About Can USA really win a big war?
|August 30th, 2004||#1|
| || |
Can USA really win a big war? info
But I do start to wonder, is USA really that powerful as many people imagine it is, but Chairman Mao say USA is just a paper tiger.
My points are:
What kind of real big wars did USA fight since WWII? Which ones did it win which ones did it lose?
As far as I can remember, USA only fought 2 real wars:
(1) Korea War:
USA won from N.Koreans, but lost to Chinese. Why lost to Chinese? Because Chinese troops started from Chinese-Korean border, and beat the US troops back half Korea and took the whole N.Korea in stand, that's why I say Chinese won from Americans.
(2) Vietnam War:
USA completely lost, kicked out of Vietnam, a real big lose of face in the world, a superpower losing to a badly armed small nation. I don't want to hear excuses of those political pressure from inside USA like anti-war movenment, I am only interested in facts, win or lose.
I know USA with all her allies invaded Iraq twice, but what kind of resistance did Iraq do? Almost nothing, almost not a single plance took off to fight, it is not a real war at all, it is simply like an adult beating up a 6 year old kid.
Can USA really win a big war? I really doubt if USA with all her might can take on big countries like Iran which is really wanting to fight if invaded by USA.
Seems to me, except Korea and Vietnam, USA has never fought a real war since WW2, so how can we be sure USA can win a real big war?
Or is USA's military just a hype like the stock bubble? Or just like what Mao Zedong pointed out, a paper tiger? Because from WW2, when USA faced a real big enemy, it always lost while before the war the Americans took the victory as granted but in the end a terrible lose.
Final point is:
If you learn lessons from past, then you may know a better future.
If you don't learn from history, then you are doomed to lose again.
From Corporals to Generals. Rising Dragons of Middle Kingdom.
|August 30th, 2004||#2|
| || |
You're forgetting in these two large conflicts there was a bigger war going on, the cold war. That was a chest bumping war, and many options were held off, I think.... we had many troopers deployed in europe, we thought Russia was gonna come raining down and start WW3 anyday. Sure, nuclear capabilities ensured MAD. But just the same, things were uncertain....
I know very little of the Korean war, so I can't really explain why China was able to force us into a tie. I must accept then (until I inform myself) that China was just that damn good.
As for the Vietnam war, that war was lost because of a failure to outline a big picture, the one plan to follow to end the war. We pretty much just kept the southern piece alive from communism until we got tired of it and left. Not really a lose, not really a win. Just a crazy, brutal, confuseing conflict.
I also think dureing the 70's and 80's, we saw a revitaliation of our military, new technology has allowed us to reach a efficiency not possible dureing the Korean and Vietnam era wars.
So yes, I think America can win a large encounter.
|August 30th, 2004||#3|
| || |
May I also point out the facts:
During both Korea and Vietnam wars, the US troops had much much superior weapons, still lost.
Now at this moment, US again have an advantage in all weapons, but due to the fact that other big countries also have this or that super weapons, it seems to me that USA's advantage at this moment is not bigger than it had during the Korea and Vietnam wars.
|August 30th, 2004||#4|
| || |
Frog, Im afraid you've taken to your governments propeganda. The US was pulled out of Vietnam dou to public interest against the war, we didn't lose anything until after we left.
Do not forget your own governments massive casulties In Korea...
|August 30th, 2004||#5|
| || |
In a political war with the nations opinion divided, most of the time no.
In an all out war with America's fate in the balance, the US will be able take on anybody.
If the US were to fight China right now without using nukes, if I were in charge, all I'd do is bomb every single dam in the country to flood their rice fields and starve them out. I'd bomb their infrastucture and production facilities to oblivion. I would NOT set foot one single soldier into the coutry I would simply take away China's ability to be an effective country. It would take them 20 years to recover, plus with that much turmoil there is a good chance the government would be overthrowwn.
But that kind of strategy wouldn't be used unless the US got into an all out war. So you see were not the panzy's you think we are.
|August 30th, 2004||#6|
| || |
I don't want to hear excuses of those political pressure from inside USA like anti-war movenment, I am only interested in facts, win or lose.
About casulties of Chinese troops in Korea:
Yes, since Chinese troops had much less good weapons than the American troops, therefore Chinese took large casulties. I once read a book written by American about the Korea war, he said: if the Chinese had the same weapons as the US troops had, it would be a massacre to the Americans.
Please don't assume too much, don't "think" others are automatically brain-washed if they have different opinions. Well, this is a bit off-topic.
|August 30th, 2004||#7|
| || |
Relax, the first part was a joke, Im not accusing anyone of anything. Im mearly saying that perhaps, If the US order of Battle was like the Chinese, and our citizens at the time had a better resolve, then we probobly would of eventually beat the N. Vietnamese. I agree that the US military may not be able to win a big, drawn out war, but not because of military reasons, rather because alot of people In this country don't want them to win and will do anything to put internal pressure against them.
|August 30th, 2004||#8|
| || |
Political pressure and public support are two very involved factors in war for a country like the US.
If you do not like the arguments presented, refute them with your own facts. Do notattempt to control other's opinions or stifle discussion by attempting to control what others say - if you continue the topic will be locked.
|August 30th, 2004||#9|
| || |
But about an All Out War btw China and USA:
You know what means All Out?
If without nukes, then it is not an All Out War.
Well, if without nuke, think about where do your bombers to take off first.
Korea? Forget it.
Japan? Foget it.
Then we have an existing Topic called "How to sink a Carrier Groups"
Believe me, I don't have the intension to "limit" the extend of the Discussion, but my original idea about this topic is the final facts: Win or Lose.
Well, let's it be a open disscussion then if people are interested in it.
|August 30th, 2004||#10|
| || |
How bout nuclear subs or land based missle from the US, have you forgoten those.
All out doesn't necesaraly mean insane, but if you want to go those levels...
If you want to use nukes then it be so much easier to take out China.
You maybe able to get some nukes to hit the US, but in a whole the US would still survive. The US on the other hand will be able to hit China at will, completely obliterating it out of existence.
Besides we have long range bombers that can fly across the world, we can take off from Kansas and hit China if we want to.