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

[ATOMonkey]

The first exchanges would be fought at sea with missles and aircraft. Whoever wins this battle would then invade the other country, or if they don't have the stomach for the fight, withdraw.

China will likely invade through Mexico.

We will be hosed. The chinese terrain makes an overland assault virtually impossible. A coastal assault will mean lots of losses and difficulty maintaining logistics.

Our best hope is to defeat them in the air to discourage an invasion, and if they do invade we withdraw to mountainous terrain and attempt to beat them back across the Mexican border.

In all likelihood, we lose Texas and the rest of the Southwest. Just from the sheer numbers that the Chinese will throw at us.

Yeah, not a very rosey picture from my perspective.

 

[gunowner930]

The first exchanges would be fought at sea with missles and aircraft. Whoever wins this battle would then invade the other country, or if they don't have the stomach for the fight, withdraw.

China will likely invade through Mexico.

We will be hosed. The chinese terrain makes an overland assault virtually impossible. A coastal assault will mean lots of losses and difficulty maintaining logistics.

Our best hope is to defeat them in the air to discourage an invasion, and if they do invade we withdraw to mountainous terrain and attempt to beat them back across the Mexican border.

In all likelihood, we lose Texas and the rest of the Southwest. Just from the sheer numbers that the Chinese will throw at us.

Yeah, not a very rosey picture from my perspective.

You think China is going to be able to sneak millions of soldiers into Mexico?

Research the strength of the USN and USAF compared to their Chinese counterparts. The US has the advantage here in quantity and quality.

China is growing and becoming more powerful, but the notion that they could wage an offensive conventional war against the U.S. is laughable.

 

[edporch]

We don't have the power and resources to go to Communist China, engage in a conventional land war and outright conquer them.
Imagine the logistics of a war on the other side of the world with a country of over a billion people.

And speaking of using nukes, don't think that even if we had the capacity to nuke every square inch of China, that we wouldn't have a few launched back at us.

So the reality in my mind is to keep a level of peace with them based a lot on the old mutually assured destruction (MAD) philosophy that prevented an all out war with the Soviet Union.

Our philosophy needs to be one to KEEP the cost to THEM too high for them to attack us.

 

[E5RANGER375]

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

id rather just see it fall into the ocean so the rest of us wont have to worry about fallout.

 

[Expat]

id rather just see it fall into the ocean so the rest of us wont have to worry about fallout.

You have to send San Fran with it or no deal.

 

[gunowner930]

Just send the communists out on a one way permanent trip to China. Southern California would be great if it wasn't ran by statists.

 

[grimor]

If we didn't go with nukes (which no one wins) and stuck with typical conventional weapons, we would probably lose in a line everyone up and fight.

It just depends, are we invading them? Are they invading us? is it a support battle in Korea? Where is the fight?

 

[Palarran]

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.

Which is why I say that I think it would be limited. I feel that as soon as one side has clearly lost, they would probably sue for peace quickly. It would most certainly be in the other side's interest to accept a negotiated peace rather than risking a nuclear war.

It just depends, are we invading them? Are they invading us? is it a support battle in Korea? Where is the fight?

Most likely scenario IMO: They try to invade Taiwan. We intervene in Taiwan's favor. Big air and naval fight in the China Sea. Possibly the Chinese will get ashore in Taiwan, and our quick reaction forces are directly engaged. North Korea probably takes the opportunity to reinvade SK, which probably brings Japan in-in a limited way (air and naval). If Taiwan doesn't fall, we may invade the mainland around Hong Kong or Fuzhou to put pressure on the Chinese to quit.

Either we loose Taiwan and sue for peace, or they fail to take it and sue for peace. I can't see us allowing South Korea to fall to the North.

 

[Palarran]

Also, if Taiwan falls, whether we try to invade and liberate will depend on how well the air and naval war has gone. If we have done well, I can see an attempt being made; if we have lost, we'll sue for peace and let them keep Taiwan.

The alternative is to go nuclear, which even if it only starts tactical may very well escalate into a strategic exchange. That would would probably mean loosing Honolulu, Anchorage, Los Angeles, San Diego, Sacramento, Portland, Seattle, and maybe Denver, Las Vegas, and Phoenix-I don't know for sure what the range on Chinese missiles is. I'd rather sue for peace and take the national humiliation than win a war at that cost.

 

[public servant]

Would you like to play a game?

 

[Palarran]

Plus, if we get into a war with China, the first thing we are going to do is repudiate our debt that they hold. With the stroke of a pen, most of their foreign reserves have just disappeared. And don't tell me that anyone will do anything more than send us a strongly worded diplomatic missive: what are they going to do, invade? We will be pissed already, and no one really wants to see an angry CVBG off their coast.

After the war, the disposition of our debt to China will be hashed out in the peace treaty.

 

[Palarran]

Would you like to play a game?

One of my hobbies is board war games, so yes, indeed I would.

 

[djl02]

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.

I agree completely with you, they could collapse us tomarrow if they wanted,with the economy of our allies, I dont see anyone getting involved. If there was a war,whos to say it wouldnt be over here.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

1. Cripple our infrastructure / electricity somehow .

2. Within days / week , people are going nuts and panicking , societal break down . Riots coming to a town near you type stuff .

3. Russia / China / BRIC / whoever else "team up" and execute a joint strike / invasion .

4. GAME OVER .

 

[E5RANGER375]

no one really wants to see the U.S. fail. it would be game over for the world. The dont wanna nuke us because then they would starve. and they dont want to invade because then it would be on like donkey kong.

 

[vesan87]

This is a neat website with alot of information. World Military Strength Ranking

 

[ghitch75]

if they invaded we don't have enough bullets to stop them....they would come in waves and not stop.....1 billion...

 

[Ashkelon]

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.

This.

 

[Flintlock]

China would only use war with the United States as a last measure, as their economy is far too dependent on exports to the United States. 80% of China's GDP comes from international trade and the US takes the vast majority of that. China goes to war with us, we cancel any debt China owns and stop importing Chinese good and their economy is gone before they know it. The people will lose jobs, money, everything and in a best case scenario turn on their own government. The truth of the matter is China has far too much of a fiscal investment in the United States to go to war with us. There would be severe shortages and price increases in the United States at first when Chinese imports stopped coming in, but after a few years our own manufacturing base would grow to cover those shortages bringing prices down and creating an immense amount of jobs in the manufacturing sector.

 

[trnsplntfrmohio]

We don't have the power and resources to go to Communist China, engage in a conventional land war and outright conquer them.
Imagine the logistics of a war on the other side of the world with a country of over a billion people.

And speaking of using nukes, don't think that even if we had the capacity to nuke every square inch of China, that we wouldn't have a few launched back at us.

So the reality in my mind is to keep a level of peace with them based a lot on the old mutually assured destruction (MAD) philosophy that prevented an all out war with the Soviet Union.

Our philosophy needs to be one to KEEP the cost to THEM too high for them to attack us.

they don't even have the ability to grow enough food to keep all their people fed. For Christ sakes, Indiana is selling them so much corn now it isn't even funny. China will soon be in the toilets again. They are where we were (speaking in realitive terms) 100 some years ago in terms of manufacturing and they grew very quickly. Very soon their ecomeny will start to crumble becasue there is too much of a concetration of workers in one sector of the work force.