black folk have no bases near here and couldn't get your scrap heap navy within striking distance, unlike us, who have bases everywhere you stupid slope.
>But that's what will almost assuredly happen if the US thinks bombing the mainland is a good idea.
You bat eating freaks only exist through our good graces, had Patton gotten his way you would be a smear on the world map, instead you're just a smelly shitstain that needs to be wiped up. I think your shitty dam would do a good job of it, so go ahead and attack Taiwan so I can personally gut you with a bayonet.
>don't think americans are mentally prepared to see Guam or Hawaii surrounded and possibly occupied by PLAN, nor are they ready to see the US west coast heavily bombed by ballistic missiles
If China can even do that, which is a big if, you are still wrong. Most Americans can’t even point out Guam on a map. Hawaii is further from China than the US and they’d have to get past the USN, Japan, South Korea, and possible the Philippines too. How are they landing on Hawaii? Shit most of the country would welcome a bombardment of the west coast as long as it doesn’t interrupt football season.
An American would know that. Dirty chink shills don’t.
>name dropping random weapons
Check
>overestimating US capabilities
Check
>underestimating Chinese capabilities
Check
Oh yeah, it’s boomer time
Someone post the DC webm
>does the West really have the edge against China?
Yeah.
Practically none of China's ships can sail further than about 600 km from their coast. The US could park some destroyers and a couple aircraft carriers along major shipping lanes (mostly around the Gulf of Thailand) in order to throw a HUGE wrench in their ability to trade with anyone (starve them into submission over a couple weeks/months).
The US has greater capabilities to disable/destroy Chinese satellites, which would put their fleet in great danger.
In the event of a hot war between China and the US, most countries in the area would either certainly side with the US (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan), or probably side with the US (the Philippines, Vietnam), thus adding extra ships to the US side with friendly ports for US ships to resupply at. Since China has made it clear over the last 10-ish years though "Wolf Warrior" diplomacy that they want to subjugate thew world, China will have very few friendly ports open to them for their navy to access.
China hasn't got a very big numerical advantage over the US. And it is severely lacking in most other relevant areas.
>vietnam
>probably
you have no idea how much vietnamese mfs want to completely and utterly genocide chinksets. it's not even funny.
What tabletop game is this?
Pretty sure it's Dystopian Wars.
>most countries in the area would either certainly side with the US (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan), or probably side with the US (the Philippines, Vietnam)
I'd put Vietnam and Philippines above a certain siding with the US. This is what China declares are it's territorial waters.
>Taiwan and mainland China are largely strategically aligned on the Spratly islands issue, since they both claim exactly the same area, so Taiwan's control of Itu Aba (Taiping) island is viewed as an extension of China's claim.[73]
>Taiwan and China both claim the entire island chain, while all the other claimants only claim portions of them.
>Taiwanese lawmakers have demanded that Taiwan fortify Itu Aba (Taiping) island with weapons to defend against the Vietnamese, and both China and Taiwanese NGOs have pressured Taiwan to expand Taiwan's military capabilities on the island, which played a role in Taiwan expanding the island's runway in 2012.[95]
The correct move for countries like Vietnam and the Philippines is to support neither and remain neutral.
They both gain more with China out of the picture. North Vietnam also supported South Vietnam's claims over the Paracels while being allied by China against South Vietnam. That whole area is a mess, but they all hate China and the status quo is next to the worst outcome for them.
Every time I see this map I remember how fricking delusional the CCP can be.
RoC's official stance on those islands is the exact same as the PRC's, btw.
Vietnam would certainly join the US to fight China. Only because they hate the chinks
Since the west controls a huge portion of the natural resources needed to build and operate those ships, yes.
Ching Chong Ping Pong Ding Dong Doggy Doggy Yummy Yummy Implessive!
*Gets simultaneously eaten by a lathe and escalator somehow*
kfc, Black person worship, dick women, trans kids, gay anal sex taught to kindegaderns instead of quatnam phyiscs, pornhub
english is worse mutt
Basically just parroting other anons, but in like the 2025-2027 range I’d say if you threw the US and Chinese navy all together in a vacuum it’d be pyrrhic as frick to the point where you can’t say anyone won. The two biggest navies would just sink eachother, USN in pacific v China RIP Yankees. But here’s the magic part. Like other anons said, the US is just going to waltz up to the Chinese navy. If China starts shit with Taiwan this decade it won’t work. I don’t think they will, but if they do it will be within this decade cause Xi is a coomer that doesn’t understand the notion of setting up his nation for greatness when he’s no longer around and would rather be the dude to “make it happen”. If he wasn’t a spazz with the wolf warrior crap and Taiwan ambitions 20-30 years out China would be the Middle Kingdom. Their neighbors would like them, no island building garbage and they probably would have won over all of SEA and the Philippines, sounder rational diplomacy with developing economies would have made them an alternative to the west as opposed to more of the same exploitative garbage. Oh well. Sucks to sucks. I just want to see if the J-20 is any good and if the F-22 is good for more than shooting down weather balloons.
The craziest part about this?
The West would be perfectly happy to trade and coexist with this hypothetical China. Instead they've chosen the path of psychotic revanchism for the century of humiliation, even if it destroys them yet again.
Just like the west was happy to sell and work with Russia until Putin chimped out in 2014. Even Georgia in 2008 barely was a blip.
But even if the USN ends up dying, the Japanese Navy will be able to pick up where they left off.
>The two biggest navies would just sink eachother, USN in pacific v China RIP Yankees.
I think more like "RIP global shipping" because the USN is what provides security for maritime commerce. They're the reason piracy isn't a thing today. If the USN is gone, piracy starts ramping up unless other countries begin spending way more on navies than they currently do.
Those ships will probably sink after getting one hole in their hulls. Western ships can take an enormous amount of punishment, something I promise these ultra speed-builds from China can’t handle.
like the zumwalt and the LCS
>the zumwalt and the LCS
those are the same thing, moron.
Do you have braindamage?
Aren’t all the ships they’re building really small? Like their destroyers only have 1/3 of the displacement of a US equivalent.
Is the US navy in the same situation as imperial Japan was in 1940? Large amount of ships and experience personal but no real or fast enough industrial power to keep up?
>but no real or fast enough industrial power to keep up
Churning out ships has become difficult everywhere outside of East Asia.
Not really. Japan couldn’t keep up with neither US shipbuilding nor technology. The US was churning out more and more advanced ships than Japan could hope for. China aside from its three carriers is largely spamming small vessels (patrol craft, frigates and corvettes) in order to ramp up numbers. They want to be able to claim to have more ships than the US when the actual displacement of the Chinese navy is far behind the US.
>Is the US navy in the same situation as imperial Japan was in 1940?
No, for one thing the us has allies in Asia who are not going to be super thrilled about China going around and invading shit. So their navies and air forces would be involved as well. There is also the USAF which that alone would be providing significant support to to the USN. Pic related is air force project which allows every single cargo plane in USAF inventory to be used as a anti ship/ land attack cruise missiles carriers without any form of modification or additional training to the crew. Meaning once the strike mission is done the aircraft can go back to transporting shit.
>every single cargo plane in USAF inventory to be used as a anti ship/ land attack cruise missiles carriers without any form of modification or additional training to the crew. Meaning once the strike mission is done the aircraft can go back to transporting shit.
Seems like a no brained option to have buy I didn’t think the chair force would be so cool
Oh hey, it's you again
Jesus christ, same fricking moronic comparison every thread
>hurrr its just like my head cannon ww2 parallel!!!!
It's because we mocked Hapanda so hard over the Opium Wars that now his autism forces him in every thread to try to compare America to either China then or Japan in WW2.
Chinese "hypersonics" are knockoff Russian "hypersonics" and Patriots are 7-0 against them. Bring it on. War games are always set up to assume the worst fantasy scenario for the West.
>Chinese "hypersonics" are knockoff Russian "hypersonics"
>Patriots are 7-0 against them.
You know absolutely zero what you spew out of your mouth, especially if you're suddenly bringing patriots of all things into the conversation.
>Chinese AShBMs and Russian hypersonics share a similar flight profile
>one American missile defense system has already proven it can down Russian hypersonics consistently
>this isn't grounds go say that another American missile defense system can down a threat with a similar profile, somehow
???
proven? by who lol, ukrainian MoD? no actual trusted third party has verified any of the fantastical claims of patriot shoot downs.
Stay deluded.
Besides the US, which confirmed the hypersonics specifically targeting the Patriot battery in the Ukrainian capital were intercepted and incoming debris caused minor damage to one launcher that was repaired within two days?
>inb4 no, a different third party that I get to say is trustworthy
Like who, China? China can test it by lobbing a missile at the next USN vessel conducting FONOPs instead of issuing their ten millionth final warning. Frick off.
the US isn't an unbiased third party you stupid moron, of course they're going to say that they intercepted every kinzhal. making a pathetic >inb4 callout doesn't resolve the obvious conflict of interest jesus christ you have total shit for brains
https://gulflink.health.mil/scud_info/scud_info_refs/n41en141/Patriot.html
>"The results of these studies are disturbing. They suggest that the Patriot's intercept rate during the Gulf War was very low. The evidence from these preliminary studies indicates that Patriot's intercept rate could be much lower than ten percent, possibly even zero."
the US in their AARs back when they were the undisputed top dog in the world could afford some reflection, hence them coming clean with how horribly patriot performed in the gulf war.
This is not the same US today whose hegemony is being disputed by two great powers (one of them dangerously close to becoming a superpower in their own right). While at the same time currently participating in an active european proxy conflict through money & equipment transfers. The US has every reason to lie through their teeth as long as the war is still ongoing.
>hence them coming clean with how horribly patriot performed in the gulf war.
you are moronic and didn't read the paper linked, which the mentally ill anon believes supports his point (it doesn't)
Did you?
>A 10 month investigation by the House Government Operations subcommittee on Legislation and National Security concluded that there was little evidence to prove that the Patriot hit more than a few Scuds
in conclusion, kys
>...in 1992
"I WATCHED VIDEOS AND THERE WERE NO INTERCEPTS!!!" - Postol, a civilian
>And so for every eight Patriots launched, there will be only one success. From a box of random unlabeled videotapes of intercepts over Israel, seven out of every eight will show misses, demonstrating that it is a lot easier to find video of misses than of hits. There are reasonable estimates which suggest that about 80% of the intercepts were successful.
>In Saudi Arabia an average of three interceptors was launched at each Scud which was engaged, so one random film clip in three would show a hit if 100% of all engaged Scuds had been destroyed. That was not the case, so the fraction of videotapes showing successes would actually be less than one out of three or 27%. The correct result for Saudi events is that only about 27% of all random news videotapes would show successes but 73% would show misses. The Saudis situation is not significantly different from the Israeli case, and in neither instance would one find very many successes.
obviously flawed methodology for the subcommittee, this is all very well known, and the debunking is included in that very article itself
but the reason you are moronic is because the current Patriot does not resemble the original article, as this old-ass Gulf War relic acknowledges
spoiler: Pac3 and newer systems have performed great everywhere they have been deployed
have a nice day first and send me videos so I can estimate your success rate
pac-3? You mean the same newer systems that couldn't even help defend Saudi Arabia against whatever crap houthis welded together? sounds to me like patriot still suffers from the same issues as it did in the gulf war. It's almost like patriots are a fundamentally flawed system that the US only hasn't iterated on because cold war money tried up and ground-based AA isn't the primary focus US doctrine to begin with, tl;dr have a nice day you brainless NPC
>sounds to me like
>It's almost like
between 2012 and 2019 Pac-3s had an average 90/90 successful intercepts per year using 2 interceptors per detection (vs the 8/4 of Gulf era)
so you resort to passive-aggressive homosexualry of someone with no concrete evidence and who knows little about the system
chop chop, homo
>continues to spout numbers with zero evidence
kinzhals knocked out every patriot system in ukraine because of numbers I made up in my head, see I can do it too you dumb homosexual
>zero evidence
the first set of numbers was from the article mentally ill anon linked, and they are obviously correct by simple math
the second set is public knowledge if you watched Patriots in the ME at all, you can to this day dig up articles like
>Arab-operated Patriots intercepted over 100 tactical ballistic missiles since 2015
why are you so desperate to deny reality? reality cares very little, and will not see fit to un-kill Chinese or Russians or any other copelords
>wordswordswordswords
yawn I was going to seriously reply but I think I'm done reading your nonsense drivel, continue staying delusional if that's your preference, I can't help you and neither can anyone else apparentlg
>No, the Patriot is shit!!!
>Then why is it shit..?
>There's plenty of evidence, even the fact they said "hey it's not working too good here" to point that they're aware of trying to make it unshit.
>Or what about, oh I don't know, the Kinzhal penetrator with a suspicious hole blasted into the core of it?
>...Frick you too many words!!1!!
Embarrassing performance.
You got rekt
You know what, that's a great point anon. Let's pull up some satellite imagery of the destroyed Patriot battery. Until you do that, I'm going to go with the facts as currently reported.
If the patriots didn’t shoot down the missiles then what did they hit and blow up? Clearly nothing important or we’d never hear the end of it.
So either the patriots worked, or Russian missiles hit some random field and did no damage. Which is it?
>we’re going to wreck you with missiles
>here is our old version of our missile defense system shooting down equivalent missiles
>noooooo that doesn’t count
Ok then
South Korea alone builds as many ships as China by the way, though it's mostly commercial. China is in the middle of a military buildup, where the long term costs of having a large fleet hasn't really hit them yet. Building systems is actually pretty cheap, usually only a fraction of life cycle costs (including manning and costs associated with that). You'd have to be incredibly ignorant to think China could keep up the pace they're building ships in the long run
this concept is one of the reasons 2025-2035 or 2027 specifically are often cited as the most dangerous periods wrt China making a move. It will be after their military has grown much larger and more capable, but before it becomes too big of a financial burden and procurement slows. It's also the period where Chinese economic growth is expected to slow down to a level comparable to the US, which means Chinese power will be peaking in all dimensions before a long and slow decline
Have you ever considered anon how readily the US can start shitting out ships if need be
Do you understand how much the navy would love an excuse to build new ships to replace their older shit
This isn't the advantage you think it is
If they really wanted to they would've done it by now with the pivot to asia plan nearly a decade ago.
The reality is that no, they can't just start shitting out ships if need be. You can't just snap your fingers like it's ww2-era liberty ship spam anymore. The funding is gone, the manufacturing base is gone. The talent/labor pool is gone, the know-how is gone.
All of these are reflected in naval procurement since the 90s over 30 years ago which ranges from mediocre to absolutely hairbrained wastes of money like the LCS program. These are problems decades in the making and will take decades to fix.
convenient that cheerleaders simply ignored this comment
No we can’t.
Our commercial ship builders are some of the worst in the world. They’re some of the most outdated shipyards (honestly i think they may be THE most out of date shipyards) of any OECD nation.
Thanks to the jones act making sure they don’t actually have to compete so they don’t improve. The rest of us pay marginally higher prices so they can keep their welfare workers building a handful of ships per year
Looking at all the Russian tanks and armored vehicles.
Their numbers were impressive.
Then they invade a bordering country but they dont have enough supply trucks, fuel trucks, support vehicles.
Then you see the Americans airlifting burger kings and pizza huts to a landlocked Afghanistan.
China vs the US will be the naval equivalent.
Delusional chicoms
I wish these chicoms c**ts would stick to twitter/Instagram/TikTok etc. The only good bug is a fricking squished bug.
please god let the war happen, please god let whites become so pissed they start lynching random asiatics once it kicks off
>boats
LMAO,
lol even
I'd bet that a fleet in motion is probably the most resilient target against nuclear missiles, compared to all other military targets
diversity in its military (nig)
castrating itself (transkids)
ethinc tensions (illony nazis)
Enjoy the herbal condiment bing bong
Yes, China is full of moron chinks. Of course the West has the advantage.
>Lot of ships
Uh, how much money will all those ships cost? Chinese economy isn't what it used to be.
BTW, how poor is Chinese steel? I vaguely remember it being described as a "mixed bag" where certifications don’t mean anything so the product might be good or might be sub-par or even awful.
Usually shit. But that's because there are very few consequences for ripping off customers.
I'll wager that the situation is different when your customer can send you to the gulag if you rip them off.
With things like these there's nothing that can be done to immediately change the mode of operation and workplace culture cultivated for years on end, even if you start going to the extreme measures.
The REAL question is this:
How hard does Li Yuchun frick? 'Cause I'm gonna feed her so much fricking jizz she'll be the size of a hippo. I'm gonna frick her all over China while it burns. I'm gonna pump her full of my Aryan babies while Emperor Pooh suffocates to death under the piled corpses of the national people's congress. Li's jumbo jugs will be milked for profit and her nudes will be leaked by the time my couch-sized balls are drained.
This is not a threat. This is not a warning. This is a guarantee. I shall not be stopped. The geas binds me.
Godspeed you magnificent pervert
Quantity doesn't beat quality unless it's by a huge factor. A destroyer also isn't equivalent to a missile cruiser or carrier. Then your image is comparing China and the UK not China and the U.S.
In naval matters specifically around Taiwan and the SCS, not anymore unless the americans somehow turn things around in the next 5 years or so. Unlike other branches USN has decayed across the entire board after the cold war while the PLAN only gained experience since then. Type 055 is a very capable platform and you can expect more ships of that quality in the future.
Now for naval ops outside those areas, sure, the west has the edge. But that's not particularly relevant until maybe several decades from now. A Taiwan conflict is much more likely and what the west should be preparing against.
Imagine modern (well close enough) warfare
>completely reliant upon Western technology and resources
I feel like they're kind of fricked if they go to war against the US.
First of all
>China stronk!
>just look at these statistics from China, a nation famous for lying where you go to jail for questioning the government, and all of their neighbors hate them, and their products are known worldwide as being cheap disposable pigshit!
And second of all, there is NO situation in which China will ONLY be fighting America. America doesn't take every opportunity to stab everyone around them in the back, so we have actual friends, those "American Imperialism!" maps are a result of that. Nobody is going to want to die for fricking China. The closest thing you had to an ally is Russia, even before Ukraine it was questionable, now theres no way in hell they'd join you in a suicidal war against half the planet.
You have no future because you have no friends and you make your own people miserable, you poison your own land, your own people. You're on the tipping point of a catastrophic demographic disaster the likes of which the world has never seen, and you can't even flood your nation with immigrants like everyone else suffering that fate because you've made it abundantly clear you don't give a shit about your own people.
The time for the PRC to accomplish anything at all has passed, and now they've doomed themselves to be a footnote in history, and no amount of mutt screeching or whataboutism will change that.
Now go make some cheap plastic toys for my kids chang, try not to lose any limbs today, it costs the factory money to clean your guts out
>w-we have actual friends
>out of theatre countries
>Literally every single country on his list still supports the US more than china
>1/3rd of mainland Europeans who have zero assets in East Asia would voluntarily go to war with China despite the "protective" economic pressure
>single digit support for China despite endless propaganda
>politicians are likely more hawkish than electorates
based, insanely high, every CPC member should see this and tremble
I can only imagine how high the polling for UK & East Asia are
perhaps China should make fewer enemies
East Asian polling is even worse. At most they would limit themselves to rear area support and that's it, vast majority want to stay out. I don't think people realize how little desire there is for war against china in, say, South Korea or Japan.
>I don't think people realize how little desire there is for war against china in, say, South Korea or Japan.
Little desire for war and not helping if war comes are radically different positions
>euros who have very little skin in the game still support the US
>literally everyone likes the US more than China
Try again gay
China is returning to its traditional ascendancy. The historical aberration that is the post-war American hour is coming to an end. Cope if you want, we're only a few more failed foreign adventures, collapsed banks and senile presidents away. And the US never backstabs its allies, except for Suez, where the US backstabbed France & Britain simultaneously to appease the USSR and a brown despot.
>China is returning to its traditional ascendancy
China's "traditional ascendancy" has always been ruling china and maybe occasionally occupying nearby land before getting forced out by embarrassingly smaller armies.
Europeans and americans have been mapping and colonizing the far corners of the earth for over 500 years now.
and stop with this "we" shit we know what you are
When you look at the span of history, you will find China is the one constant. Always wealthy, always present, and nearly always powerful. One century was industrialisation induced fluke, that's it. China has industrialised.
>China is returning to its traditional ascendancy.
268 years of Qing Manchu
209 years of Liao Khitan
119 years of Jurchen Jin
97 years of Mongol Yuan
China returns to its traditional place of intimacy with the heel of a boot, no amount of ethnic cleansing can save you from this one lmao
>Also, the situation was so dire McArthur was begging for nukes to be deployed lol.
it was his fetish, calm down
>Do you really think the US will commit more troops to defend Taiwan, than it was able to deploy right on the heels of WW2 in Korea, when a huge chunk of US forces were still mobilised?
it doesn't need to; billions of dollars have went in to making a leaner, more vicious force
> at least we killed a lot of civilians.
you are daft - the point is the disestablishment of any effective state in the Middle East
even if the US never returned to the region, it will remain in turmoil forever
things did not have to be this way - bug when China returns to riots, warlords, and cheap labor, I will not shed a tear
>China is returning to its traditional ascendancy
If by that you mean "starving by the millions when the US and Australia stop selling you food" then yes, that is a historical tradition of your people
I'll never understand where this meme of china being unable to feed their own people comes from. China, for a country of their size, is one or the best positioned at being self-sufficient when it comes to food.
By being a net importer of food and livestock feed by a large margin.
The net importer of food % is mainly because of the livestock feed you mentioned. And specifically for feeding pigs.
China can make do without a luxury item in an actual war setting. Pork isn't the only source of protein after all.
Everything else like rice, wheat, fish, produce, etc. they produce within their own borders and in fact EXPORT their own food. So this information of yours is hilariously misguided.
>Pork isn't the only source of protein after all.
Funny joke, but it has been more than 1000 years since in case you did not realize.
the average chinaman is still as hungry as ever
>fish
I wish, then maybe you c**ts would stop illegally trawling the worlds ocean for fish. But then again, the soviet union tried to kill off all the whales just cus so hey, tried and true commie heritage. homosexual.
China is not dependent on US and Australia for their food in order to not have millions starve, I suggest re-examining your information because it's blatantly wrong
Actual cope. China literally cannot feed itself. Lie all you want this is a known fact
Taiwan's food sufficiency rate is only 35%, China's is 75%, which could be improved during preparations for conflict. How long do you think the Taiwanese will be willing to have their tiny country be a battle ground once they start to feel the pressure?
>China is not dependent on US and Australia for their food in order to not have millions starve
they factually are, they nuked most of their own farmland for their potemkin cities, so most of their edible food is sourced from African colonies or overseas. This is a fact, chang.
>Yes, because stealth truly means invisible cloaking devices and China doesn't have Sam's against such a slow moving target.
your AA is garbage and you're dreaming if you think America can't blow your frickin dam and flood your shitty office cubicle where you shitpost from, you human parasite.
>largest economy
lol no chink, it's about 66%m smaller than they lie about it being. Just like your dicks :^)
>muh lost war with arghanistan!
lmao, lol! same ol talking point, go grease an escalator and continue to not get laid
>China is returning to its traditional ascendancy
China has never been a world power
And you wonder why asians want nothing to do with the US these days. Unfortunately for you, your racism doesn't help with defense matters. In fact it makes it worse as other asians see china as the new beacon in the world over the US.
samegay
>does the West really have the edge against China?
Literally everyone and their dogs have edge against these tofu dreg boats
>carrier cracking by itself
Fricking lmao
And how many of those ships are going to be operational at any given time? What about the goals of their respective navies? What about the operating theater? No navy ever operates in full (not peak) capacity.
Are we going to just assume the entire Chinese Navy, with 100 destroyers and frigates will just sit around stationed in the Pacific? Will you have all the ships from both the Chinese and American navy just sit in a neat line in the pacific and fire at each other until last boat's standing?
There's no point in comparing these on-paper capabilities without understanding how naval operations work.
For most practical purposes the context will be around china's very own waters. In which case yes, China will absolutely have 100% naval strength due to not having global presence requirements like the united states does. And because of that, the united states will only be able to be fight China only with 50% half strength at best. Not to mention lacking the logistical throughput China possesses through sheer laws of physics and the physical distances involved.
>China will absolutely have 100% naval strength
No navy, under any circumstance, is able to operate each and every hull afloat that they own. All navies operate in rotation. They have never been operating at full capacity as it has been considered impossible.
Have you seen the US Navy operate all their 11 carriers? Or all of their DESRON? Same goes for China, UK, etc. Full capabilities are what you have on paper.
For example, nuclear-powered aircraft carriers cycle through training and workups, maintenance and refueling, and then deployments. Saying that 5-6 out of 11 carriers would be available tomorrow is a decent estimate. However, the USN rarely operates more than three carriers.
In my opinion, the smartest move is to underestimate our opponent, assume they will fail and that everything we build will work as advertised. It's also safe to assume we can fix every supply chain issue we're presently aware of, because we just will. I can't think of a single instance in history where underestimation and overconfidence ever caused problems. We'll just win. The plans said so.
This is why the US will lose against China. This exact line of thinking has been their strategy since the 1990s, especially in the state department. And since then only fixated on bombing middle eastern countries who don't have any sort of heavy weaponry.
China meanwhile has been preparing against the US since the 1990s, treating it like it is at its first gulf war peak at all times. They are actually prepared and have been preparing for far longer.
>They are actually prepared
China's own estimates said PLA would be a regional power (i.e. competitive with Korea/Japan) by 2025, it's only US fanboys who claim China is a peer threat already
"Hide your strength, bide your time."
Perhaps this quote may ring a bell.
cope harder, Xi set the "world-class" (i.e. able to repel the US) target for 2050
cut the difference and maybe China will be a world power in 2040? what a twist!
again, only US fanboys claim China is a peer threat already
Are you saying china lies when they say they're strong and is truthful when they imply they're weak?
yes, as corroborated by all physical evidence
Seriously, I never understood why this board is so keen on underestimating an opponent.
We over-estimate their capabilities and worst case scenario is that we are overprepared and pull off another 1991 style curb stomp.
We underestimate the enemy and the worst case scenario is a potential humiliating defeat. There is no benefit to overwieneriness
Anon we are already trying to make an air superiority fighter capable of also sinking ships with cruise missiles that can travel as far as a strategic nuclear bomber before refueling. Boat Spam much like shitting out a bunch of basic tanks is a WW2 tactic that does not guarantee superiority at all when the enemy can just pull a defeat in detail on you because their weapons are that capable.
Too bad for you, China is ahead of the US in UAV and 6gen fighter development.
Your views are 10yrs outdated
Can I see it?
>Considering how fast the Chinese can build ships compared to Americans, does the West really have the edge against China?
Yes, your tech is made of spit and paper wumao scumbag. Never forget you're lesser than us.
Yes.
>insect thinks chinese ship building ports won't get bombed to dust the moment an actual war breaks out
Keep being delusional chang.
Yes, because stealth truly means invisible cloaking devices and China doesn't have Sam's against such a slow moving target.
Keep failing to understand how stealth works, chang.
>china is a threat
third worlders? on /k/?
>Americans going 0 for 2 against sandpeople yet they're stupid enough to think they could contend with the largest economy in the world in its own backyard
o i am laffin, try actually winning a war before making these claims
yes
They make all ameica's shit so when burgers stop buying they run out of cash. I love seeing america x china shitflinging when in reality the two are attached at the hip.
They mostly make plastic shit, particle board shit, cheap thin sheet metal shit and cheap electronics. All of the high end electronics they just assemble while being overseen by westerners, Japanese, Koreans or Taiwanese. So I guess we run out of cheap calculators, Walmart lamps, IKEA furniture and funko pops. In the end we'd be better off for the change.
>superpowers don't go to war because both have far more to lose than to gain
Whoa....
Reminder of what America is capable of when it actually tries
Is that Lockheed shartin
More competent than nearly two billion Mainlanders* btw
Hey ching chong CHINAMAN we're gonna KICK YOUR ASSES like your ancestors in the Weimar republic kicked everybody's asses in Europe
BE VERY UNSETTLED CHANG WE COMING FOR YOUR BIG ASIAN wiener
The US could if it wanted.
1: repeal jones act and dredging act
2: NEPA exemptions for ships/yards and their entire supply chain
3: hand worker visas out like hotcakes
Inb4 #3 “but muh immigrants driving wage down huuuurrr” bro the only thing that matters is building ships at cost, not some inbred midwestern wanting some ged job
Real question
How the frick are mutts going to handle fighting China and Russia plus learning Spanish at the same time
Whilst also talking their kid to trans pole dancing classes in shultzheimerbergsteinville Texas
I mean that's a big hol up
That kinda puts a wrench in the workings
If you catch my drift
>Han bugpeople calling anyone "mutts'
ror
I'm English
You know those guys that wigged some of your mutt soldiers when they tried to invade Canada that one time
That one single time
>english
>not more mutt than America
talk to us when you can buy a butterknife without a license and don't get beaten + arrested for saying homie in a song lyric online.
Oh ok amerimutt
You go be big mad big mutt mad
I'm the guy here asking the real questions
Seriously, how the frick do you think you can fight two countries while also learning Spanish
this may surprise you, but people with an IQ above room temp can do more than one thing at once
strange you mention Canada, one of the most obligate bilingual countries & mostly owed to the French, and then grandstand about being English anyway lmao
Oh ok amerimutt so being bisexual trans and bilingual is cool now?
Lol no
Just hurry the frick up and learn Spanish
And don't even say the word Canada
Dont even think it
Because yous got your asses kicked last time
>Oh ok amerimutt so being bisexual trans and bilingual is cool now?
take your meds, quebechon
You've just basically cucked and was like
"Well yeah it's ok to speak two languages"
That's how meek the refugee homosexuals are
ESPANOL!
I was mocking you for being a frogloving homosexual while emphasizing your pea-brain, as matter of fact
not surprised it flew over your head, they call it anglo-sized for a reason
Yeah well my people were shitting into flushing toilets before your refugee pussy people refugee homosexualed to goblin land in shit smeared refugee rags
This was in the 1500s or something
Way before your ancestors invented cuck porn and molested the Black folk we bred and left behind in america
Those poor fricking Black folk being molested by your refugee pussy people
Filming them fricking your women you vile homosexuals
The poor Black folk could have caught anything off that slimy green refugee pussy
That's probably how aids was invented
On a refugee ship heading to goblin land
Leave the farming equipment alone
And learn Spanish
Post chefs knife
>You are more mutts than the country you seethe about
>you have less military capability than the country you seethe about
>you have less guns than the country you seethe about
>you have less human rights than the country you seethe about
>you have to accept America is your superior in all things and cry about it in silence
>you will NEVER exceed us.
>you will always be worthless.
did not read your responses btw, your intelligence, opinions, and ideologies are beneath me, as is your entire stinking "nations. You people are losers and will continue to be such. Throw youtrselves off the nearest building, and make sure it hurts, or at least kills you.
This isn't /misc/, this isn't your safe space, this is an American telling you to frick off and that you lost.
I wonder what your reaction will be when, at current rate of advancement, PLAN in totality surpasses the US Navy in tonnage within a decade? People like you are fascinating, it is like an open examination into brain rot
well, will china be clever enough to not let their paper tiger get wet?
Shipbuilding is only one factor of many that go into a Navy. Naval Tradition length and area of operation matters greatly. China is stuck with a very new and recent one that has only really operated on a coastal basis, while the US has a few century one that is used to operating on a global basis.
Chinese naval academy recruiting ad. I appreciate the Xi Jinping display stand in the study room.
Clarification: Naval submarine academy.
This thread is a reminder than MacArthur was right about Korea and the chinks
>I would have dropped between 30 to 50 tactical atomic bombs on his air bases and other depots strung across the neck of Manchuria…. a belt of radioactive cobalt. It could have been spread from wagons, carts, trucks and planes. For at least 60 years there could have been no land invasion of Korea from the North
>does the West really have the edge against China?
They're called Japan, the Philippines, Taiwan, and South Korea. All are unsinkable aircraft carriers.
>muh forward deployment
They are all in range of mainland based missiles and airforce, so they are worthless
all useless once we shoot down all your satellites because china can't into space because their dongs are too small
Absolutely moronic.
You will lose all your sat too.
Also US has launch 80+ per year, China do 60+, they can replace their sat just as easily as you do.
Would you rather have a bunch of cold war tier missile boats or a coalition of 800 F35s?
If Britain stopped being a free trade nation and enacted protectionism they'd be able to revive their shipbuilding capabilities. Japan did.