if you say chinas army is better than usa your are wrong

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for chip_money
chip_money

2748

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#151 chip_money
Member since 2006 • 2748 Posts
Numbers will subdue technology. It's been proven numerous times in history, the Battle of Stalingrad, the Battle of Moscow, the Battle of the Bulge, just to name a few. So far as I know, China can call upon a third of its population to serve in the armed forces, which would outnumber the entire population of the United States.tycoonmike

but the conquistadors put down armies of thousands with only a few hundred with superior technology...
Avatar image for mark4091
mark4091

3780

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#152 mark4091
Member since 2007 • 3780 Posts
[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]You keep telling my that my claims are unaware and naive........you wont tell me why.......Chinas military isnt stronger than the United States? Well It can get up to 10 times bigger than America's and keep in mind that the majority of Americas army is stretched thin........so you're not refering to that when you call me naive...jointed

First off, the number of men in the military is virtually irrelevant. Our military is at its smallest size in history. We were numbered around 4.4 million around WWI, now we are down to approximately 2.2 million. This is because we have become more efficient. We use better weaponry, we have better training, more experienced leaders, and we have an effective infrastructure. We could arbitrarily increase and decrease the amount of men in the military and it wouldn't make a bit of difference, we would be equally effective, just with more men at hand for ground operations.

It's not irrelevant when the opposing army is that much larger.....and it's not like China has stone age equippment......as I said, they upgraded their WHOLE army......It's basically the same as the united states only much bigger and with an inferior airforce....and no it's not like 200% inferior

It wouldn't matter if it were a billion against a million. If there is a considerably greater strategic and tactical advantage on one side, it just means more dead.

no,

just look at the russians during world war 2, they only gave their soldiers a rifle and 2 ammo clips and look what they accomplished.......It is true that numbers arent everything but when it comes to this many troops more and such a little technological advantage it's not irrelevant

GO I dare you look up how many russians lost they're lifes during WWII
Avatar image for UrbanSpartan125
UrbanSpartan125

3684

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#153 UrbanSpartan125
Member since 2006 • 3684 Posts
[QUOTE="CaptHawkeye"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="UrbanSpartan125"][QUOTE="jointed"]

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]You keep telling my that my claims are unaware and naive........you wont tell me why.......Chinas military isnt stronger than the United States? Well It can get up to 10 times bigger than America's and keep in mind that the majority of Americas army is stretched thin........so you're not refering to that when you call me naive...jointed

First off, the number of men in the military is virtually irrelevant. Our military is at its smallest size in history. We were numbered around 4.4 million around WWI, now we are down to approximately 2.2 million. This is because we have become more efficient. We use better weaponry, we have better training, more experienced leaders, and we have an effective infrastructure. We could arbitrarily increase and decrease the amount of men in the military and it wouldn't make a bit of difference, we would be equally effective, just with more men at hand for ground operations.


It's not irrelevant when the opposing army is that much larger.....and it's not like China has stone age equippment......as I said, they upgraded their WHOLE army......It's basically the same as the united states only much bigger and with an inferior airforce....and no it's not like 200% inferior

it is no where near the technology of the US military, you need to do some research before you do ignorant posts like that

no where near? well for starters ..their tanks and their infantry eqippment is more modern than americas...

You are, very, very, very, wrong about this. The standard weapon of the Chinese army is still the Ak-47, which, last I checked, was older then even the M-14.

no I'm not wrong at all....The standard Chinese assault rifle is QBZ-95....

Their tanks are simply better than the Abrams.....

M1A2 abrams is the most advanced Main battle tank in existance, many refer to it as being a class of its own simply outmatching every tank in speed, range and firepower. the fire control system coupled with armor and m256 120mm smoothbore cannon give it an unprecedented advantage on the battle field. There have been constests to see what the best tank in th world was, in all cases the abrams won, Beating out the Challenger 2, Leapord 2, Le clerc and Merkava. in its entire service only 18 Abrams have been damaged or destroyed, and its numbers in the thousands give Americas M1 abrams the win for the best tank in the world
Avatar image for deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
deactivated-5901ac91d8e33

17092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#154 deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
Member since 2004 • 17092 Posts
[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]You keep telling my that my claims are unaware and naive........you wont tell me why.......Chinas military isnt stronger than the United States? Well It can get up to 10 times bigger than America's and keep in mind that the majority of Americas army is stretched thin........so you're not refering to that when you call me naive...mark4091

First off, the number of men in the military is virtually irrelevant. Our military is at its smallest size in history. We were numbered around 4.4 million around WWI, now we are down to approximately 2.2 million. This is because we have become more efficient. We use better weaponry, we have better training, more experienced leaders, and we have an effective infrastructure. We could arbitrarily increase and decrease the amount of men in the military and it wouldn't make a bit of difference, we would be equally effective, just with more men at hand for ground operations.

It's not irrelevant when the opposing army is that much larger.....and it's not like China has stone age equippment......as I said, they upgraded their WHOLE army......It's basically the same as the united states only much bigger and with an inferior airforce....and no it's not like 200% inferior

It wouldn't matter if it were a billion against a million. If there is a considerably greater strategic and tactical advantage on one side, it just means more dead.

no,

just look at the russians during world war 2, they only gave their soldiers a rifle and 2 ammo clips and look what they accomplished.......It is true that numbers arent everything but when it comes to this many troops more and such a little technological advantage it's not irrelevant

GO I dare you look up how many russians lost they're lifes during WWII

that's exactly my point......very many......

Avatar image for acegunslinger
acegunslinger

1223

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#155 acegunslinger
Member since 2004 • 1223 Posts

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"] just look at the russians during world war 2, they only gave their soldiers a rifle and 2 ammo clips and look what they accomplished.......It is true that numbers arent everything but when it comes to this many troops more and such a little technological advantage it's not irrelevantjointed

I'll let you in on something: World War II will never be refought. Making assumptions about modern warfare based upon the battles of World War II will only lead you astray. Today we would need only a few missiles and all of Russia's men would have been wiped out.

Dude I were showing you an example.........No matter how much more superior the german wermacht were they couldnt hold the russians back....the same goes for america and the Chinese......

You should look at a more modern example. The Israeli-Arab wars for instance. The Israelis used western tactics, weapons, training, and though they were heavily outnumbered, they decisively defeated the opposition which was using soviet weaponry, tactics, and training
Avatar image for OODALOOP
OODALOOP

36350

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#156 OODALOOP
Member since 2004 • 36350 Posts

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"] just look at the russians during world war 2, they only gave their soldiers a rifle and 2 ammo clips and look what they accomplished.......It is true that numbers arent everything but when it comes to this many troops more and such a little technological advantage it's not irrelevantjointed

I'll let you in on something: World War II will never be refought. Making assumptions about modern warfare based upon the battles of World War II will only lead you astray. Today we would need only a few missiles and all of Russia's men would have been wiped out.

Dude I were showing you an example.........No matter how much more superior the german wermacht were they couldnt hold the russians back....the same goes for america and the Chinese......

And, your example is stupid. You have no concept of modern warfare. It's amusing that anyone over the age of seven would attempt to reduce something as complex as military strength and efficacy to the argument "more men = better." If we needed a larger military we would have a larger military.
Avatar image for CaptHawkeye
CaptHawkeye

13977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#157 CaptHawkeye
Member since 2004 • 13977 Posts
[QUOTE="CaptHawkeye"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="UrbanSpartan125"][QUOTE="jointed"]

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]You keep telling my that my claims are unaware and naive........you wont tell me why.......Chinas military isnt stronger than the United States? Well It can get up to 10 times bigger than America's and keep in mind that the majority of Americas army is stretched thin........so you're not refering to that when you call me naive...jointed

First off, the number of men in the military is virtually irrelevant. Our military is at its smallest size in history. We were numbered around 4.4 million around WWI, now we are down to approximately 2.2 million. This is because we have become more efficient. We use better weaponry, we have better training, more experienced leaders, and we have an effective infrastructure. We could arbitrarily increase and decrease the amount of men in the military and it wouldn't make a bit of difference, we would be equally effective, just with more men at hand for ground operations.

It's not irrelevant when the opposing army is that much larger.....and it's not like China has stone age equippment......as I said, they upgraded their WHOLE army......It's basically the same as the united states only much bigger and with an inferior airforce....and no it's not like 200% inferior

it is no where near the technology of the US military, you need to do some research before you do ignorant posts like that

no where near? well for starters ..their tanks and their infantry eqippment is more modern than americas...

You are, very, very, very, wrong about this. The standard weapon of the Chinese army is still the Ak-47, which, last I checked, was older then even the M-14.

no I'm not wrong at all....The standard Chinese assault rifle is QBZ-95....

Their tanks are simply better than the Abrams.....

Considering the Chinese Type 90 tank, which is their most expensive and advanced tank, doesn't even have a fire control system which is basic in all current armor, you'd be wrong about that one as well.

Christ, even French tanks have fire control systems.

The QZB-95 has not been used in any military situation, thus you cannot say it is "superior" to American weapons. While you're at it, take the time to actually read up on the design. It is hardly superior to any current standard army weapon.

Avatar image for tycoonmike
tycoonmike

6082

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#158 tycoonmike
Member since 2005 • 6082 Posts
[QUOTE="tycoonmike"]Numbers will subdue technology. It's been proven numerous times in history, the Battle of Stalingrad, the Battle of Moscow, the Battle of the Bulge, just to name a few. So far as I know, China can call upon a third of its population to serve in the armed forces, which would outnumber the entire population of the United States.chip_money

but the conquistadors put down armies of thousands with only a few hundred with superior technology...


Because they had numerical superiority, in the form of the bacteria and viruses they carried with them from Europe. Numerical superiority doesn't have to rely on solely human numbers.
Avatar image for OODALOOP
OODALOOP

36350

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#159 OODALOOP
Member since 2004 • 36350 Posts
[QUOTE="chip_money"][QUOTE="tycoonmike"]Numbers will subdue technology. It's been proven numerous times in history, the Battle of Stalingrad, the Battle of Moscow, the Battle of the Bulge, just to name a few. So far as I know, China can call upon a third of its population to serve in the armed forces, which would outnumber the entire population of the United States.tycoonmike

but the conquistadors put down armies of thousands with only a few hundred with superior technology...


Because they had numerical superiority, in the form of the bacteria and viruses they carried with them from Europe. Numerical superiority doesn't have to rely on solely human numbers.

You're only supporting his argument, and demonstrating that through more destructive firepower (biological weaponry), troop strength becomes insignificant.
Avatar image for Stevo_the_gamer
Stevo_the_gamer

50257

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 49

User Lists: 0

#160 Stevo_the_gamer  Moderator
Member since 2004 • 50257 Posts
Why are you comparing Russia and Germany? Russia had no chance whats so ever against the Germans, but if it wasn't for the winters, Germany would have easily defeated Russia. Hell, the winters have always saved Russia.
Avatar image for mark4091
mark4091

3780

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#161 mark4091
Member since 2007 • 3780 Posts
[QUOTE="mark4091"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]You keep telling my that my claims are unaware and naive........you wont tell me why.......Chinas military isnt stronger than the United States? Well It can get up to 10 times bigger than America's and keep in mind that the majority of Americas army is stretched thin........so you're not refering to that when you call me naive...jointed

First off, the number of men in the military is virtually irrelevant. Our military is at its smallest size in history. We were numbered around 4.4 million around WWI, now we are down to approximately 2.2 million. This is because we have become more efficient. We use better weaponry, we have better training, more experienced leaders, and we have an effective infrastructure. We could arbitrarily increase and decrease the amount of men in the military and it wouldn't make a bit of difference, we would be equally effective, just with more men at hand for ground operations.

It's not irrelevant when the opposing army is that much larger.....and it's not like China has stone age equippment......as I said, they upgraded their WHOLE army......It's basically the same as the united states only much bigger and with an inferior airforce....and no it's not like 200% inferior

It wouldn't matter if it were a billion against a million. If there is a considerably greater strategic and tactical advantage on one side, it just means more dead.

no,

just look at the russians during world war 2, they only gave their soldiers a rifle and 2 ammo clips and look what they accomplished.......It is true that numbers arent everything but when it comes to this many troops more and such a little technological advantage it's not irrelevant

GO I dare you look up how many russians lost they're lifes during WWII

that's exactly my point......very many......

yeah, but its not the 1940's german scientists were working on nuclear weapons as the germans were taking over russia, many russians died but now many chinese could not do the same thing against the US, 25,000 warheads says so.
Avatar image for chip_money
chip_money

2748

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#162 chip_money
Member since 2006 • 2748 Posts
Actully all we have to do to beat them is wait 30 or 40 years...

by then all there will be in China is old people because of thier 1 child policy.
Avatar image for tycoonmike
tycoonmike

6082

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#163 tycoonmike
Member since 2005 • 6082 Posts
[QUOTE="tycoonmike"][QUOTE="chip_money"][QUOTE="tycoonmike"]Numbers will subdue technology. It's been proven numerous times in history, the Battle of Stalingrad, the Battle of Moscow, the Battle of the Bulge, just to name a few. So far as I know, China can call upon a third of its population to serve in the armed forces, which would outnumber the entire population of the United States.bt_the_great_78

but the conquistadors put down armies of thousands with only a few hundred with superior technology...


Because they had numerical superiority, in the form of the bacteria and viruses they carried with them from Europe. Numerical superiority doesn't have to rely on solely human numbers.

You're only supporting his argument, and demonstrating that through more destructive firepower (biological weaponry), troop strength becomes insignificant.


Here's the beauty of it, though. You can't speak of past wars in present terminology, you must assume what the combatants knew at the time of the war. At the time of the war, the Conquistadors knew nothing of how biological warfare worked, thus they had an invisible ally of billions of microbes. Thus they had numerical superiority, despite their not knowing about it. You cannot use that which you do not know about; they knew about disease, but they didn't know about immunities or how disease is caused to be able to use it themselves without natural interference.
Avatar image for deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
deactivated-5901ac91d8e33

17092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#164 deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
Member since 2004 • 17092 Posts
[QUOTE="jointed"]

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"] just look at the russians during world war 2, they only gave their soldiers a rifle and 2 ammo clips and look what they accomplished.......It is true that numbers arent everything but when it comes to this many troops more and such a little technological advantage it's not irrelevantbt_the_great_78

I'll let you in on something: World War II will never be refought. Making assumptions about modern warfare based upon the battles of World War II will only lead you astray. Today we would need only a few missiles and all of Russia's men would have been wiped out.

Dude I were showing you an example.........No matter how much more superior the german wermacht were they couldnt hold the russians back....the same goes for america and the Chinese......

And, your example is stupid. You have no concept of modern warfare. It's amusing that anyone over the age of seven would attempt to reduce something as complex as military strength and efficacy to the argument "more men = better." If we needed a larger military we would have a larger military.

are you being serious?

They don't just have more men.......they have more tanks and more aircrafts....

and yes, when there's such a large diffrence between the two sides, it is about the quantity not the quality.....

You see what happends the the troops down in Iraq...they're fighting against rebels with home made bombs.....Imagine what the Chinese army would do......

there is one major diffrence between china and the US......China doesnt care about human lives.....that's what makes their army stronger

Avatar image for tycoonmike
tycoonmike

6082

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#165 tycoonmike
Member since 2005 • 6082 Posts
[QUOTE="jointed"]

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"] just look at the russians during world war 2, they only gave their soldiers a rifle and 2 ammo clips and look what they accomplished.......It is true that numbers arent everything but when it comes to this many troops more and such a little technological advantage it's not irrelevantbt_the_great_78

I'll let you in on something: World War II will never be refought. Making assumptions about modern warfare based upon the battles of World War II will only lead you astray. Today we would need only a few missiles and all of Russia's men would have been wiped out.

Dude I were showing you an example.........No matter how much more superior the german wermacht were they couldnt hold the russians back....the same goes for america and the Chinese......

And, your example is stupid. You have no concept of modern warfare. It's amusing that anyone over the age of seven would attempt to reduce something as complex as military strength and efficacy to the argument "more men = better." If we needed a larger military we would have a larger military.

More men does equal better because it takes men to run the machines of war. It just so happens that because we were able to stare the Soviet Union down and because of the fact that if any country so much as blinks at us we invade them and because of our clearly superior nuclear capabilities that we don't need a huge army. If the Soviet Union were still around, we would need a huge army because there would actually be a threat to our survival.
Avatar image for ghost_909
ghost_909

1880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#166 ghost_909
Member since 2005 • 1880 Posts
Generally, the Chinese are much more disciplined than the US and they aren't 2 trillion dollars in debt.
Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

180302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#167 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 180302 Posts

Generally, the Chinese are much more disciplined than the US and they aren't 2 trillion dollars in debt. ghost_909

The US military is disciplined and well trained.  We are also ahead technologically.  Defense spending is high as well.

Avatar image for Stevo_the_gamer
Stevo_the_gamer

50257

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 49

User Lists: 0

#168 Stevo_the_gamer  Moderator
Member since 2004 • 50257 Posts
Well, I'll put it this way. The United States of America has the most technologically advanced military in the world. The Chinese Military has the largest army in the world. Who would win? I would say the United States.
Avatar image for OODALOOP
OODALOOP

36350

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#169 OODALOOP
Member since 2004 • 36350 Posts
are you being serious? They don't just have more men.......they have more tanks and more aircrafts....and yes, when there's such a large diffrence between the two sides, it is about the quantity not the quality.....You see what happends the the troops down in Iraq...they're fighting against rebels with home made bombs.....Imagine what the Chinese army would do......there is one major diffrence between china and the US......China doesnt care about human lives.....that's what makes their army strongerjointed
Yes, you are correct about one thing: it is about quantity versus quality, which is what gives us the unmitigated advantage.
Avatar image for OODALOOP
OODALOOP

36350

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#170 OODALOOP
Member since 2004 • 36350 Posts
More men does equal better because it takes men to run the machines of war. It just so happens that because we were able to stare the Soviet Union down and because of the fact that if any country so much as blinks at us we invade them and because of our clearly superior nuclear capabilities that we don't need a huge army. If the Soviet Union were still around, we would need a huge army because there would actually be a threat to our survival.
tycoonmike
Oh for christ sake. I feel like I'm talking to my six year old.
Avatar image for deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
deactivated-5901ac91d8e33

17092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#171 deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
Member since 2004 • 17092 Posts

[QUOTE="jointed"]are you being serious? They don't just have more men.......they have more tanks and more aircrafts....and yes, when there's such a large diffrence between the two sides, it is about the quantity not the quality.....You see what happends the the troops down in Iraq...they're fighting against rebels with home made bombs.....Imagine what the Chinese army would do......there is one major diffrence between china and the US......China doesnt care about human lives.....that's what makes their army strongerbt_the_great_78
Yes, you are correct about one thing: it is about quantity versus quality, which is what gives us the unmitigated advantage.

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

Avatar image for ghost_909
ghost_909

1880

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#172 ghost_909
Member since 2005 • 1880 Posts

[QUOTE="ghost_909"]Generally, the Chinese are much more disciplined than the US and they aren't 2 trillion dollars in debt. LJS9502_basic

The US military is disciplined and well trained. We are also ahead technologically. Defense spending is high as well.

Yeah I just thought about my post again and I guess debt really doesn't matter, even if it ends up in inflation. The US really will be 2 trillion dollars in debt after the Iraq war though, that wasn't just an exaggeration.
Avatar image for chip_money
chip_money

2748

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#173 chip_money
Member since 2006 • 2748 Posts

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]are you being serious? They don't just have more men.......they have more tanks and more aircrafts....and yes, when there's such a large diffrence between the two sides, it is about the quantity not the quality.....You see what happends the the troops down in Iraq...they're fighting against rebels with home made bombs.....Imagine what the Chinese army would do......there is one major diffrence between china and the US......China doesnt care about human lives.....that's what makes their army strongerjointed

Yes, you are correct about one thing: it is about quantity versus quality, which is what gives us the unmitigated advantage.

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china


well...I'm sure superior numbers can overrun anything that's thrown at them :roll:
Avatar image for OODALOOP
OODALOOP

36350

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#174 OODALOOP
Member since 2004 • 36350 Posts

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]are you being serious? They don't just have more men.......they have more tanks and more aircrafts....and yes, when there's such a large diffrence between the two sides, it is about the quantity not the quality.....You see what happends the the troops down in Iraq...they're fighting against rebels with home made bombs.....Imagine what the Chinese army would do......there is one major diffrence between china and the US......China doesnt care about human lives.....that's what makes their army strongerjointed

Yes, you are correct about one thing: it is about quantity versus quality, which is what gives us the unmitigated advantage.

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

I'm only waiting to hear you support this claim. I'm very interested.
Avatar image for acegunslinger
acegunslinger

1223

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#175 acegunslinger
Member since 2004 • 1223 Posts

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]are you being serious? They don't just have more men.......they have more tanks and more aircrafts....and yes, when there's such a large diffrence between the two sides, it is about the quantity not the quality.....You see what happends the the troops down in Iraq...they're fighting against rebels with home made bombs.....Imagine what the Chinese army would do......there is one major diffrence between china and the US......China doesnt care about human lives.....that's what makes their army strongerjointed

Yes, you are correct about one thing: it is about quantity versus quality, which is what gives us the unmitigated advantage.

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

Actually, you fail to take into account that the U.S. would have the support of its allies. Not to mention superior training and equipment. Just look at the Vietnam War, the US lost around 58,000 while the NVA lost somewhere around a million dead. The only reason the US military lost was because it was fighting with one hand tied behind its back.
Avatar image for tycoonmike
tycoonmike

6082

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#176 tycoonmike
Member since 2005 • 6082 Posts
[QUOTE="tycoonmike"]More men does equal better because it takes men to run the machines of war. It just so happens that because we were able to stare the Soviet Union down and because of the fact that if any country so much as blinks at us we invade them and because of our clearly superior nuclear capabilities that we don't need a huge army. If the Soviet Union were still around, we would need a huge army because there would actually be a threat to our survival.
bt_the_great_78
Oh for christ sake. I feel like I'm talking to my six year old.

Let me explain some things to you:

1. I don't enjoy being insulted, no matter my opinion on something.
2. Can you deny that because there is no one leering threat to our survival that we have a smaller army? Oh, sure, there's terrorism, but that isn't one large threat. That's more like ten small threats.
3. Why else are we supposedly the most powerful? It's because we aren't being threatened by one coherent threat, as I have said before. We have too much say in the world for anyone to be a threat to us. The only reason why China hasn't attacked us is because of the trade benefits. We have effectively connected ourselves to the rest of the nations of the world in a way so that we won't be attacked without drastic consequence to the opposition. It isn't because of military power, it's because of economic power.
Avatar image for Stevo_the_gamer
Stevo_the_gamer

50257

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 49

User Lists: 0

#177 Stevo_the_gamer  Moderator
Member since 2004 • 50257 Posts

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]are you being serious? They don't just have more men.......they have more tanks and more aircrafts....and yes, when there's such a large diffrence between the two sides, it is about the quantity not the quality.....You see what happends the the troops down in Iraq...they're fighting against rebels with home made bombs.....Imagine what the Chinese army would do......there is one major diffrence between china and the US......China doesnt care about human lives.....that's what makes their army strongerjointed

Yes, you are correct about one thing: it is about quantity versus quality, which is what gives us the unmitigated advantage.

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

The United States has enough firepower to wipe China off the map probably a hundred thousand times over. :|
Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

180302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#178 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 180302 Posts

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

jointed

It's not like our military is depleted dude.....and numbers can't help you against superior technology and firepower....that just means more casualties.

Avatar image for deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
deactivated-5901ac91d8e33

17092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#179 deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
Member since 2004 • 17092 Posts
[QUOTE="jointed"]

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]are you being serious? They don't just have more men.......they have more tanks and more aircrafts....and yes, when there's such a large diffrence between the two sides, it is about the quantity not the quality.....You see what happends the the troops down in Iraq...they're fighting against rebels with home made bombs.....Imagine what the Chinese army would do......there is one major diffrence between china and the US......China doesnt care about human lives.....that's what makes their army strongerStevo_the_gamer

Yes, you are correct about one thing: it is about quantity versus quality, which is what gives us the unmitigated advantage.

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

The United States has enough firepower to wipe China off the map probably a hundred thousand times over. :|

you mean with nukes? Yea i've heard about them.....China has a whole arsenal of them too

Avatar image for CaptHawkeye
CaptHawkeye

13977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#180 CaptHawkeye
Member since 2004 • 13977 Posts
[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"][QUOTE="jointed"]

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]are you being serious? They don't just have more men.......they have more tanks and more aircrafts....and yes, when there's such a large diffrence between the two sides, it is about the quantity not the quality.....You see what happends the the troops down in Iraq...they're fighting against rebels with home made bombs.....Imagine what the Chinese army would do......there is one major diffrence between china and the US......China doesnt care about human lives.....that's what makes their army strongerjointed

Yes, you are correct about one thing: it is about quantity versus quality, which is what gives us the unmitigated advantage.

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

The United States has enough firepower to wipe China off the map probably a hundred thousand times over. :|

you mean with nukes? Yea i've heard about them.....China has a whole arsenal of them too

The point of this conversation was a straight out military slugfest. Because a nukefest between the US and Chinese would undoubtedly result in M.A.D.

Avatar image for deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
deactivated-5901ac91d8e33

17092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#181 deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
Member since 2004 • 17092 Posts
[QUOTE="jointed"]

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

LJS9502_basic

It's not like our military is depleted dude.....and numbers can't help you against superior technology and firepower....that just means more casualties.

Superior technology can help you in almost every occasion....but the technological gap between China and the US isnt great enough to compensate the number advantage

Avatar image for acegunslinger
acegunslinger

1223

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#182 acegunslinger
Member since 2004 • 1223 Posts
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="jointed"]

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

jointed

It's not like our military is depleted dude.....and numbers can't help you against superior technology and firepower....that just means more casualties.

Superior technology can help you in almost every occasion....but the technological gap between China and the US isnt great enough to compensate the number advantage

It did when Israel went head to head with its Arab neighbors.
Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

180302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#183 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 180302 Posts
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="jointed"]

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

jointed

It's not like our military is depleted dude.....and numbers can't help you against superior technology and firepower....that just means more casualties.

Superior technology can help you in almost every occasion....but the technological gap between China and the US isnt great enough to compensate the number advantage

Do you think you have all the intell on what the US military has/is developing?  I'd still take the edge in technology over numbers any day.  More advantageous by far.

Avatar image for mark4091
mark4091

3780

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#184 mark4091
Member since 2007 • 3780 Posts
[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="tycoonmike"]More men does equal better because it takes men to run the machines of war. It just so happens that because we were able to stare the Soviet Union down and because of the fact that if any country so much as blinks at us we invade them and because of our clearly superior nuclear capabilities that we don't need a huge army. If the Soviet Union were still around, we would need a huge army because there would actually be a threat to our survival.
tycoonmike
Oh for christ sake. I feel like I'm talking to my six year old.

Let me explain some things to you:

1. I don't enjoy being insulted, no matter my opinion on something.
2. Can you deny that because there is no one leering threat to our survival that we have a smaller army? Oh, sure, there's terrorism, but that isn't one large threat. That's more like ten small threats.
3. Why else are we supposedly the most powerful? It's because we aren't being threatened by one coherent threat, as I have said before. We have too much say in the world for anyone to be a threat to us. The only reason why China hasn't attacked us is because of the trade benefits. We have effectively connected ourselves to the rest of the nations of the world in a way so that we won't be attacked without drastic consequence to the opposition. It isn't because of military power, it's because of economic power.

alright can I explain something to you... do you not think that if the united states of america got into a all out war with the peoples republic of china that more americans and all allied nations would enlist? yes they would. The free nations of the world may not look that powerful, look I'll give you an example, back in WWII canada had one of the biggest armies and one of the biggest navies and airforces along with britian and the united states, after the war britian and canada and other allies cut military funding why? well in canada's case it was a new nation and had to build up other industries, britian had to rebuld after being bombed, but the US continued with its military and built 25000 nuclear warheads yeah 25000 nuclear weapons> any chinese amount of soldiers. The chinese have to look after 1 billion people!
Avatar image for deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
deactivated-5901ac91d8e33

17092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#185 deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
Member since 2004 • 17092 Posts
[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="jointed"]

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

acegunslinger

It's not like our military is depleted dude.....and numbers can't help you against superior technology and firepower....that just means more casualties.

Superior technology can help you in almost every occasion....but the technological gap between China and the US isnt great enough to compensate the number advantage

It did when Israel went head to head with its Arab neighbors.

yea but the gap wasnt as great as the one between China and America

Avatar image for CaptHawkeye
CaptHawkeye

13977

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#186 CaptHawkeye
Member since 2004 • 13977 Posts
[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="jointed"]

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

LJS9502_basic

It's not like our military is depleted dude.....and numbers can't help you against superior technology and firepower....that just means more casualties.

Superior technology can help you in almost every occasion....but the technological gap between China and the US isnt great enough to compensate the number advantage

Do you think you have all the intell on what the US military has/is developing?

Don't even bother Basic. You're talking to someone who thinks the Abrams MBT is obsolete...

Avatar image for Stevo_the_gamer
Stevo_the_gamer

50257

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 49

User Lists: 0

#187 Stevo_the_gamer  Moderator
Member since 2004 • 50257 Posts
[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"][QUOTE="jointed"]

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="jointed"]are you being serious? They don't just have more men.......they have more tanks and more aircrafts....and yes, when there's such a large diffrence between the two sides, it is about the quantity not the quality.....You see what happends the the troops down in Iraq...they're fighting against rebels with home made bombs.....Imagine what the Chinese army would do......there is one major diffrence between china and the US......China doesnt care about human lives.....that's what makes their army strongerjointed

Yes, you are correct about one thing: it is about quantity versus quality, which is what gives us the unmitigated advantage.

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

The United States has enough firepower to wipe China off the map probably a hundred thousand times over. :|

you mean with nukes? Yea i've heard about them.....China has a whole arsenal of them too

So, what's your point? You forget how the United States has multiple defenses against nuclear weapons, blowing it up while in flight. How about this, one nuclear weapon; We, the United States, blow it up a couple of hundred miles above the surface of the Earth over China. Every single electronic eqiupment within hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of miles, destroyed. China---Crippled.
Avatar image for OODALOOP
OODALOOP

36350

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#188 OODALOOP
Member since 2004 • 36350 Posts
[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"][QUOTE="tycoonmike"]More men does equal better because it takes men to run the machines of war. It just so happens that because we were able to stare the Soviet Union down and because of the fact that if any country so much as blinks at us we invade them and because of our clearly superior nuclear capabilities that we don't need a huge army. If the Soviet Union were still around, we would need a huge army because there would actually be a threat to our survival.
tycoonmike
Oh for christ sake. I feel like I'm talking to my six year old.

Let me explain some things to you:

1. I don't enjoy being insulted, no matter my opinion on something.
2. Can you deny that because there is no one leering threat to our survival that we have a smaller army? Oh, sure, there's terrorism, but that isn't one large threat. That's more like ten small threats.
3. Why else are we supposedly the most powerful? It's because we aren't being threatened by one coherent threat, as I have said before. We have too much say in the world for anyone to be a threat to us. The only reason why China hasn't attacked us is because of the trade benefits. We have effectively connected ourselves to the rest of the nations of the world in a way so that we won't be attacked without drastic consequence to the opposition. It isn't because of military power, it's because of economic power.

1. Then I'd not make such patently absurd claims as "more men does equal better." We have more than sufficient manpower in order to run the machines of war. We can instantly increase the number three and four fold if needed. Let me make the simplest comparison possible: If we took 40 Roman Legions and set them against one regiment of 21st century American Marines with 21st century firepower, do you really believe we'd be wiped out by their sheer numbers? Sure, there is a much closer gap between China and America than the classical age and the 21st century, but the gap is significant enough where they would not pose a tactical threat to us. 2. Terrorism, as well as all forms of 4th generation warfare relies upon a larger conventional force fighting attrition warfare against a smaller, force without centralized power fighting unconventionally via media, politics, and setting the emotions of the opposition's people against themselves. This is why terrorism is specifically a difficult task for a global superpower. We would not have this problem with another large, conventional nation's military. 3. You're merely voicing our further advantages.
Avatar image for deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
deactivated-5901ac91d8e33

17092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#189 deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
Member since 2004 • 17092 Posts
[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="jointed"]

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

LJS9502_basic

It's not like our military is depleted dude.....and numbers can't help you against superior technology and firepower....that just means more casualties.

Superior technology can help you in almost every occasion....but the technological gap between China and the US isnt great enough to compensate the number advantage

Do you think you have all the intell on what the US military has/is developing?  I'd still take the edge in technology over numbers any day.  More advantageous by far.

You think you have intell on what the PLA is developing?

We can't really use such an arguement....

But I agree, I would also choose technology over numbers any day......I just say that in the case between USA and China technology isnt enough......atleast not the kind america has for its disposal

Avatar image for klusps
klusps

10386

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 53

User Lists: 0

#190 klusps
Member since 2005 • 10386 Posts
Why would they have fat people in the army?
Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

180302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#191 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 180302 Posts

Don't even bother Basic. You're talking to someone who thinks the Abrams MBT is obsolete...

CaptHawkeye

Due to extreme bias against the US...

Avatar image for acegunslinger
acegunslinger

1223

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#192 acegunslinger
Member since 2004 • 1223 Posts
[QUOTE="acegunslinger"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="jointed"]

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

jointed

It's not like our military is depleted dude.....and numbers can't help you against superior technology and firepower....that just means more casualties.

Superior technology can help you in almost every occasion....but the technological gap between China and the US isnt great enough to compensate the number advantage

It did when Israel went head to head with its Arab neighbors.

yea but the gap wasnt as great as the one between China and America

You just killed your own argument...
Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

180302

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#193 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 180302 Posts

You think you have intell on what the PLA is developing?

We can't really use such an arguement....

But I agree, I would also choose technology over numbers any day......I just say that in the case between USA and China technology isnt enough......atleast not the kind america has for its disposal

jointed

They are behind in tech....they would be working to catch up...while the US is moving on.  Bit different.

Avatar image for tycoonmike
tycoonmike

6082

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#194 tycoonmike
Member since 2005 • 6082 Posts
alright can I explain something to you... do you not think that if the united states of america got into a all out war with the peoples republic of china that more americans and all allied nations would enlist? yes they would. The free nations of the world may not look that powerful, look I'll give you an example, back in WWII canada had one of the biggest armies and one of the biggest navies and airforces along with britian and the united states, after the war britian and canada and other allies cut military funding why? well in canada's case it was a new nation and had to build up other industries, britian had to rebuld after being bombed, but the US continued with its military and built 25000 nuclear warheads yeah 25000 nuclear weapons> any chinese amount of soldiers. The chinese have to look after 1 billion people!mark4091

I'm certain more Americans would enlist, but I'm equally certain that if our allies were wise, they wouldn't get involved. You're speaking of a war between the US and China, not the US and our allies vs. China and its allies, let's keep this as a straight fight between the two, ok?

And the only reason why this happened was because the US wasn't able to be effectively attacked. Technology back then wasn't advanced enough for there to be ICBM's or any weapon which would cause massive damage over a large area without needing a large army or a large fleet of ships, naval or air based, to defend it.

Yeah, and if we used nukes against China, the rest of the world would nuke us. Nuclear weapons are against the Geneva Convention and the Rules of War.
Avatar image for deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
deactivated-5901ac91d8e33

17092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#195 deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
Member since 2004 • 17092 Posts
[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="acegunslinger"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="jointed"]

America's technology aint good enough to compensate for the numbers they lack if fighting china

acegunslinger

It's not like our military is depleted dude.....and numbers can't help you against superior technology and firepower....that just means more casualties.

Superior technology can help you in almost every occasion....but the technological gap between China and the US isnt great enough to compensate the number advantage

It did when Israel went head to head with its Arab neighbors.

yea but the gap wasnt as great as the one between China and America

You just killed your own argument...

how exactly? :?

The number gap wasnt as great as the one between China and the US.........that's not killing my arguement....

Avatar image for OODALOOP
OODALOOP

36350

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#196 OODALOOP
Member since 2004 • 36350 Posts
This is becoming another laughable anti-American thread.
Avatar image for deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
deactivated-5901ac91d8e33

17092

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#197 deactivated-5901ac91d8e33
Member since 2004 • 17092 Posts

This is becoming another laughable anti-American thread.bt_the_great_78

how?

We're arguing who has the greatest army......not the political side of the countries....

Avatar image for mark4091
mark4091

3780

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#198 mark4091
Member since 2007 • 3780 Posts
[QUOTE="mark4091"]alright can I explain something to you... do you not think that if the united states of america got into a all out war with the peoples republic of china that more americans and all allied nations would enlist? yes they would. The free nations of the world may not look that powerful, look I'll give you an example, back in WWII canada had one of the biggest armies and one of the biggest navies and airforces along with britian and the united states, after the war britian and canada and other allies cut military funding why? well in canada's case it was a new nation and had to build up other industries, britian had to rebuld after being bombed, but the US continued with its military and built 25000 nuclear warheads yeah 25000 nuclear weapons> any chinese amount of soldiers. The chinese have to look after 1 billion people!tycoonmike

I'm certain more Americans would enlist, but I'm equally certain that if our allies were wise, they wouldn't get involved. You're speaking of a war between the US and China, not the US and our allies vs. China and its allies, let's keep this as a straight fight between the two, ok?

And the only reason why this happened was because the US wasn't able to be effectively attacked. Technology back then wasn't advanced enough for there to be ICBM's or any weapon which would cause massive damage over a large area without needing a large army or a large fleet of ships, naval or air based, to defend it.

Yeah, and if we used nukes against China, the rest of the world would nuke us. Nuclear weapons are against the Geneva Convention and the Rules of War.

still man, china is not in a very good position, its not a good place to live, they are not as smart as the american army but I do agree they're army is advanced, but I dont think they have enough experiance in modern combat as any of the allies let alone the US, and there really could not be a reason for a war between china and the US alone, china is a big enough threat if they got involved in a war with the states that other countries would help the states, I mean with iraq there wasint even a point in other nations getting involved in a minor conflict.
Avatar image for tycoonmike
tycoonmike

6082

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#199 tycoonmike
Member since 2005 • 6082 Posts
This is becoming another laughable anti-American thread.bt_the_great_78
Then explain to me why America is so great? I can tell you why America is evil:

- Capitalism
- It's fast to act
- The government acting despite the lack of support among the populace
- Capitalism
- Affirmative Action (though that's another topic)
- Overly Nationalistic citizens ruining our credibility among the other nations
- Capitalism
- Lack of culture (except for the Native Americans)
- Lack of fairness among the people of the populace
- Government corruption while the people do nothing about it
- Hypocracy (we are the stronghold of democracy and yet we aren't even a true democracy)

Need I go on?
Avatar image for OODALOOP
OODALOOP

36350

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#200 OODALOOP
Member since 2004 • 36350 Posts

[QUOTE="bt_the_great_78"]This is becoming another laughable anti-American thread.jointed

how?

We're arguing who has the greatest army......not the political side of the countries....

An argument that consists of no substantiated facts but aims only on blind adherence to proving an inadequacy smacks of bigoted rhetoric.