Just now watched this. The guy jumping on the wind shield killed me. 
They look like the rioters in Ferguson.
2 Likes
nothing like china . iraq was swept aside because the allies gained air-superiority in about 30 minutes and were launching 1,000+ air-strikes a DAY
to put that in context for you in over a year we have only launched about 4,000 against ISIS .
Add this to our clear advantage in terms of training and kit on the ground . which were miles ahead of iraq much further ahead than we are of china . it was an easy ride compare to what we would expect from an attempt to invade china .
we would not have such an easy ride against china who along with russia have a very sophisticated anti-air system that we would seriously struggle to overcome and would likely require boots on the ground to knock out , along with their airforce which be it less advance to ours is pretty fucking big
this would pro-long the conflict hugely compared to iraq .
then add that to the fact that china’s ground kit isnt that far behind ours (no warriant they do not drive type 59’s anymore ) .
if we gained (a fucking big if ) air-superiority over china or any military in the world for that matter we would win . it just turns into a game of whack a mole once free rein of the air is established .
They certainly seem to be getting rid of all that worked up stress
2 Likes
I wasn’t comparing the actual war to a potential war with China. I was merely stating similarities between the Iraq army, and Chinese army. You think China has a huge modern army but they do not, and you have not provided a shred of evidence, other than a picture of a few guys in modern uniforms.
China focuses much more on their anti naval, and naval might, seeing how a war with the U.S would pretty much be a pure naval war.
It is, and i have provided literally dozens of links, and you have provided zero counter evidence.
Maybe if you’re willing to bomb them for 20 years straight. We had air superiority over North Vietnam pretty much the entire war and only one of our bombing campaigns could really be considered successful.
thats because you were not fighting a conventional style war , it was a gurrlia war where they hid underground .
the gulf war was a conventional war as would one against china be .
once free rein is established we could launch as many strikes as we wanted ripping their forces apart .
what links ? you have mainly spoke about their navy which you would be correct in saying is miles behind ours currently .
i know in your head they still drive type 59’s but in reality they do not . where they lack is practical training . most of their training is classroom based .
this is a very good documentary . worth a watch , which shows chna’s biggest military problems which they’re attempting to fix
Incorrect, the Viet Cong were waging a Guerrilla war, how ever the North fought us conventionally.
Dozens and dozens of links, go back up to our “Would the U.S respond if China attacked Taiwan or Japan” argument.
China lacks a joint command, they were in the process of forming one but scrapped it. Their tanks are actually too small for them, their pilots get shit training and completely lack experience, and would be ripped to shreds buy Japans small air force. They have one carrier which hardly works, their generals have zero experience along with their troops. Not to mention they have some of the worst obesity rates out of any modern army.
Not to mention they spend a pathetic amount of money on each solider (75% of the money goes to the soliders gun). All of this was confirmed by the PLA (see links above).
And since I’m nice ill tell you where our argument started so you don’t have to go digging for the links.
(starts at 8110)
This seems as a better way of achieving the same goal.
Or this.
1 Like
How 'bout this?
1 Like
I wonder how heavy a human head is.
Hahha, i just googled this and they actually still do. The vast majority of their tank force is out dated shit.
This tank also makes up a large portion of their tank force, and they gave some fully upgraded ones to Iraq, and surprise surprise they got shit on by Abrams, and Challengers. Apparently the Iraqis even upgraded them and made them better.
They have 9,000 tanks, and the majority of them are pieces of shit. They have very few of their newest ones. This really just goes to show you have done zero research, and you still have not provided any evidence to support your claim of Chinese ground forces being anywhere close to NATO levels.
Also read up on the last time they went to war. They had a hard time fighting militias in open conventional combat.
They just now retired this tank in 2013, which is good for them because it could be pierced by getting shot a few times in the same spot with a fucking 50 cal.
yes which was argued mainly on your ability to beat them at sea .
[quote=“SirWarriant, post:10079, topic:21032”]
Not to mention they spend a pathetic amount of money on each solider (75% of the money goes to the soliders gun). All of this was confirmed by the PLA (see links above).
[/quote] repost the links i have more important shit to do than scroll through 10,000 posts 
let me start by saying being in service and being used on combat operations are two very different things .
the two MBT’s used currently for combat roles are the type 99 and the type 96
(comparable to a T-90 )
they also have other tanks used for training purposes . which if you read your own fucking source which you seem never to do it states it quite clearly
the type 69/79 is in reserve and used for training purposes
although i had to laugh it appears a very upgraded version of the type 59 is still in service but again id imagine they are simply there to make up numbers on paper .
they are also developing a new tank called the MBT 3000
man to man we win every time .
my point is more of a broader scale . the idea we could turn china over like we did iraq is laughable and really shows you up to be a bit of an ignorant child to be honest .
but alas no matter what i say you will always have such opinions so i cant really be bothered to type for days wasting my time
a very very interesting read i found . almost quite eerie to read
Irelevant, all those links showed weaknesses in the Chinese Army, not navy.
I told you exactly where the argument starts, so you do not hardly have to scroll through 10,000 posts, more like 5.
If they ever got in a land war with our allies in the region they would have to use their shitty tanks. They only have 600 of the third generation MBTs, and that would not be enough to take on Vietnam or South Korea. So they would have to use them in combat, especially since they would lose quite a few of their fancy ones.
Again they have them in service for a reason, they could not properly invade their enemies or protect their nation with only 600 tanks.
So what, they developed their type 99 in 2001, and they only have 600. So i would assume it would take them a shit ton of time to make a decent number of the MBT 3000.
I NEVER said that, you are making crap up. I have fully admitted several times that they could do some serious damage to us and our allies in the region. But my point still stands, their army is many years behind ours, they’re mostly focusing on their anti ship capabilities.
Right, so i provide facts, an argument, show you where to find my sources, and i remain polite, and you respond with this. If anyone is acting like a child it’s you.
600+ Type 99
2,500 + of the type 96
That already out numbers pretty much most nations and would likely out number what NATO would deploy (tanks use up a lot of logistics )
China would be unlikely to deploy that amount anyway at tops a 1,000 .
Again we are discussion NATO invading mainland China I won’t be drawn away from that fact no matter how much you try . [quote=“SirWarriant, post:10088, topic:21032”]
Right, so i provide facts, an argument, show you where to find my sources, and i remain polite, and you respond with this. If anyone is acting like a child it’s you.
[/quote] I stand by the statement
Which is not enough to take on any of the countries surrounding it. South Korea has a tank force of 2,500, and they are top of the line tanks. As for Vietnam, good luck getting a 58 ton tin can through a muddy swampy jungle, there’s a reason we didn’t use tanks very much during that war.
LOL, no we are not, where the fuck are you getting this from? I was just comparing Chinas military to Iraq, saying it’s a quantity over quality deal. You clearly need glasses.
I’m sure you do, you like to throw out the age card when ever you can, even though it is never relevant.
Oh, more arguing about tanks, my favorite.
1 Like
I showed this to my Mother, who is insanely Catholic, and she said i needed to go to confession over it. 