China and US on collision course for war over South China Sea

[Maxilian]

China has about 4,000 Nukes aimed at them. Ain't shit going to happen anytime soon. We got ways to nuke them and then re nuke them and then re nuke them

The main problem is not that they have nukes, is that everyone is using these as an excuse to get even more nukes (Russia says hi)

[ringpriest]

By comparison the cold war R-36M (AKA NATO reporting name SS-18 "Satan") could do over 25,000 KPH and was also capable of maneuvering during flight.

So the USA have had over a quarter of a century to come up with a way of stopping this type of missile, they probably have something up their sleeve.

Not necessarily. There's this popular myth of US military being utterly invincible due to an unmatched technological edge (which is certainly a nice PR/morale booster if you're the US), and the US does have a tradition going back decades pushing high-tech, bleeding-edge weapons systems. But that does not mean the US is always ahead of all potential opponents, on all fronts, all the time.

The P-270 Moskit is a Soviet supersonic, sea-skimming anti-ship missile first deployed in 1978 - it was regarded for many years as being unstoppable (I've no idea if a modern Aegis-equipped ship or task force could reliably successfully engage them or not; I suspect no one does) and is still in service. The R-73 is a Soviet short-range air-to-air missile from 1984 that featured off-boresight capability, thrust vectoring, and a helmet-mounted site - it fills the same niche as the US Sidewinder, which reached equivalent capability in 2003, almost 20 years later. The Chinese military uses both systems.

Meanwhile, the US Navy's primary anti-ship missile in the Harpoon, first deployed in 1977; while it has been regularly upgraded since then, the Harpoon, with its roughly 100 nmi range and sub-sonic speed, is no longer anywhere near the front of the anti-ship-missile race. (The Navy is looking into several different options for replacing the venerable Harpoon, and intends to have one "real soon" - hopefully the brass will remember to tell both Chinese and US politicians to wait on starting any wars until after the Harpoon-replacement is developed, acquired and deployed.)

The US does enjoy a substantial high-tech edge in many different aspects of war, but going in with the presumption that it has unquestionable, across-the-board superiority (and can always count on having it) is sheer hubris; thinking that is dangerous to both the nation as a whole and the soldiers and sailors overseas.

[chaotus]

China and the US will never fight a war until one of them is no longer capable of generating trade money. China is perfectly happy strip mining the entire environment to whore itself out to US consumption. The US is perfectly happy to continue consuming. They might squabble about islands here and there, throw some words around and maybe sink a ship "accidentally" but full on conventional war will never happen. Nuclear war is a pipe dream as well. Nuclear war has never been a viable concept since it's inception. It doesn't leave anything for you to use to offset the cost of the war. You can't systemically disassemble and pillage your enemy if you glass their country. The only reason the Japanese nukes didn't strangle the pillaging of Japan is because one was enough, two was a show of force. Three+ would have been taking away valuable future resources. No nuclear war, which involves multiple countries firing back and forth in a short time frame would be only 1 or 2 detonations. You would have 30+ easily. That just completely screwed up return on investment. Nobody wants to lose money in a war. You are supposed to make money.

[PACOX]

China, Russia, Iran, they'll never go to war with the US unless the US collapses. A war with China or Russia is was to costly. Noone would truly win.

Iran doesn't want to become Iraq.

[Kellhound]

Not necessarily. There's this popular myth of US military being utterly invincible due to an unmatched technological edge (which is certainly a nice PR/morale booster if you're the US), and the US does have a tradition going back decades pushing high-tech, bleeding-edge weapons systems. But that does not mean the US is always ahead of all potential opponents, on all fronts, all the time.

The P-270 Moskit is a Soviet supersonic, sea-skimming anti-ship missile first deployed in 1978 - it was regarded for many years as being unstoppable (I've no idea if a modern Aegis-equipped ship or task force could reliably successfully engage them or not; I suspect no one does) and is still in service. The R-73 is a Soviet short-range air-to-air missile from 1984 that featured off-boresight capability, thrust vectoring, and a helmet-mounted site - it fills the same niche as the US Sidewinder, which reached equivalent capability in 2003, almost 20 years later. The Chinese military uses both systems.

Meanwhile, the US Navy's primary anti-ship missile in the Harpoon, first deployed in 1977; while it has been regularly upgraded since then, the Harpoon, with its roughly 100 nmi range and sub-sonic speed, is no longer anywhere near the front of the anti-ship-missile race. (The Navy is looking into several different options for replacing the venerable Harpoon, and intends to have one "real soon" - hopefully the brass will remember to tell both Chinese and US politicians to wait on starting any wars until after the Harpoon-replacement is developed, acquired and deployed.)

The US does enjoy a substantial high-tech edge in many different aspects of war, but going in with the presumption that it has unquestionable, across-the-board superiority (and can always count on having it) is sheer hubris; thinking that is dangerous to both the nation as a whole and the soldiers and sailors overseas.

The US Navy does practice against sea-skimming supersonic missiles actually, they have a perfect idea of the ability to intercept one. However, that only becomes an issue if the launching platform survives long enough to locate and launch against the target, not a given by any means. I do agree the Harpoon needs replaced, preferably by a hypersonic missile, though the ability of the Chinese to defeat even the Harpoon is limited to a few of their newest ships.

Overall, the US DOES have both a technological advantage and a time-at-sea/professionalism advantage. It is very unlikely the USN would lose a war in the Pacific now or in the near future.

[Gorgodeus]

USA vs China war over South China Sea? Not going to happen.

If you do not think the U.S won't do whatever it takes to keep an area, which handles over 5 trillion dollars a year worth of goods traveling through it secure, you are a fool.

[arandomuser]

2 secular nations would never go to war with another they would just use proxy wars to assert dominance and avoid nuclear annihilation.

[BruceG87]

Just last Friday China passed a law allowing citizens of Taiwan to travel to and from China without a passport. It's like the US and Canada now.

That policy changed sometime ago in the US. Passports are now required when returning to the US at the US-Canadian border.

- - - Updated - - -

On the note of the actual topic at hand..

Projection of power does not constitute preparation to use force.

[Deleted]

China isn't going to do much. All their money is invested in the EU and US. This is typical muscle showing.

[Gorgodeus]

China isn't going to do much. All their money is invested in the EU and US. This is typical muscle showing.

It is much more than that. Once they get all the islands built in all the right spots, the next step is to lay claim to the waters as "territorial" waters, as opposed to what they are now - international waters. They want exclusive control of the busiest shipping lanes on the planet. With that type of control, they can then dictate terms on a lot of fronts much more effectively, such as trade treaties. That is what this whole thing is about.

[Nathreim]

China cant afford a war with the US they wont do shit. If they start a war with us it would be a good excuse for the US to never pay back that debt. Not to mention all the business that will pull out of China and go elsewhere. South Korea and India would love to get their hands on those fat contracts.