10 hours ago, GOPinThailand said:

 

Chinese navy would be at the bottom of the Taipei Straights in two days(probably much faster )

 

https://www.quora.com/If-the-US-went-to-war-with-China-who-would-win-and-why

 

Thanks for the link. I found it very interesting. The problem that the USA faces currently is the POTUS.

 

IMHO and it is only an opinion is that the population as a whole wouldn't really support such a war (though the Trump supporters certainly would). The cost to both countries would be too high. I am fairly sure that Trump needs something like this to keep going but during the time he has been POTUS he has pissed off many allies and friends and worldwide support for it would be lacking. 

10 hours ago, GOPinThailand said:

Chinese navy would be at the bottom of the Taipei Straights in two days(probably much faster )

 

https://www.quora.com/If-the-US-went-to-war-with-China-who-would-win-and-why

How can a country, which have 200+ nuclear warheads and plenty of ICBMs lose a war?

56 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

Thanks for the link. I found it very interesting. The problem that the USA faces currently is the POTUS.

 

IMHO and it is only an opinion is that the population as a whole wouldn't really support such a war (though the Trump supporters certainly would). The cost to both countries would be too high. I am fairly sure that Trump needs something like this to keep going but during the time he has been POTUS he has pissed off many allies and friends and worldwide support for it would be lacking. 

On top of it, he's a coward, so he will not attack a powerful country just for electoral benefits. Maybe a weaker country such as Iran....

1 hour ago, oilinki said:

How can a country, which have 200+ nuclear warheads and plenty of ICBMs lose a war?

 

Winning a war is not so hard but winning the peace afterwards will be.

 

Just look at how long the Iraq and Afghanistan war actually lasted and there is still no peace there.

16 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

Let me try to understand you.

 

You believe that the US 7th Fleet and a few thousand Marines in Taipei can stare down 

quote "2,285,000 personnel, 0.18% of the country's population and that is only the Army active service guys. Don't forget the reserves who can be called up.

 

I simply Googled the Chinese forces to get these figures.

 

With a personnel strength of 255,000[2][11] servicemen and women, including 10,000 marines and 26,000 naval air force personnel, it is the second largest navy in the world in terms of tonnage, only behind the United States Navy, and has the largest number of major combatants of any navy.

 

The People's Liberation Army Air Force operates a large and varied fleet of some 3,010+ aircraft, of which around 2,100 are combat aircraft (fighter, attack and bombers).[3] According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, PLAAF combat pilots acquire an average of 100-150 flying hours per year.

 

In addition the Chinese forces are based in China and reinforced from there whereas the US forces gets its support from the USA which is a long way away.

 

I assume that you will volunteer to be in the front line forces that will bear the brunt of the first wave casualties. You will do that won't you?

 

I love the sound of a keyboard warrior flexing somebody elses muscles and letting others die for him. You sound like a Trump supporter.

 

PS If you had thought of going nuclear, beware, the Chinese have nuclear weapons too.

 

Unless mistaken, you had a career in the military (correct me if I'm wrong). If so, then you'd probably be able to appreciate that figures are nice, but actual combat experience, combat readiness plus command and control issues count for....quite a bit.

 

I don't think anyone seriously imagines it will come down to a simple showdown between whatever hypothetically deployed US forces in Taiwan, and the entire PRC armed forces.

10 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

Thanks for the link. I found it very interesting. The problem that the USA faces currently is the POTUS.

 

IMHO and it is only an opinion is that the population as a whole wouldn't really support such a war (though the Trump supporters certainly would). The cost to both countries would be too high. I am fairly sure that Trump needs something like this to keep going but during the time he has been POTUS he has pissed off many allies and friends and worldwide support for it would be lacking. 

It really doesn't matter, only fools talk about going to war with China.

3 hours ago, stevenl said:

It really doesn't matter, only fools talk about going to war with China.

Really. 

 

You may not be interested in war but it maybe interested in you. 

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6988385/china-releases-chilling-army-propaganda-video-warning-the-world-of-a-massive-new-global-conflict/

 

5 hours ago, GOPinThailand said:

Really. 

 

You may not be interested in war but it maybe interested in you. 

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6988385/china-releases-chilling-army-propaganda-video-warning-the-world-of-a-massive-new-global-conflict/

 

Yes, really, thanks for proving my point.

On ‎10‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 3:39 PM, Redline said:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-10-04/the-big-hack-how-china-used-a-tiny-chip-to-infiltrate-america-s-top-companies

 

this could be why?

That was a long read but a good one. Thank you for the link.

4 hours ago, stevenl said:

Yes, really, thanks for proving my point.

What point are you claiming?

16 hours ago, neeray said:

That was a long read but a good one. Thank you for the link.

Many details, and they aren’t backing down on accuracy 

On 10/7/2018 at 9:34 PM, billd766 said:

 

Thanks for the link. I found it very interesting. The problem that the USA faces currently is the POTUS.

 

IMHO and it is only an opinion is that the population as a whole wouldn't really support such a war (though the Trump supporters certainly would). The cost to both countries would be too high. I am fairly sure that Trump needs something like this to keep going but during the time he has been POTUS he has pissed off many allies and friends and worldwide support for it would be lacking. 

 

I don't think any rational person supports a war. A good first step would be to stop enabling behaviour that can lead to war.