Who would win in an unrestrained, completely savage war, China or America?

[volkvin]

A country that doesn't exist anymore? Which one would that be...... Also America is rather competitive as far as the curriculum goes, it varies by state but i saw an article not long ago where a certain state, i wanna say Connecticut, was ranked #2 in math in the world behind some nation, not that China is in these statistics they don't want to lose hot air

Sure. That is why most grads cannot identify anything but America on world map, have trouble with domestic history and are lost in current affairs.

Good thing we have things called facts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra..._and_ethnicity

- - - Updated - - -



Shut up, it's late.

And back to my first point. Religion = official stats = garbage. Can continue this line for a long time.

It's a good thing your not important in the slightest, being that wrong would get you laughed at for so long in any important function

Edit: Huh was looking at your numbers..... sooooo there are supposedly 500million people living in America....

Good thing your opinion is right up there with mine.

You're either completely deluded or trolling, so I think I'm gonna go back to lurking ITT.

Trolling of course. This is a retarded thread with hypothetical retarded outcomes. All superior armies have fallen in one place, where vodka runs out of tap... Mongols, Swedes, Napoleon, Hitler. Welcome to...

When i hear " sick burn " It's usually a sarcastic reply to a failed joke. My bad.

lol

[Paulosio]

I don't think anyone would win.

China is too big and too populace for anyone to defeat. I don't believe anyone would have any chance of success in invading America due to sheer military might. It would go on and on and then whichever side was the aggressor would eventually have to give up.

Lots seem to think America would "win" but if America couldn't succeed against Vietnam in the 60-70s how much success do you think they'd have against China with far more territory and far more soldiers to deal with. It would just be like Germany vs Soviets in world war 2...

[Theinquisition]

What the fuck did i just watch. I especially liked the pictures of a Lambo, and stacks of cash. Instead of actually using a real one in the video.

Dude I almost snotted on myself at 2:15

[Åmbulance]

I don't think anyone would win.

China is too big and too populace for anyone to defeat. I don't believe anyone would have any chance of success in invading America due to sheer military might. It would go on and on and then whichever side was the aggressor would eventually have to give up.

Lots seem to think America would "win" but if America couldn't succeed against Vietnam in the 60-70s how much success do you think they'd have against China with far more territory and far more soldiers to deal with.

The hypothetical suggests that civilian casualties is a non factor. Unlike every previous war, where we tried out best to avoid civilian deaths. So the easy solution in that case is just to carpet bomb until submission, no foot soldiers needed.

- - - Updated - - -

Dude I almost snotted on myself at 2:15

If Flava Flav had a kid, he would look like that. ( yes i know Flav has like 42 kids )

[volkvin]

The hypothetical suggests that civilian casualties is a non factor. Unlike every previous war, where we tried out best to avoid civilian deaths. So the easy solution in that case is just to carpet bomb until submission, no foot soldiers needed.

If the muslim goat fuckers are able to explode bombs in America itself and hijack plains, than what do you think an intelligent nation would be able to do with this broken country lol

Infracted

[Åmbulance]

If the muslim goat fuckers are able to explode bombs in America itself and hijack plains, than what do you think an intelligent nation would be able to do with this broken country lol

Must resist urge, can't afford another infraction.

[xylophone]

Trolling of course. This is a retarded thread with hypothetical retarded outcomes. All superior armies have fallen in one place, where vodka runs out of tap... Mongols, Swedes, Napoleon, Hitler. Welcome to...

Figures I would restrain myself the majority of the thread and then bite on the most obvious bait in here.

[Mihalik]

The hypothetical suggests that civilian casualties is a non factor. Unlike every previous war, where we tried out best to avoid civilian deaths. So the easy solution in that case is just to carpet bomb until submission, no foot soldiers needed.

Has been tried with Germany has been tried with Japan and with Vietnam. It doesn't work. Too much ground to cover, you still need boots on the ground if you want to win. Or nukes...then it doesn't matter.

[Ginantonicus]

[QUOTE=Åmbulance;23081278]The hypothetical suggests that civilian casualties is a non factor. Unlike every previous war, where we tried out best to avoid civilian deaths. So the easy solution in that case is just to carpet bomb until submission, no foot soldiers needed.

- - - Updated - - -



That has only ever worked twice. Nagasaki and Hiroshima. And how was firebombing cities in Europe avoiding civilian casualties.

[Chrysia]

Has been tried with Germany has been tried with Japan and with Vietnam. It doesn't work. Too much ground to cover, you still need boots on the ground if you want to win. Or nukes...then it doesn't matter.

In all those theaters, civilian casualties were still strongly avoided. The hypothetical we were given is "unrestrained total war." In a hypothetical where America doesn't give a flying fuck about civilian casualties, carpet bombing the coastal regions of China would cripple the shit out of them in no time flat.

- - - Updated - - -

That has only ever worked twice. Nagasaki and Hiroshima. And how was firebombing cities in Europe avoiding civilian casualties.

Most of the bombed cities in WWII were military targets, and care was taken to avoid residential districts. By the allies, anyway.

[Ginantonicus]

In all those theaters, civilian casualties were still strongly avoided. The hypothetical we were given is "unrestrained total war." In a hypothetical where America doesn't give a flying fuck about civilian casualties, carpet bombing the coastal regions of China would cripple the shit out of them in no time flat.

- - - Updated - - -



Most of the bombed cities in WWII were military targets, and care was taken to avoid residential districts. By the allies, anyway.

That is plain wrong. After the battle of Britain when the allies where able to retaliate they actively sought out to create civilian casualties in the hopes of destroying the moral of the civilian populace.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing...n_World_War_II

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo

[Chrysia]

That is plain wrong. After the battle of Britain when the allies where able to retaliate they actively sought out to create civilian casualties in the hopes of destroying the moral of the civilian populace.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing...n_World_War_II

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Tokyo

Only your second link seems to support that statement, and that was in the Japanese theater.

[Ginantonicus]

Only your second link seems to support that statement, and that was in the Japanese theater.

From the first link.

"Several researchers have claimed that not all of the communications infrastructure, such as the bridges, were targeted, nor were the extensive industrial areas outside the city centre.[4] Critics of the bombing argue that Dresden—sometimes referred to as "Florence on the Elbe" (Elbflorenz)—was a cultural landmark of little or no military significance, and that the attacks were indiscriminate area bombing and not proportionate to the commensurate military gains."

[Chrysia]

From the first link.

"Several researchers have claimed that not all of the communications infrastructure, such as the bridges, were targeted, nor were the extensive industrial areas outside the city centre.[4] Critics of the bombing argue that Dresden—sometimes referred to as "Florence on the Elbe" (Elbflorenz)—was a cultural landmark of little or no military significance, and that the attacks were indiscriminate area bombing and not proportionate to the commensurate military gains."

And yet, the city's own authorities cite casualties of ~25,000 across all raids, and that's a subset of researchers. There isn't concrete evidence of a lack of tactical targets in that area.

[Ginantonicus]

And yet, the cities own authorities cite casualties of ~25,000 across all raids, and that's a subset of researchers. There isn't concrete evidence of a lack of tactical targets in that area.

http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COMM.10.5.03.HTM

http://www.crf-usa.org/america-respo...g-of-civilians

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffma....2/Bombing.htm
"Is the deliberate mass murder of civilians on a huge scale ever justified? This article does not have an answer for this question. However, it is important to note that this was a very specific goal of England and America in World War II as the quotes above show. Germany and Japan also bombed civilians but the scale of what they did was a tiny fraction of their opponents. More people died in the bombing of Hamburg alone that in the entire German bombing campaign against England. Was the Anglo-American bombing necessary or moral? Many serious military experts feel it was a poor choice in terms of military priorities. What follows is documentation from both sides. "

http://rense.com/general81/germm.htm. you have to read between the lines a bit on this one.

[josykay]

After fighting such high developed countries like Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan and so on and losing, i have huge doubts, that the US will be able to defeat China.
It will be most likely a terrible mess for the US, just like Russia became for the French in the Napolic Wars and Germany in WW2. This country is ridiculously large and so damn hard to occupy. Maybe China will have the higher casualties, but in the end noone will claim victory.

Oh and meanwhile while you fight in the far east, the sneaky EU will seize opportunity and conquer US back, ending that revolution. :P

[Ginantonicus]

After fighting such high developed countries like Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan and so on and losing, i have huge doubts, that the US will be able to defeat China.
It will be most likely a terrible mess for the US, just like Russia became for the French in the Napolic Wars and Germany in WW2. This country is ridiculously large and so damn hard to occupy. Maybe China will have the higher casualties, but in the end noone will claim victory.

Oh and meanwhile while you fight in the far east, the sneaky EU will seize opportunity and conquer US back, ending that revolution. :P

Korea was a draw.

[Chrysia]

Korea was a draw.

Korea was a draw, Vietnam was a PR loss, but we were inflicting far more casualties than we were sustaining, and both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are insurgent problems, not organized military. Occupation, not military victory, is our problem in both of those countries.

[Flutterguy]

They just finished building their first aircraft carrier. I'm not worried.

[Skillslam]

China has Goku