China' army - Page 5




 
--
Boots
 
January 4th, 2005  
rocco
 
"Do you know that the most succesful Microsoft R&D "station" is? Beijing, China."

- my error, you are correct, their is a R&D in china for microsoft.

sexybeast put it forward better than me... i just cant explain stuff in words without looking offensive...
January 4th, 2005  
Sexybeast
 
it is alright buddy, no body got offensed here, just debate here

still, my old theory, other than weapons, an army needs more to be a strong armed force
i am not saying PLA doesn't have good weapons, T99G is a good tank(it makes me laugh when someone said T98 is a copy of russian T-72, hope that dude can compare the picture of those two and he can see the clear difference), the missiles in PLA is also pretty good, especially its ICBMs..
since CHina can also send men into universe (very complicated space tech), PLA has no problem to develop better solid fueled ICBMs (DF-31 and DF-41), PLA also has J-10 and possiblely J-XX, a new generatioin fighter (probably in 2020)

HOWEVER!

PLA needs a fundemental change, makes it into a complete STATE army rather tahn a party army, make it more professional rather than letting it heavily involved in commerical activities (better now, worse in 1990s), and hopefully in the future, PLA can become a whole voluteer army with a group of highly educated soldiers than just a group of unemployed high-school-out young men
January 4th, 2005  
rocco
 
also the al kallid mbt2000 isnt any good, thats what even the pakistanis are saying on their own military forum.
--
Boots
January 4th, 2005  
Redneck
 
 
I'm not saying this just to hear myself talk, either provide sources for your information or this thread will be locked and the offender/s temporarily banned.
January 5th, 2005  
rocco
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redneck
I'm not saying this just to hear myself talk, either provide sources for your information or this thread will be locked and the offender/s temporarily banned.
does this include me? if so then here are the sources i ment for my last post, and ill try to find sources for any post you want me to ...

http://www.pakistanidefenceforum.com...hp/t21591.html

http://www.pakistanidefenceforum.com...howtopic=39052

they are conceding, and remember they are very nationalistic.

this is a tank 20 years in the making, not even made by reputable builders of weponary.
January 5th, 2005  
Regisvo
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sexybeast
PLA needs a fundemental change, makes it into a complete STATE army rather tahn a party army
Hi brother

I don't know how well you knew about political science and history, but some questions are very important:

1. What differences were there between political party and constitutional party?

2. What differences were there between a army controled by political party or by constitutional party?

3. Will there be a United States if there wasn't The Federalist?

4. Why has Chinese civilization been maintaining at least 5,000 years? Have you seen the new official infomation? - the history of Chinese civilization had added 3,000 years (sorry for all people here, this is a Chinese page)

As a reference
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Guaripa
No Empire last 1,000 years, No Democracy has ever lasted 200 yrs, only time will tell.
http://www.military-quotes.com/forum...t=7689&start=0

Yes, we are changing, true, indeed, but some classics will not be changed. if someone wanted a fundamental change, they would think soberly. Anybody can sing a word "only you", but "free will" was not the only thing in the human life. Natural Law must be complyed by everyone regardless of FREE WILL of majority, minority or the one. It isn't complex description, is it?
January 6th, 2005  
Sexybeast
 
well man, a party army is loyal to its party with a state army is loyal to its consitution and congress or president (elected by ppl)

to ensure the 100% loyalty of PLA, soldiers used up lots of their time to focus on political lessons, (it is not that easy to brainwash a person, takes time), there are extremely complicated party orgnization in PLA, above company level, there are party commitee, below company level there are party groups (cells)

also, a party army influences a nation's politic, that is when PLA crushes the Tiananmen demostration (i am not saying i think it is wrong), but this is a clear action of political intervention of a nation's politic, also generals have a saying of policies, EX: those old red guards, most of them died , but some are still alive , Liu Huang Qin, or Zhang Zhen

it seems u dont really agree that democracy is a good way to making CHina a super power, but i think it is, media freedom and free election will significantly reduce corruption and those things, and a political army is an obstacle for democractic progress in china (ex agian, Tiananmen)

the purpose of an army i think is to protect its ppl from external threats,
i dont like when an army joins into an internal fight
January 6th, 2005  
godofthunder9010
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gingerbeard
wait, so u r say intellectuals copy other ppl to get the nobel prize? that's funny cos u wont say the chinese has copy people to get gold medals in the olympics.
Yes, I was quite impressed with the improvement China has made in the last few Olympics. Still, that has absolutely nothing to do with technology but I find it to be a good sign to demonstrate that China is making solid progress in most areas.

Nobel Prizes generally reward extremely original thinking and/or groundbreaking achievements in the advancement of World Peace. Only person from China that I can remember winning the thing is the Dali Lhama -- but I doubt China wants to claim him as their own. (There may be others that I don't know about of course.)

Quote:
at the moment u r right in military, but as i said the newest chinese tank is one of the best. and even better than the russians.
Right we haven't got enough data for you to make the statement that "its better than the Russians" because nobody has yet provided any detailed information to use for making the comparison. The one extremely noninformative article says that China is building a tank around a 152mm main gun and no other info. We know nothing whatsoever about:
1.) Armor
2.) Secondary weapons like machine guns and other small arms systems
3.) Why the FCS is so wonderful
4.) Powerplant and maximum speed
5.) Performance on rough terrain
6.) Why this particular autoloader is better than a manual loader (most tankers far prefer manual loaders)
7.) Testing and likely mechanical defects ... etc.

Now I'm slow responding, but one of you mentioned a case where an accidental friendly fire shot from a M1a2 was deflected off of the armor of a Challenger. Frankly, if any tank on earth can accomplish that feat, it would be the Challenger. Best armored beast on the planet and one helluva tank. Regardless, we're talking about more of a fluke than anything. Depleted uranium rounds from M1's almost never do anything of the sort, and I still say 152mm is a completely unnecessary size increase for a MBT main gun ... but it has its uses. Considering that 155mm is a pretty common size gun for Self Propelled Artillery (the Paladin for instance http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m109a6.htm uses a 155mm), a MBT with that size main gun could double as both MBT and SPA. That's the biggest advantange I can think of for it. For it to be practical as a MBT, it would be huge and an unparalelled fuel hog. Short of that, it would be like i said --- it would carry a lot few rounds than an M1a2, etc.

Quote:
and how do u know the tactics are soviet? if so why they are reducing sizes now to a smaller better fighting force? i think that's back in the 50s and 60s
In this regard, I'm a lot more impressed by the current direction of China's military than I am with the remains of the old USSR presently. They're making good progress.

Quote:
i fact, the chinese new subs, missle and tank is exceptional. if u see the news, u will always hear how gd the chinese missles were. the fighter plane's missle is develop by the chinese if u read the article on about flanker beats Us planes. and the missle beats the US.
Again, we've got insufficient data with which to demonstrate that China's stuff beats the USA's stuff. Surpassing the F22 in overall air superiority capabilities is a very tough goal for anybody to achieve. Surpassing older models that are being phased out? That should be easily achievable for any nation who knows good combat aircraft design. If that's what they're referring to, I'm not terribly impressed.

Quote:
it is true in wat u said in some sense, but which country hasent copy before? Japan copied German military style, each country follows the same pattern
Japan copied some things, but did a lousy job at copying the most important parts pre-1945 --> mechanized warfare and Blitzkrieg were not used anything like what the Germans did and Japanese tanks sucked.

Quote:
America and USSR copy the German Jet plane to develop their own after WW2. pretty much all of east asia copy china in the old times. and pretty much we all speak english as our international language because of Britian be fighting around the world in the 18-19 century. if u say this then honestly u can find plenty of examples.
Beginning with WW2, Germany set the standard for military hardware and battlefield tactics. The rest of the world followed and copied them.

Currently, the USA has pretty much taken over that position. One advantage that China doesn't have is an alliance like NATO associated alliances. Basically, any European power or the USA or Japan or Korea or Israel or S Korea -- will develop the worlds best of whatever. Tanks or aircraft or assault rifle, it can be whatever you like. Those nations then have a system of sharing that technology with each other. This is why the most recent Leopard II is about equal in to a Challenger and M1a2, etc, etc, etc. This amounts to a significant disadvantage for the Chinese even though they do have a similar (though less open) relationship with Russia.

Quote:
but as u said before, alot of chinese get Nobel prize today, if u look at chinese people in ur schs college or uni, they are probably one of the top in their class or the whole sch/uni.

u must know it is amazing that 50 years ago, 99% of them are farmers, now its going to lead the world soon in many fields.
Its a credit to Chinese culture that they tend to do so well accademically. Chinese over here do very well at whatever they decide to do. Chinese philosophy and culture is very very condusive to progress and technological advancement. Communism was a major setback, but it is a very resilient culture. Frankly, if Chaing Kaishek had won the civil war in the late 40's, China would very likely have surpassed the USA and Europe already. China would be the most important and powerfuld nation on Earth right now. You can hate the KMT all you want, but they wouldn't have made such an awful mess of things with Communist ideologies, the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward.

Quote:
china is changing so fast as if a source is 1 year old, its going to be outdated. just trying to find them on the web, u will know what i am talkin about
As always, it is hoped that China's growth and change leads to good things for the rest of the world. It remains to be seen and the future cannot be predicted.
January 6th, 2005  
gingerbeard
 
actually its kind of funny, what ever i say people say i havebeen brainwashed! but hey, lemme tell u this guys, i live in US all my life. so i cannot be bombarded by chinese propaganda. my origin is chinese yes. and how about reading ur own sourse say about chinese military before u speak? please?!?!? cos that's where i got my information from. since i cant read chinese.
January 6th, 2005  
CABAL
 
 
Quote:
Frankly, if Chaing Kaishek had won the civil war in the late 40's, China would very likely have surpassed the USA and Europe already. China would be the most important and powerfuld nation on Earth right now. You can hate the KMT all you want, but they wouldn't have made such an awful mess of things with Communist ideologies, the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward.
godofthunder9010, you'll need to show certain respect to political ideologies. I see you are from the United States, a country known for its hysterical Anti-Communist rhetoric in the past. So please, reconsider.

Generalisimo Chiang Kai Shek was a corrupt leader who recieved persistant amounts of generous monetary donations from the United States for the war efforts, but most of them were kept in his personal ample bank accounts. During the late 1930's ever since Chiang Kai Shek had the priviledge to lead the entire nation, KMT have turned itself from a one party Republic into a corrupt military-runned absolutist government. So in this case, Mr. Chiang is no different than Mao Zhedong in terms of progress. However, both of them share the same dream, unity and stability. Regardless of their mistakes, I respect both of them.