U.S. Would Lose War vs. China, Celente Says

[ruger17hmr]

Wow, What do you think?
Have at it guys ...

u.s. would lose war vs. china celente says: Tech Ticker, Yahoo! Finance=

 

[Lobo]

.

 

[RichardR]

We would have to have a Commander in Chief who would actually authorize the use of nuclear weapons to win a full-blown war with China though.

Which we currently do not.

 

[CarmelHP]

China is in the position that the U.S. was in at the beginning of World War 2, a huge manufacturing base, huge capacity, excess workforce, access to markets and raw materials. We've hollowed out our base, we would be hard pressed to win a conventional war with the PRC and no one would benefit from a nuclear exchange. Even in nuclear conflict, China could most likely ride it out better that we could.

 

[match14]

I agree with Lobo, win is a term that can be subject to different interpretations. I think "win" only becomes unachievable when we have to occupy other countries. For example I don't think the US could successfully occupy China if we were to go to war with them and beat them on the battlefield. With regards to our problems in Iraq or Afganistan, I think it's really important to consider how large those countries are, and how few troops we have over there.
For the same reason I don't think Germany would have been able to successfully occupy all the contries they conquered in the long term.

 

[HICKMAN]

apples and oranges

We aren't at war with Iraq or Afghanistan, we are fight muslim extremists, not the country. Don't know who the bad and good guys are most of the time.

China is a country, with an Army like ours.

 

[E5RANGER375]

The U.S. has sucked in Iraq ans afghanistan in one regard: rebuilding their **** hole countries.

In the business of killing them all and letting *** sort them out the U.S. Military does an OUTSTANDING job, as long as politicians keep their noses out of it.

Im game to kill some Chinese if they want some.

 

[ghostinthewood]

I wouldn't think it'd be easy, but didn't we basically fight them in Korea and Vietnam anyway? I'd like to think we've had good practice.

 

[Palarran]

I think if we go to war with China it will be a very limited thing. No way are we going to be landing marines and marching on Beijing; there may be some land combat around Hong Kong, Taiwan, and in Korea, but neither side is going to want to push the other far enough that it feels it has to go nuclear (Exception: possibly at sea, where no civilians could be hurt, but even that would be inviting a response that would probably escalate). If that happens, everyone looses, and I think everyone would know it.

 

[malern28us]

Depends on where the war would be fought and conventional or nuclear weapons. Conventional war in the US, I put my money on the USA. Conventional war in China, we dont stand a chance. I read somewhere that China has a 50 million man army ready to go. Not people in the age range to train, ready to deploy. The US just couldnt put enough troops over there to fight against 50 million. My .02!

 

[rambone]

You guys seem to be forgetting that America doesn't have a penny to its name. We would go bankrupt in short order. Go to war with the country that is keeping us afloat = We lose.

And get over yourselves with the wishing for nuclear war. Guess what, that wouldn't pan out too well for our homeland either. Seems to me that "somebody" just fired a missile off the coast of California a couple months ago. We aren't as safe as you guys think.

 

[Palarran]

Everyone, except Britian and the US, went bankrupt in the First World War. Everyone except the US went bankrupt during the second. It didn't stop people from fighting.

 

[ghostinthewood]

Depends on where the war would be fought and conventional or nuclear weapons. Conventional war in the US, I put my money on the USA. Conventional war in China, we dont stand a chance. I read somewhere that China has a 50 million man army ready to go. Not people in the age range to train, ready to deploy. The US just couldnt put enough troops over there to fight against 50 million. My .02!

Korean War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

With the US estimate, it seems numbers don't always mean a lot.

As far as bankruptcy, I don't think it'd stop us from fighting, at least for awhile. It hasn't stopped us from doing anything else eh? Times are a lot different than they were in the '40s though...

 

[Leadeye]

I really don't think large powers can fight conventional wars for any length of time just because of the nature of modern warfare. Weapons today have near 100% hit probablilty and are very lethal. They are also time and cost consuming to build. Just doing the math on the logistics of such a war says it can't last very long. It either ends or goes nuclear.

 

[Zimm1001]

Two super powers with nuclear weapons. Bottom line: A war might start as a conventional war but if it looked like either side was about to lose they would use nuclear weapons and the other would as well. Inevitable conclusion. No winners.

 

[Hawkeye]

I think one of the biggest things weighing against the US in a war with China is the casualty count. Its had a very bad effect on public opinion and general support fo the war since Viet Nam. I really don't think the US public/Press has much stomach for casualties. China may be in a diferent position.

 

[trnsplntfrmohio]

we haven't won a war since the civil war.

 

[machete]

Wow, What do you think?
Have at it guys ...

u.s. would lose war vs. china celente says: Tech Ticker, Yahoo! Finance=

No call in answering it.... We would never go to war with China....

 

[machete]

We would have to have a Commander in Chief who would actually authorize the use of nuclear weapons to win a full-blown war with China though.

Which we currently do not.

i aint got much interest in seeing LA nuked,,,so lets knock off nuke talk,,,right now...

 

[boozoo]

Wow... I guess since you say so we won't talk about it any more!

The point is, with China's masses and the fact that have absorbed so much of the world's industrialization, that you WILL NOT win a protracted war with them due to their industrialization alone. But, if it did come to nuclear blows, their industry is so concentrated in certain areas that a strategic strike would absolutely cripple them regardless of how many people they have.

But if there is one thing I can agree with - it's that we should continue to hope and pray that we don't ever get into it at the nuclear level with anyone.