Could the US defeat China in a CONVENTIONAL war?

[JGalt]

China would send 100,000,000 soldiers and overwhelm us without mercy.

A 100 million person wall of humanity versus belt-fed machine guns?

My money's on the machine guns, if the barrels don't melt.

 

[Confederate Soldier]

WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER

Think of how the ALLIES stormed Normandy….now multiply that times like 1000.

Until you realize the absolutely staggering statistics of it. In order for China to land 100,000,000 troops in the U.S., China first has to have an extraordinarily large fleet to house these men. If we cram theoretically, 10,00 men onto one troop carrier, it would take ten thousand troop carrier ships to hold the men, and gear, and ammunition, and tanks, and vehicles, and supplies, etc. So we're talking about a flotilla of nearly 15,000-20,000 ships. Now exactly how long would it take this flotilla to get here? The fastest cargo ships take about two weeks to sail from China to the U.S., with others taking over a month. That gives the U.S. plenty of time to pick ships off while they're still out at sea, and mass forces at the landing points. Unless China builds itself a massive 20,000 ship flotilla of top speed troop carrier ships, Chinese soldiers won't be hitting the beaches any time soon.

By air, China would have a rough time trying to bomb the U.S. with their planes limited fuel windows, while the U.S. has the comfort of being at home base. We can meet them out at sea with plenty of fuel, while they burn precious fuel carrying munitions, with just enough to get them back home.




So a landing is pretty much out, air campaigns are way to costly and would likely be ineffective, so that leads us to ICBMs.





I'd say we're in a great position if a conventional war broke out.

 

[22lcidw]

You gonna loan him a nuke or two? Ukraine didn't save any from the days of USSR.

He wants the United States to launch an attack.

 

[Skylar]

I do not think so at all.

If I am wrong, explain how the US would defeat China in an all out conventional war. Specifically.

In a conventional war....where?

The US's greatest strength is that it can project force across the world while being geographically isolated from any major power that could threaten it....save with unconventional attacks.

China has difficulty projecting it power into the Sea of China. Let alone San Diego or the Pentagon.

 

[Yarddog]

We could if our troops didn't have their hands behind their backs ever since WWII. Whenever we started kicking ass in all the wars since 1945, the effing gubmint placed all kinds of restrictions on the troops. All persons above the rank of colonel should be forbidden from making any tactical decisions. It's all political now.

We'll make you the one exception with your new promotion. "General Hoss"

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Zelensky wants to attack Russia with nuclear weapons. Our elected politicians are of the swamp and tools of the globalists.

 

[Indeependent]

A 100 million person wall of humanity versus belt-fed machine guns?

My money's on the machine guns, if the barrels don't melt.

This very serious question has been asked on YouTube and TikTok and the response has been that we cannot imagine a line of 100 million soldiers being mowed down before many of them reach our soldiers.

 

[Moonglow]

He wants the United States to launch an attack.

He can't afford that.

 

[g5000]

I remember in 1991 when Iraq had the third largest military in the world, armed by the Soviets, and people were predicting there would be countless American lives lost if we kicked Iraq out of Kuwait.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

China has like 1.5 billion people and No Constitution.

They could literally send 500,000,000 peopple to Taiwan.

Anyone who saw STARSHIP TROOPERS….that is what it can look like.

They would have to swim!

 

[ColonelAngus]

Until you realize the absolutely staggering statistics of it. In order for China to land 100,000,000 troops in the U.S., China first has to have an extraordinarily large fleet to house these men. If we cram theoretically, 10,00 men onto one troop carrier, it would take ten thousand troop carrier ships to hold the men, and gear, and ammunition, and tanks, and vehicles, and supplies, etc. So we're talking about a flotilla of nearly 15,000-20,000 ships. Now exactly how long would it take this flotilla to get here? The fastest cargo ships take about two weeks to sail from China to the U.S., with others taking over a month. That gives the U.S. plenty of time to pick ships off while they're still out at sea, and mass forces at the landing points. Unless China builds itself a massive 20,000 ship flotilla of top speed troop carrier ships, Chinese soldiers won't be hitting the beaches any time soon.

By air, China would have a rough time trying to bomb the U.S. with their planes limited fuel windows, while the U.S. has the comfort of being at home base. We can meet them out at sea with plenty of fuel, while they burn precious fuel carrying munitions, with just enough to get them back home.




So a landing is pretty much out, air campaigns are way to costly and would likely be ineffective, so that leads us to ICBMs.





I'd say we're in a great position if a conventional war broke out.

The supply lines would insane.

If China mobilized all of their factories to build war machines like the US did for WWII, they could easily dedeat us.

They produce most of our shit. We have no strategic protection from globalism.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

He wants the United States to launch an attack.

Again,

 

[Borillar]

If we had to fight an unlimited conventional war with China in China, we would lose. If we fought them here, we would win.

If we fought a limited conventional war with China, such as defending Tiawan, we might succeed in thwarting an invasion, but it could be very messy and easily escalated.

 

[JGalt]

I remember about this time last year Putin cock gobblers on this forum were bragging that Russia could beat us.

I think I just found who I'd want to be the point man for my patrol.

Of course you probably think guns are icky, do you'd just get a dildo instead of a carbine.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I do not think so at all.

If I am wrong, explain how the US would defeat China in an all out conventional war. Specifically.

The US could defeat the Chinese naval and air forces in a matter of days. Occupying mainland China would be simply impossible. The Army and Marines could almost sit out the war, as they would not be needed.

The only thing China could do then is invade their communist neighbors, while suffering constant attacks from the air and sea with bombers and cruise missiles until they saw fit to surrender.

The key is not to get sucked into a ground war with China IN mainland China..

 

[Skylar]

I remember in 1991 when Iraq had the third largest military in the world, armed by the Soviets, and people were predicting there would be countless American lives lost if we kicked Iraq out of Kuwait.

Russia is suffering from what befalls all autocracies: corruption.

Putin is giving tactical military commands to generals. He has no basis of experience or training to be do this effectively.
His troops are poorly trained, poorly equipped, poorly connected, poorly transported and following a military doctrine prefaced on top down centralization of authority.....which has poor leadership. Russian soldiers go where they are told and expected to do exactly what they're told without deviation.

Even their logical model is push first. Where they ship equipment based not on the needs of the field, but on what leadership decides they will need ahead of time.

US/NATO doctrine is about autonomous responsiveness. Obviously, they have a chain of command. But they empower tactical commanders (all the way down to the squad level) to find opportunities and improvise. They actively train for this. They are immaculately equipped (comparatively), supported and transported. The have a pull logistical doctrine, where forces requisition what they need to match the conditions on the ground.

There is a reason Russia is leaning so hard into threats of nuclear attacks. On a conventional level they are utterly outmatched.

US v Russia isn't a great basis of comparison to US v. China.

 

[MagicMike]

We could if our troops didn't have their hands behind their backs ever since WWII. Whenever we started kicking ass in all the wars since 1945, the effing gubmint placed all kinds of restrictions on the troops. All persons above the rank of colonel should be forbidden from making any tactical decisions. It's all political now.

Total bullshit!

 

[MarathonMike]

I don't see China or anyone else risking a land assault against America. Our civilian arsenal is well known throughout the world.

 

[Confederate Soldier]

The supply lines would insane.

If China mobilized all of their factories to build war machines like the US did for WWII, they could easily dedeat us.

They produce most of our shit. We have no strategic protection from globalism.

Do you know how long it would take for them to build everything? In WWII, it took on average, 42 days for the U.S. to crank out ONE liberty supply ship at peak war production effort. The parts were supplied by over 15 factories, and then it took about a week to assemble. China could do it, but to create thousands of ships, in places where they could even build ships, would take a very long time. It wouldn't be like the U.S. would be sitting on the beaches just watching them do it without preparations of our own, you know.

 

[Skylar]

The US could defeat the Chinese naval and air forces in a matter of days. Occupying mainland China would be simply impossible. The Army and Marines could almost sit out the war, as they would not be needed.

The only thing China could do then is invade their communist neighbors, while suffering constant attacks from the air and sea with bombers and cruise missiles until they saw fit to surrender.

The key is not to get sucked into a ground war with China IN mainland China..

Agreed. China in China would be an impossible foe for the US to defeat conventionally.

The reverse is also true, only moreso.

Ignoring all the oceans, navies and armies, the US civilian population is hideously armed....with more small arms than any army in the world. Including the US military. It wouldn't be an occupation but a never ending insurrection.

They would almost certainty fight through proxies or outside their own territory. Which has been the basis of pretty much every US war since the 1860s.