# A war with China in 2025 would be bloody and unwinnable



## beijingwalker

*A war with China in 2025 would be bloody and unwinnable*
2016-8
A top defense strategy think tank recently released a report hat looks at the implications of a possible war between the US and China.

The news is almost universally bad, but the assessment of a full-scale war between the US and China in 2025 paints a dire picture of the aftermath of a conflict between the world’s two biggest superpowers.

While a war today would be costly for the US, China’s increasing anti-access, area denial arsenal as well as its growing carrier capability and aircraft strength could make it impossible for the US to establish military dominance and achieve a decisive victory in 2025, the report by the RAND Corporation says.

“Premeditated war between the United States and China is very unlikely, but the danger that a mishandled crisis could trigger hostilities cannot be ignored,” RAND says. “Technological advances in the ability to target opposing forces are creating conditions of conventional counterforce, whereby each side has the means to strike and degrade the other’s forces and, therefore, an incentive to do so promptly, if not first.”

Instead, the two sides would fight until its home populations got fed up and demanded an end to hostilities, something that may not happen until the body counts get too high to stomach.

RAND declined to state a number of expected casualties in any potential war, but it estimated the loss of multiple carriers and other capital platforms for each side. Nimitz-class carriers carry approximately 6,000 sailors and Marines on a cruise. The loss of a single ship would represent a greater loss of life and combat power than all losses in the Iraq War.

The study predicts a stunning display of technological might on both sides, which isn’t surprising considering what each country has in the field and in the works. The paper doesn’t name specific weapon systems, but it predicts that fifth-generation fighters will be able to shoot down fourth-generation fighters with near impunity.

The US recently fielded its second fifth-generation fighter, the F-35 Lightning II. America’s other advanced fighter, the F-22 Raptor, has been in service since 2005. China is developing four fifth-generation fighters — the J-20; the J-32; the J-23; and the J-25.

The J-20 and J-32 will likely be in the field in 2025 and would potentially rival America’s fighters.

By 2025, China could have two more aircraft carriers for a total of three. It currently owns one functional carrier purchased from Russia and is manufacturing a second.

Despite America’s greater numbers of both fifth-generation fighters and total aircraft carriers, China’s growing missile arsenal would force America to act cautiously or risk unsustainable losses, RAND argues.

Outside of the conventional war, cyber attacks, anti-satellite warfare, and trade disruptions would hurt both countries.

Both belligerents have anti-satellite weapons that are nearly invulnerable to attack, meaning that both countries will be able to destroy a substantial portion of each other’s satellites. The destruction of the American satellite constellation would be especially problematic for the rest of the world since nearly all GPS units connect to American satellites.

Cyber attacks would cripple vulnerable grids on both sides of the Pacific, likely including many of the computer servers that maintain public utilities and crucial services like hospitals.

Trade disruptions would damage both countries, but China would be affected to a much greater extent, RAND says.

A lot of American commerce passes through the Pacific, but China does a whopping 95 percent of its trade there and is more reliant on trade than the US. For China, any large Pacific conflict would be very expensive at home.

While it’s very unlikely that China could win a war with the US, RAND says the fighting would be so bloody and costly for both sides that even average Americans would suffer greatly. Service members and their families would have it the worst.

“By 2025, US losses could range from significant to heavy; Chinese losses, while still very heavy, could be somewhat less than in 2015, owing to increased degradation of US strike capabilities,” RAND says. “China’s [anti-access weapons] will make it increasingly difficult for the US to gain military-operational dominance and victory, even in a long war.”

There are two pieces of good news. First, leaders on both sides are hesitant to go to war. Even better, RAND’s assessment says that neither country is likely to risk nuclear retaliation by firing first, so the war would likely remain a conventional affair.

The bad news is that increasing tension could trigger an accidental war despite political leaders best intentions. RAND recommends that leaders set clear limits on military actions in the Pacific and establish open lines of dialogue.

The American and Chinese military do participate in some exercises together. The Chinese hospital ship Peace Ark and the Chinese frigate Hengshui took part in the Rim of the Pacific exercise, but continued Chinese espionage against America and reported cyber attacks prevent a happy relationship.

Hopefully the US and China can come to friendly terms because a war tomorrow would be catastrophic and a war in 10 years could be crippling for everyone involved.
http://www.businessinsider.com/china-war-2025-bloody-unwinnable-2016-8

Reactions: Like Like:
12


----------



## shhh

beijingwalker said:


> *A war with China in 2025 would be bloody and unwinnable*
> 2016-8
> A top defense strategy think tank recently released a report hat looks at the implications of a possible war between the US and China.
> 
> The news is almost universally bad, but the assessment of a full-scale war between the US and China in 2025 paints a dire picture of the aftermath of a conflict between the world’s two biggest superpowers.
> 
> While a war today would be costly for the US, China’s increasing anti-access, area denial arsenal as well as its growing carrier capability and aircraft strength could make it impossible for the US to establish military dominance and achieve a decisive victory in 2025, the report by the RAND Corporation says.
> 
> “Premeditated war between the United States and China is very unlikely, but the danger that a mishandled crisis could trigger hostilities cannot be ignored,” RAND says. “Technological advances in the ability to target opposing forces are creating conditions of conventional counterforce, whereby each side has the means to strike and degrade the other’s forces and, therefore, an incentive to do so promptly, if not first.”
> 
> Instead, the two sides would fight until its home populations got fed up and demanded an end to hostilities, something that may not happen until the body counts get too high to stomach.
> 
> RAND declined to state a number of expected casualties in any potential war, but it estimated the loss of multiple carriers and other capital platforms for each side. Nimitz-class carriers carry approximately 6,000 sailors and Marines on a cruise. The loss of a single ship would represent a greater loss of life and combat power than all losses in the Iraq War.
> 
> The study predicts a stunning display of technological might on both sides, which isn’t surprising considering what each country has in the field and in the works. The paper doesn’t name specific weapon systems, but it predicts that fifth-generation fighters will be able to shoot down fourth-generation fighters with near impunity.
> 
> The US recently fielded its second fifth-generation fighter, the F-35 Lightning II. America’s other advanced fighter, the F-22 Raptor, has been in service since 2005. China is developing four fifth-generation fighters — the J-20; the J-32; the J-23; and the J-25.
> 
> The J-20 and J-32 will likely be in the field in 2025 and would potentially rival America’s fighters.
> 
> By 2025, China could have two more aircraft carriers for a total of three. It currently owns one functional carrier purchased from Russia and is manufacturing a second.
> 
> Despite America’s greater numbers of both fifth-generation fighters and total aircraft carriers, China’s growing missile arsenal would force America to act cautiously or risk unsustainable losses, RAND argues.
> 
> Outside of the conventional war, cyber attacks, anti-satellite warfare, and trade disruptions would hurt both countries.
> 
> Both belligerents have anti-satellite weapons that are nearly invulnerable to attack, meaning that both countries will be able to destroy a substantial portion of each other’s satellites. The destruction of the American satellite constellation would be especially problematic for the rest of the world since nearly all GPS units connect to American satellites.
> 
> Cyber attacks would cripple vulnerable grids on both sides of the Pacific, likely including many of the computer servers that maintain public utilities and crucial services like hospitals.
> 
> Trade disruptions would damage both countries, but China would be affected to a much greater extent, RAND says.
> 
> A lot of American commerce passes through the Pacific, but China does a whopping 95 percent of its trade there and is more reliant on trade than the US. For China, any large Pacific conflict would be very expensive at home.
> 
> While it’s very unlikely that China could win a war with the US, RAND says the fighting would be so bloody and costly for both sides that even average Americans would suffer greatly. Service members and their families would have it the worst.
> 
> “By 2025, US losses could range from significant to heavy; Chinese losses, while still very heavy, could be somewhat less than in 2015, owing to increased degradation of US strike capabilities,” RAND says. “China’s [anti-access weapons] will make it increasingly difficult for the US to gain military-operational dominance and victory, even in a long war.”
> 
> There are two pieces of good news. First, leaders on both sides are hesitant to go to war. Even better, RAND’s assessment says that neither country is likely to risk nuclear retaliation by firing first, so the war would likely remain a conventional affair.
> 
> The bad news is that increasing tension could trigger an accidental war despite political leaders best intentions. RAND recommends that leaders set clear limits on military actions in the Pacific and establish open lines of dialogue.
> 
> The American and Chinese military do participate in some exercises together. The Chinese hospital ship Peace Ark and the Chinese frigate Hengshui took part in the Rim of the Pacific exercise, but continued Chinese espionage against America and reported cyber attacks prevent a happy relationship.
> 
> Hopefully the US and China can come to friendly terms because a war tomorrow would be catastrophic and a war in 10 years could be crippling for everyone involved.
> http://www.businessinsider.com/china-war-2025-bloody-unwinnable-2016-8



But China is a copy-paste backwards country.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## beijingwalker

Shaheer ul haq said:


> But China is a copy-paste backwards country.


Right， and China will copy and paste many US soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## Ind4Ever

Shaheer ul haq said:


> But China is a copy-paste backwards country.


Come on now. Even if China go to war with Vietnam it will be brutal for China both military and economical. It doesn't mean Vietnam is superior to China. Is it? Americans and rest of the world fought world wars. So losses don't matter when it comes to that. But the Victory. Or are u suggesting Nato and US armed forces will loss the war with China?


----------



## Beast

Ind4Ever said:


> Come on now. Even if China go to war with Vietnam it will be brutal for China both military and economical. It doesn't mean Vietnam is superior to China. Is it? Americans and rest of the world fought world wars. So losses don't matter when it comes to that. But the Victory. Or are u suggesting Nato and US armed forces will loss the war with China?


China will walk over Vietnam. How bloody can it be? 

NATO and US armed forces has no chance in landing in mainland China. Any attempt on mainland will be end of the world scenario with H -bomb utilized.

Reactions: Like Like:
11


----------



## cirr

Our American friends are yet to win the war in Afghanistan against a couple of thousands of Taliban fighters.

Reactions: Like Like:
21


----------



## T-Rex

*I don't think the west will allow that much time to China. They can sense the rate at which China is catching up with them in the field of technology and this has made them desperate for a conflict with China. They think a military defeat, even at small scale, will put immense pressure on the CPC which might lead to the fall of China as a global power. They are expecting some sort of power struggle in CPC and the consequent fall of Xi as the leader, followed by dissolution of the CPC. This is basically the game plan.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## cirr

Shaheer ul haq said:


> But China is a copy-paste backwards country.



Copy and paste only in your washed brain.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## beijingwalker

Ind4Ever said:


> Come on now. Even if China go to war with Vietnam it will be brutal for China both military and economical. It doesn't mean Vietnam is superior to China. Is it? Americans and rest of the world fought world wars. So losses don't matter when it comes to that. But the Victory. Or are u suggesting Nato and US armed forces will loss the war with China?


First Nato won't go to war with China for US. Second it depends on where the war will be fought, China defeated US led UN forces back in 1950s when China virtually had nothing, cause the war was fought so close to China.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Beast

T-Rex said:


> *I don't think the west will allow that much time to China. They can sense the rate at which China is catching up with them in the field of technology and this has made them desperate for a conflict with China. They think a military defeat, even at small scale, will put immense pressure on the CPC which might lead to the fall of China as a global power. They are expecting some sort of power struggle in CPC and the consequent fall of Xi as the leader, followed by dissolution of the CPC. This is basically the game plan.*


That will be foolish. Are most ordinary American willing to risk their lives for this possible small conflict which may lead to Armageddon? China is nuclear power. If China ABSM sunk 4 carriers. Are American going to use nuclear retaliation?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## friendly_troll96

cirr said:


> Copy and paste only in your washed brain.


he was being sarcastic


----------



## cirr

T-Rex said:


> *I don't think the west will allow that much time to China. They can sense the rate at which China is catching up with them in the field of technology and this has made them desperate for a conflict with China. They think a military defeat, even at small scale, will put immense pressure on the CPC which might lead to the fall of China as a global power. They are expecting some sort of power struggle in CPC and the consequent fall of Xi as the leader, followed by dissolution of the CPC. This is basically the game plan.*



That is exactly the reason why China must have 10000 pieces of nuclear weapons at her disposal.

If the West tries to deter the rise of China with force, then be prepared to end in ruin together.



friendly_troll96 said:


> he was being sarcastic



I thought he was an Indian or American or Pinoy or Viet in disguise. 

My apologies.

Reactions: Like Like:
7


----------



## T-Rex

cirr said:


> That is exactly the reason why China must have 10000 pieces of nuclear weapons at her disposal.
> 
> If the West tries to deter the rise of China with force, then be prepared to end in ruin together.


*
But officially China has only 300 nukes and this has emboldened her foes. *



Beast said:


> That will be foolish. Are most ordinary American willing to risk their lives for this possible small conflict which may lead to Armageddon? China is nuclear power. If China ABSM sunk 4 carriers. Are American going to use nuclear retaliation?


*
That I do not know for sure, most probably they won't. I think they will focus on decimating the Chinese Navy. The US and her allies like india and Vietnam are certainly itching for a showdown at the SCS. They strongly believe that militarily China will be humiliated by the mighty USN. *


----------



## phancong

Now US navy still have the upperhand in SCS, 10 yrs from now China military will reach the parity with the US military, US navy will meet it match if military confrontation between US and China 10 yrs from now. Two heavy weight fight each other both will be hurt badly.


----------



## xunzi

Ind4Ever said:


> Come on now. Even if China go to war with Vietnam it will be brutal for China both military and economical. It doesn't mean Vietnam is superior to China. Is it? Americans and rest of the world fought world wars. So losses don't matter when it comes to that. But the Victory. Or are u suggesting Nato and US armed forces will loss the war with China?


Of all world class power, or the supa powa, India is the most likely to be conquered by the Vietnamese. LOL

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## Beast

T-Rex said:


> *But officially China has only 300 nukes and this has emboldened her foes. *
> 
> 
> *
> That I do not know for sure, most probably they won't. I think they will focus on decimating the Chinese Navy. The US and her allies like india and Vietnam are certainly itching for a showdown at the SCS. They strongly believe that militarily China will be humiliated by the mighty USN. *


Then what is USN waiting for? US brag about going to stop our SCS islet building. Sending destroyer and deploy bomber yet no action. Or is the opposit of somebody overestimation. In modern times, we don't need a carrier to fight a carrier. U think it's still WWII? Out ABSM will decimate USN. That is why the no ball USN still dare not bomb our islet. 

And somebody likes to blow hot fart.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shhh

cirr said:


> Copy and paste only in your washed brain.





cirr said:


> That is exactly the reason why China must have 10000 pieces of nuclear weapons at her disposal.
> 
> If the West tries to deter the rise of China with force, then be prepared to end in ruin together.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought he was an Indian or American or Pinoy or Viet in disguise.
> 
> My apologies.



I just wanted to clarify 

But its okay.



Ind4Ever said:


> Come on now. Even if China go to war with Vietnam it will be brutal for China both military and economical. It doesn't mean Vietnam is superior to China. Is it? Americans and rest of the world fought world wars. So losses don't matter when it comes to that. But the Victory. Or are u suggesting Nato and US armed forces will loss the war with China?



Yeah.

China will lose against Viets.
USA will lose against Viets.
Russia will lose against Viets.
But the mighty India would decimate everyone including themselves.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## T-Rex

Beast said:


> Then what is USN waiting for? US brag about going to stop our SCS islet building. Sending destroyer and deploy bomber yet no action. Or is the opposit of somebody overestimation. In modern times, we don't need a carrier to fight a carrier. U think it's still WWII? Out ABSM will decimate USN. That is why the no ball USN still dare not bomb our islet.
> 
> And somebody likes to blow hot fart.


*
I really want to believe what you've just claimed because a lot for us is at stake too. I just don't want China to make the same mistake as Germany did by invading Soviet Russia. In a war precise assessment of the foe's military capabilities is essential for a victory.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gambit

Beast said:


> Then what is USN waiting for? US brag about going to stop our SCS islet building. Sending destroyer and deploy bomber yet no action. Or is the opposit of somebody overestimation. *In modern times*, we don't need a carrier to fight a carrier. U think it's still WWII? Out ABSM will decimate USN. That is why the no ball USN still dare not bomb our islet.
> 
> And somebody likes to blow hot fart.


And *THAT* is how the PDF Chinese views military tactics. All they have to do is cite 'in modern times' and everything known so far in the art and craft of warfare is erased. This is from a country that is still struggling to modernize its military and from a crew that have never shot a .22 caliber, let alone served in the military.

All it takes is three words: in modern times.


----------



## T-Rex

gambit said:


> And *THAT* is how the PDF Chinese views military tactics. All they have to do is cite 'in modern times' and everything known so far in the art and craft of warfare is erased. This is from a country that is still struggling to modernize its military and from a crew that have never shot a .22 caliber, let alone served in the military.
> 
> All it takes is three words: in modern times.



*In modern times carriers do make big fat targets for the ASBMs assisted by satellites, there's no doubt about it.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Djinn

If its anything Viets should forget if USA even exists, we all saw how US and NATO went to Ukraine's help despite giving security assurances in response to Ukraine giving up nuclear weapons.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## T-Rex

Djinn said:


> If its anything Viets should forget if USA even exists, we all saw how US and NATO went to Ukraine's help despite giving security assurances in response to Ukraine giving up nuclear weapons.


*
The US is champion of treachery and deceit, they'll say and do anything to get what they want. It's in their blood but what amuses me is the way states like Vietnam behave as far as the US is concerned.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AndrewJin

just nuke the world....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Peer Haman Shah

Pakistan woud be behind you in Syrea.


----------



## SBUS-CXK

Ind4Ever said:


> Come on now. Even if China go to war with Vietnam it will be brutal for China both military and economical. It doesn't mean Vietnam is superior to China. Is it? Americans and rest of the world fought world wars. So losses don't matter when it comes to that. But the Victory. Or are u suggesting Nato and US armed forces will loss the war with China?


Do you think, after US to win a war with China, still can maintain his superpower status? 
The US would win difficult... So, you see now is still the peace. 
Please don't forget, a 1950-1953 Korean war, China won the USA and 16 countries' war. 
Please Google, "Third Battle of Seoul" China's armed forces pushed the war to the 37 th the parallel 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Battle_of_Seoul

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## patero

AndrewJin said:


> just nuke the world....



Probably what will happen eventually. Not much hope for our species really given our inability to understand and care about each other, I hope whatever species that eventually evolves from the ashes of our self-destruction learns something from our failures.


----------



## Nilgiri

Wouldn't a war at any point with a country/nation the size of China be a bloodbath and unwinnable really?

Clickbait title.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hakikat ve Hikmet

T-Rex said:


> *I don't think the west will allow that much time to China. They can sense the rate at which China is catching up with them in the field of technology and this has made them desperate for a conflict with China. They think a military defeat, even at small scale, will put immense pressure on the CPC which might lead to the fall of China as a global power. They are expecting some sort of power struggle in CPC and the consequent fall of Xi as the leader, followed by dissolution of the CPC. This is basically the game plan.*


"Let China sleep, when she wakes up the world will cry" - Napoleon

It's not the West, but whether China will give time is the question..


----------



## SBUS-CXK

Shaheer ul haq said:


> But China is a copy-paste backwards country.


Copy and paste do you think is very simple thing?? 
Such as India, drawings for LCA is provided by France, the United States to provide engine, Israeli missiles, Europe provide avionics system. To now, 30 years... Can and J-10 battle? 
Arjun provided by the German engine, artillery, and suspension system. Thirty years up to now, there are 57 kinds of defects. can and China the type 96 tank combat? 
Sir, isn't what you want to copy and paste can do, if you don't have the industrial base and manufacturing capacity. Everything can't do. 

https://defence.pk/threads/first-kill-for-type-96-tank-in-sudanese-conflict.178275/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Blue Marlin

aren't we all forgetting the next gen of warfare? proxys.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ind4Ever

Shaheer ul haq said:


> I just wanted to clarify
> 
> But its okay.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah.
> 
> China will lose against Viets.
> USA will lose against Viets.
> Russia will lose against Viets.
> But the mighty India would decimate everyone including themselves.



No... Let's be honest. 

China lost in veitnam 
US lost in Vietnam.. 

Simple as that. And you are trying to say.. M China will have free run into Vietnam without any loss?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AndrewJin

patero said:


> Probably what will happen eventually. Not much hope for our species really given our inability to understand and care about each other, I hope whatever species that eventually evolves from the ashes of our self-destruction learns something from our failures.


As the Chinese idiom goes, 玉石俱焚。。。。
China is a civilisation state, gone through uncountable wars for unification and centralisation in several thousand years. She never died like other civilisation.
I can't speak for those fabricated countries which were built on nothing.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mangus Ortus Novem

AndrewJin said:


> As the Chinese idiom goes, 玉石俱焚。。。。
> China is a civilisation state, gone through uncountable wars for unification and centralisation in several thousand years. She never died like other civilisation.
> I can't speak for those fabricated countries which were built on nothing.



I have said it many times before...the monentum of Life is with China. The Toa is with China. Only those with wisdom can truly understand this Fact.

@Kiss_of_the_Dragon @beijingwalker @Chinese-Dragon @TaiShang @T-Rex friends instead of reacting to these Pschyological Warefare articles and reports...why do not you come up with scenarios in which this wishful attack on China can happen.

The fact is the US will have to use proxies like india, JP or terrorists trained in Afg to enter the Western provinces. 

Also cyberattacks combined with financial/economic attacks before this theoretical shooting war. 

I look forward to your creative thinking...one of you can start a thread on this. 

Otherwise, we just waste time on these reports or wishful thikning of troublemakers and their happy proxies. Our time is best spent on celerbarting and understanding the momentum of Life in China and how this momentum is spreading to China's friends through OBOR.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## xunzi

Ind4Ever said:


> No... Let's be honest.
> 
> China lost in veitnam
> US lost in Vietnam..
> 
> Simple as that. And you are trying to say.. M China will have free run into Vietnam without any loss?


Please allow me to give you an analogy. Vietnam is like a nerd kid wearing nerdy glass in the class and try to mess with the big guy under the direction of a hidden power. He then got cock, knock, and sock on the nose bleeding many times, but continue to come back to mess around. At some point, the big guy feels tired of the beat down and so decide it's time to let him have his candy.

Watch this video to understand what I'm talking about..

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## gambit

Sinopakfriend said:


> I have said it many times before...the monentum of Life is with China. *The Toa is with China.* Only those with wisdom can truly understand this Fact.


Looks like you got the wrong set of 'wisdom', buddy.

Geographically, China have poor _feng shui_. Poor _feng shui_ invites bad _juju_. As I reached out with my astral projected self, I can see the global _chi_ force -- Life -- favoring the US. What China experiencing now is only a temporary respite from the _chi_ force rearranging itself from China's internal reorganization of her society.

The world is dominated by water and Water is a sign of healing, of freedom, of cleansing, and of renewal. The US with our good _feng shui_ is braced by water from coast to coast, as if Mother Nature Herself smothers Uncle Sam into her ample bosom. 

The Toa maybe with China. But the Tao is with US.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shhh

Ind4Ever said:


> No... Let's be honest.
> 
> China lost in veitnam
> US lost in Vietnam..
> 
> Simple as that. And you are trying to say.. M China will have free run into Vietnam without any loss?



US loses everywhere.
They had to nuke Japan to win the war.
China had beat the shit out of USA and co in Korean war.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Mangus Ortus Novem

gambit said:


> Looks like you got the wrong set of 'wisdom', buddy.
> 
> Geographically, China have poor _feng shui_. Poor _feng shui_ invites bad _juju_. As I reached out with my astral projected self, I can see the global _chi_ force -- Life -- favoring the US. What China experiencing now is only a temporary respite from the _chi_ force rearranging itself from China's internal reorganization of her society.
> 
> The world is dominated by water and Water is a sign of healing, of freedom, of cleansing, and of renewal. The US with our good _feng shui_ is braced by water from coast to coast, as if Mother Nature Herself smothers Uncle Sam into her ample bosom.
> 
> The Toa maybe with China. But the Tao is with US.



Dear Gambit,

Indeed the US is the inevitable empire. He is of of very few analysts who makes sense.

https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/geopolitics-united-states-part-1-inevitable-empire

But. But China does not wish be like the US. It is US burden to carry. To be an empire is messy business.

My reference to China is not compared to any country. Least of all the US. Wish to see the US of the honest Abe. That man is human treasure. He enjoys my deepest respect.

China is a civilisational state. It has its cycles and shall have its cycles. Indpendent of any state as reference.

Now you have the right and due duty to be loyal to your homeland and feel as you choose. Bless you for that.

So do others. 

This war business is disturbing prospect for humanity. When two great powers fight...the world burns. Here in Europe we have seen the war. Rather not see it ever again.


I am fair game to be rediculed and insulted. It is an open internet forum. No problme with that.

I sincerely request you, please, leave the human treasure of the Tao out of it. No, you have in no way insulted this. I thank you for this. I know that you are gentleman!

But in our discourse further...I depend on you to honour this request.

The Tao is with China once again though. Over to you....

You have yourself a great day.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## shhh

Two said:


> Copy and paste do you think is very simple thing??
> Such as India, drawings for LCA is provided by France, the United States to provide engine, Israeli missiles, Europe provide avionics system. To now, 30 years... Can and J-10 battle?
> Arjun provided by the German engine, artillery, and suspension system. Thirty years up to now, there are 57 kinds of defects. can and China the type 96 tank combat?
> Sir, isn't what you want to copy and paste can do, if you don't have the industrial base and manufacturing capacity. Everything can't do.
> 
> https://defence.pk/threads/first-kill-for-type-96-tank-in-sudanese-conflict.178275/



Dude dude dude.

"Sarcasm" it was "Sarcasm"

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SBUS-CXK

Ind4Ever said:


> No... Let's be honest.
> China lost in veitnam
> US lost in Vietnam..
> Simple as that. And you are trying to say.. M China will have free run into Vietnam without any loss?


Let's honesty, 
Do you know the 1950-1953 Korean war? 
China VS US, UK, SK, a total of 17 countries. 
China and these countries fighting for three years. The United States was forced to sign a peace treaty. 
India does not teach these history? 
For the Vietnam war. 
China and the Soviet union's aid is huge, and most Vietnamese officers graduated from Chinese schools, such as the battle of dien bien phu giap command. 
I don't think Vietnam is rely on their own strength to win. 

http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/20thcentury/articles/chinesesupport.aspx

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Ind4Ever

xunzi said:


> Please allow me to give you an analogy. Vietnam is like a nerd kid wearing nerdy glass in the class and try to mess with the big guy under the direction of a hidden power. He then got cock, knock, and sock on the nose bleeding many times, but continue to come back to mess around. At some point, the big guy feels tired of the beat down and so decide it's time to let him have his candy.
> 
> Watch this video to understand what I'm talking about..



What a world we are living in. History is fake bravoda for feel good feeling. 

Time travel :1979

China rolled across major sections of the Vietnam border with infantry, armor, and artillery. Their 29 day war achieved no substantial victory and failed as a show of force against the Soviet Union.

China rolled across major sections of the Vietnam border with infantry, armor, and artillery. Their 29 day war achieved no substantial victory and failed as a show of force against the Soviet Union.


Many of the PLA's commanding officers were shocked by the poor discipline, low morale, combat ineffectiveness, and high casualties in the 1979 Sino-Vietnamese War. During the nineteen days of the first two phases, the PLA suffered 26,000 casualties, about 1,350 per day. Gerald Segal points out that in Vietnam, "in contrast to Korea, Chinese troops performed poorly. In Korea, they adequately defended North Korea, but in 1979 they failed to punish Vietnam. China's Cambodian allies were relegated to a sideshow along the Thai frontier, and China was unable to help them break out."During the war, 37,300 Vietnamese troops were killed, and 2,300 were captured. 


And yes China will conquer Vietnam like we like to eat ice-cream... Because it's China



Shaheer ul haq said:


> US loses everywhere.
> They had to nuke Japan to win the war.
> China had beat the shit out of USA and co in Korean war.



OMG. Americans and allied forces already in the path of victory. Nukes where used to end the war and complete and imiditate surrender of Japanese emperor. What kind of history they teach in ur schools? And more over nope. Chinese dint beat the ship outta Koreans. It was outside support in fear of Nato declaring war against China. And again Koreans had massive backing from Soviets. 

Those times China was what Pakistan was to US during Soviet Union invasion of Afghanistan. Think about it. America came from other end of the world and defended South Korea! That's not a victory? North Koreans managed to stay alive in the was after invading south. And Americans don't want nuclear conflicts with the Soviet and pressure where mounted on US troop from American public to get the hell out of there. 


And u think China will have a refreshing run into Vietnam without heavy losses to its economy and military. 

If that's what u think and I pray to God to get a good history teacher for yiy



Two said:


> Let's honesty,
> Do you know the 1950-1953 Korean war?
> China VS US, UK, SK, a total of 17 countries.
> China and these countries fighting for three years. The United States was forced to sign a peace treaty.
> India does not teach these history?
> For the Vietnam war.
> China and the Soviet union's aid is huge, and most Vietnamese officers graduated from Chinese schools, such as the battle of dien bien phu giap command.
> I don't think Vietnam is rely on their own strength to win.
> 
> http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/20thcentury/articles/chinesesupport.aspx



Dude as per your conclusion there was no Russian help?

Russians had a fleet strength to take over entire European Union and strike hard the US deep inside their cites. And first of all. It was the West which saved China's arsee from Japan. No the Chinese. They were weak

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lure

Ind4Ever said:


> in contrast to Korea, Chinese troops performed poorly.



I don't wanna get into this since I believe both countries Soviet Union and China had a lot of positive impact on the World. You don't seem to appreciate both powers. That's understandable. 

However a simple question for you..

You claim Chinese soldiers fought well in Korea but poorly on Vietnam. How the hell do you know if they will fight poor or well in their next fight? Do you call Mike Tyson a shitty fighter just because of a bad fight? Do you think you can fight with him now at this age of his? Well I don't recommend. 

And a little side note, do you have any idea what were the main objectives behind Chinese invasion of Vietnam in 1979? Do you know that every single objective was eventually honored? What a bad fight right?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## SBUS-CXK

Ind4Ever said:


> What a world we are living in. History is fake bravoda for feel good feeling.
> 
> Time travel :1979
> 
> China rolled across major sections of the Vietnam border with infantry, armor, and artillery. Their 29 day war achieved no substantial victory and failed as a show of force against the Soviet Union.
> 
> China rolled across major sections of the Vietnam border with infantry, armor, and artillery. Their 29 day war achieved no substantial victory and failed as a show of force against the Soviet Union.
> 
> 
> Many of the PLA's commanding officers were shocked by the poor discipline, low morale, combat ineffectiveness, and high casualties in the 1979 Sino-Vietnamese War. During the nineteen days of the first two phases, the PLA suffered 26,000 casualties, about 1,350 per day. Gerald Segal points out that in Vietnam, "in contrast to Korea, Chinese troops performed poorly. In Korea, they adequately defended North Korea, but in 1979 they failed to punish Vietnam. China's Cambodian allies were relegated to a sideshow along the Thai frontier, and China was unable to help them break out."During the war, 37,300 Vietnamese troops were killed, and 2,300 were captured.
> 
> 
> And yes China will conquer Vietnam like we like to eat ice-cream... Because it's China
> 
> 
> 
> OMG. Americans and allied forces already in the path of victory. Nukes where used to end the war and complete and imiditate surrender of Japanese emperor. What kind of history they teach in ur schools? And more over nope. Chinese dint beat the ship outta Koreans. It was outside support in fear of Nato declaring war against China. And again Koreans had massive backing from Soviets.
> 
> Those times China was what Pakistan was to US during Soviet Union invasion of Afghanistan. Think about it. America came from other end of the world and defended South Korea! That's not a victory? North Koreans managed to stay alive in the was after invading south. And Americans don't want nuclear conflicts with the Soviet and pressure where mounted on US troop from American public to get the hell out of there.
> 
> And u think China will have a refreshing run into Vietnam without heavy losses to its economy and military.
> If that's what u think and I pray to God to get a good history teacher for yiy
> Dude as per your conclusion there was no Russian help?
> Russians had a fleet strength to take over entire European Union and strike hard the US deep inside their cites. And first of all. It was the West which saved China's arsee from Japan. No the Chinese. They were weak


Dude. With logical thinking. 
China and Japan war eight years (1937-1945). In the Pacific Japan 10 divisions, only 19.6% of the total, the battlefield of the Japanese army in China there are 35 divisions, accounting for 68.6% of the total number of the Japanese army divisions. 
Japan in 2/3 of military power in China. China has been the main enemy of Japan. 
Now tell me, in addition to 1945. The United States throwing the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The Soviet attack the Japanese kwantung army. 
They help to China have how old?



Lure said:


> I don't wanna get into this since I believe both countries Soviet Union and China had a lot of positive impact on the World. You don't seem to appreciate both powers. That's understandable.
> 
> However a simple question for you..
> 
> You claim Chinese soldiers fought well in Korea but poorly on Vietnam. How the hell do you know if they will fight poor or well in their next fight? Do you call Mike Tyson a shitty fighter just because of a bad fight? Do you think you can fight with him now at this age of his? Well I don't recommend.
> 
> And a little side note, do you have any idea what were the main objectives behind Chinese invasion of Vietnam in 1979? Do you know that every single objective was eventually honored? What a bad fight right?


Forgive him, he does not know Vietnam "indosinian federal" plan, also don't know Vietnam invaded Thailand, Laos and Cambodia. India does not teach that history.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Echo_419

cirr said:


> That is exactly the reason why China must have 10000 pieces of nuclear weapons at her disposal.
> 
> If the West tries to deter the rise of China with force, then be prepared to end in ruin together.
> 
> 
> 
> I thought he was an *Indian *or American or Pinoy or Viet in disguise.
> 
> My apologies.


----------



## bolo

*A war with China in 2016 would be bloody and unwinnable*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## beijingwalker

A war with China in 2030 would be the end of the United States of America.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## The SC

T-Rex said:


> *I don't think the west will allow that much time to China. They can sense the rate at which China is catching up with them in the field of technology and this has made them desperate for a conflict with China. They think a military defeat, even at small scale, will put immense pressure on the CPC which might lead to the fall of China as a global power. They are expecting some sort of power struggle in CPC and the consequent fall of Xi as the leader, followed by dissolution of the CPC. This is basically the game plan.*


That won't work.. read the anti-satellite weapons section in the article, The US and most of the GPS users are to be affected the most.. How world trade will be affected is obvious? So, China won't be really defeated ..be it on a small or large scale.. if there will be any defeat, both sides will be defeated then.. It is an insane Idea to have a war between the US ++++ and China..



gambit said:


> Looks like you got the wrong set of 'wisdom', buddy.
> 
> Geographically, China have poor _feng shui_. Poor _feng shui_ invites bad _juju_. As I reached out with my astral projected self, I can see the global _chi_ force -- Life -- favoring the US. What China experiencing now is only a temporary respite from the _chi_ force rearranging itself from China's internal reorganization of her society.
> 
> The world is dominated by water and Water is a sign of healing, of freedom, of cleansing, and of renewal. The US with our good _feng shui_ is braced by water from coast to coast, as if Mother Nature Herself smothers Uncle Sam into her ample bosom.
> 
> The Toa maybe with China. But the Tao is with US.


Salted waters don't count in feng shui!

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakistan First

Yaar, don't start this war for at least next 2 years. Let me get my underground bunker, my 1 year food supplies and my piece of agricultural land and livestock up in the mountains, ready first.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## patero

AndrewJin said:


> As the Chinese idiom goes, 玉石俱焚。。。。
> China is a civilisation state, gone through uncountable wars for unification and centralisation in several thousand years. She never died like other civilisation.
> I can't speak for those fabricated countries which were built on nothing.



Civilization as a whole has only recently developed the ability to annihilate itself, a capability which will only improve. It only requires the will to do so, and there is plenty of that in the world today.

China won't be spared the inevitable destruction of our species, nor will any other civilization. All things shall pass. Don't interpret this as criticism of China, this is criticism of human nature itself.


----------



## William Hung

Lure said:


> And a little side note, do you have any idea what were the main objectives behind Chinese invasion of Vietnam in 1979? Do you know that every single objective was eventually honored? What a bad fight right?



To pull Viet army from China’s friend Cambodia? Which VN refused to do in the next 10 years? Yeah great achievement from that “fight”.



Ind4Ever said:


> What a world we are living in. History is fake bravoda for feel good feeling.
> 
> Time travel :1979
> 
> China rolled across major sections of the Vietnam border with infantry, armor, and artillery. Their 29 day war achieved no substantial victory and failed as a show of force against the Soviet Union.
> 
> China rolled across major sections of the Vietnam border with infantry, armor, and artillery. Their 29 day war achieved no substantial victory and failed as a show of force against the Soviet Union.
> 
> 
> Many of the PLA's commanding officers were shocked by the poor discipline, low morale, combat ineffectiveness, and high casualties in the 1979 Sino-Vietnamese War. During the nineteen days of the first two phases, the PLA suffered 26,000 casualties, about 1,350 per day. Gerald Segal points out that in Vietnam, "in contrast to Korea, Chinese troops performed poorly. In Korea, they adequately defended North Korea, but in 1979 they failed to punish Vietnam. China's Cambodian allies were relegated to a sideshow along the Thai frontier, and China was unable to help them break out."During the war, 37,300 Vietnamese troops were killed, and 2,300 were captured.
> 
> 
> And yes China will conquer Vietnam like we like to eat ice-cream... Because it's China



Yeah some folks can’t accept reality so they have to put on a fake bravado. However, this article reveals some truth behind that 1979 ordeal, it doesn’t seem to support the PLA bravado that some Chinese PDF’er is trying to put on:

http://m.scmp.com/news/china/articl...e-invasion-halt-chinese-city-governments-road



> China’s People’s Liberation Army halted a city government’s road construction project on the border with Vietnam last month because of fears it could be used as a shortcut for a “Vietnamese invasion”.
> 
> If finished, the road would “definitely become a serious threat to national defence and security”, a PLA officer in charge of border affairs in Fangchenggang city, in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, was quoted as saying in Wednesday’s report China’s defence ministry website.
> 
> The two-lane road would have linked the village of Tansan, on the border with Vietnam, to the centre of Fangchenggang city, about 100km away.
> 
> The border area between China and Vietnam used to be one of the world’s most intensive area of military conflict.
> 
> After a brief but deadly war in 1979, in which more than 30,000 soldiers were killed on both sides, border clashes did not cease until 1990...



If the PLA still have this mentality then the Chinese PDF’ers should stop putting up this fake bravado and dreaming of facing the US military.


----------



## shhh

Ind4Ever said:


> OMG. Americans and allied forces already in the path of victory. Nukes where used to end the war and complete and imiditate surrender of Japanese emperor. What kind of history they teach in ur schools? And more over nope. Chinese dint beat the ship outta Koreans. It was outside support in fear of Nato declaring war against China. And again Koreans had massive backing from Soviets.
> 
> Those times China was what Pakistan was to US during Soviet Union invasion of Afghanistan. Think about it. America came from other end of the world and defended South Korea! That's not a victory? North Koreans managed to stay alive in the was after invading south. And Americans don't want nuclear conflicts with the Soviet and pressure where mounted on US troop from American public to get the hell out of there.
> 
> 
> And u think China will have a refreshing run into Vietnam without heavy losses to its economy and military.
> 
> If that's what u think and I pray to God to get a good history teacher for yiy



Dude, we are taught to use common sense, it is you people who are made to believe whatever is written in books and media.

Yup, USA beat the sh!t out of Taliban in Afghanistan too, thats why they are screwing them over to this date!
Pakistan could not do anything against soviets in Afghanistan, it was USA who made them win.
Yup, except that Pakistan beat this sh!t of of USA in Afghanistan, *without help*.

You need lessons in common sense, bro.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xunzi

Ind4Ever said:


> What a world we are living in. History is fake bravoda for feel good feeling.
> 
> Time travel :1979
> 
> China rolled across major sections of the Vietnam border with infantry, armor, and artillery. Their 29 day war achieved no substantial victory and failed as a show of force against the Soviet Union.
> 
> China rolled across major sections of the Vietnam border with infantry, armor, and artillery. Their 29 day war achieved no substantial victory and failed as a show of force against the Soviet Union.
> 
> 
> Many of the PLA's commanding officers were shocked by the poor discipline, low morale, combat ineffectiveness, and high casualties in the 1979 Sino-Vietnamese War. During the nineteen days of the first two phases, the PLA suffered 26,000 casualties, about 1,350 per day. Gerald Segal points out that in Vietnam, "in contrast to Korea, Chinese troops performed poorly. In Korea, they adequately defended North Korea, but in 1979 they failed to punish Vietnam. China's Cambodian allies were relegated to a sideshow along the Thai frontier, and China was unable to help them break out."During the war, 37,300 Vietnamese troops were killed, and 2,300 were captured.
> 
> 
> And yes China will conquer Vietnam like we like to eat ice-cream... Because it's China


Did you watch the video I showed you? LOL That will demonstrate perfectly.

In 1979s, our objectives were met.

1. Stop Soviet-back Vietcong from advancing and spreading across Southeast Asia.
2. Teach VN a lesson for their invasion of Cambodia. It was never a war to conquer VN as we are not interest in doing so. We even stated publicly that it will be limited scale war. We cause tremendous damage to their infrastructure, kill many of the hidden Vietcong hidden under civilian uniform, and capture a large amount the Vietcong militia.
3. Test the so called Soviet-VN mutual defense treaty. 

So all in all, it was a total victory in the long run. We suffer nothing. Soviet collapsed, VN crawled back to beg for normalcy. 

Who win? LOL

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## T-Rex

The SC said:


> That won't work.. read the anti-satellite weapons section in the article, The US and most of the GPS users are to be affected the most.. How world trade will be affected is obvious? So Chinawon't be really defeated be it on a small or large scale.. if there will be any defeat , both sides will be defeated then.. s it is an insane Idea to have a war between the US ++++ and China..


*
I believe you but do the western warmongers see it this way? That is the danger!*


----------



## Waqas Bajwa

well china is a new emerging state with lot of army and economy,on the other hand US had more enemies then friends and in russia is a great ally of China.


----------



## Lure

William Hung said:


> To pull Viet army from China’s friend Cambodia? Which VN refused to do in the next 10 years? Yeah great achievement from that “fight”.



De Facto invasion stopped as early as 1982 and Chinese invasion had a huge impact on this. De jure invasion stopped in 1990.

After Sino-Soviet split main Soviet hypothesis was, China would eventually fail as a state since it was very vulnerable without Soviet help. However China proved that not only it can function on it's own, it can also cross Soviet Union when their interest conflicts. During the invasion bulk of the Chinese army was waiting in the Soviet border, not invading Vietnam. Clearly the message was to Soviets and it was well received. Soviets not only failed to protect their ally Vietnam but also couldn't stop China from invading it.

So China's aim was humiliate Soviets and it did that.

But as I've said in my previous message, Soviets and China had a lot of positive implications to politics. It's a sad part of history seeing them fight eachother.

Secondly, until 1990 China made a series of border clashes with Vietnam. Gained territories from that clashes. Even gained territory from the so called "failed" invasion.

Thirdly; while China was enjoying integration to World economics and trade, Vietnam was isolated from the entire World until 1990 and had even less allies then today's North Korea. Only Soviets were looking after them economically. But it was a huge burden. An entire country was at a point of economic starvation and Soviet Union was the only caregiver. Of course this resulted a lot of complaints from Soviet officials.

Also China protected Chinese minority (Hoa people) in Vietnam. Hoa people lived hell because of Vietnamese regime. They would live a lot worse if China hadn't invaded. When China opened it's border to accept Hoa people, cunning Vietnamese government started to attack Hoa people and triggered an ethnic cleansing.

I don't see a failed China in that conflict. The entire event resulted in larger control of China in SCS, Vietnamese economic development is crippled and isolated from the World, Hoa people are 6th largest minority group in Vietnam and they still exist in there, Soviet Union no longer exist, China gained territory from Vietnamese border, Thailand and Cambodia has very good relations with China and they are thankful for what China did.

You decide who win.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## xiao qi

A short time, Chinese wasn't the winner, If Chinese soldiers didn't retreat out of Vietnamese's border. They would encounter Vietnamese regular military that was changed from Cambodia. More than 200000 soldiers, one month and grab their territories only 20km to 30km from the Chinese border ( fight with a lot of Vietnamese women and civilization army). Is it the winner?, lol. But a long time, maybe.


Two said:


> Let's honesty,
> Do you know the 1950-1953 Korean war?
> China VS US, UK, SK, a total of 17 countries.
> China and these countries fighting for three years. The United States was forced to sign a peace treaty.
> India does not teach these history?
> For the Vietnam war.
> China and the Soviet union's aid is huge, and most Vietnamese officers graduated from Chinese schools, such as the battle of dien bien phu giap command.
> I don't think Vietnam is rely on their own strength to win.
> 
> http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/20thcentury/articles/chinesesupport.aspx


Hey Giap Commander was taught by Chinese school? Give your source to prove it? i didn't know about that, although i know some Chinese consultants in Dien Bien Phu.


----------



## William Hung

Lure my friend, you probably didn’t know how many times I’ve addressed the same flawed arguments from Chinese members here. Let me just briefly address them again.



Lure said:


> De Facto invasion stopped as early as 1982 and Chinese invasion had a huge impact on this. De jure invasion stopped in 1990.



Friend, even in 1988, Vietnam still had around 100,000 soldiers in Cambodia, and I don’t mean undercover soldiers, but fully uniformed soldiers with VPA badge stationed in Cambodia.



Lure said:


> After Sino-Soviet split main Soviet hypothesis was, China would eventually fail as a state since it was very vulnerable without Soviet help. However China proved that not only it can function on it's own, it can also cross Soviet Union when their interest conflicts. During the invasion bulk of the Chinese army was waiting in the Soviet border, not invading Vietnam. Clearly the message was to Soviets and it was well received.



And what was that message that was “well received”? That China could not deal with Soviet influence and the Soviet-backed Vietnam who was free to control China’s friend Cambodia, right under China’s nose? So what message did 1979 sent? Its more like the reverse, that the Soviet and VN can reckt China’s interest in Cambodia, inside China’s own neighborhood, and it continued so for another 10 years.




Lure said:


> Soviets not only failed to protect their ally Vietnam but also couldn't stop China from invading it.



How was it the case that the “Soviet failed to protect their ally VN” when China withdrew within weeks? Vietnam didn’t even need Russian troops to deal with China with such short commitment. Now, answer me, Vietnam troops occupied Cambodia not for weeks, but for 10 years, is this not a more clear case of China “failing to protect its ally”? Or are you going to use the twisted logic that its a failure on the Soviet’s part but not a failure for China???

And fyi, Russian troops were sent to Cam Ranh bay in VN from March 1979, along with strategic weapons such as fighters and bombers.



Lure said:


> So China's aim was humiliate Soviets and it did that.



lol what? China went inside the Soviet-backed VN but withdrew within weeks with a bloody nose while the Soviet-backed VN troops occupied the Chinese-backed Cambodia for *10 years*, but somehow you have managed to twist this as a humiliation for the Soviet but not for China?? lol




Lure said:


> Secondly, until 1990 China made a series of border clashes with Vietnam. Gained territories from that clashes. Even gained territory from the so called "failed" invasion.



Those “territory” are insignificant, and more importantly, that wasn’t the objective for the 1979 conflict. Come on, even no Chinese official source ever claimed that that was the objective. You are clearly trying to find every small excuses to paint China as the victor.




Lure said:


> Thirdly; while China was enjoying integration to World economics and trade, Vietnam was isolated from the entire World until 1990 and had even less allies then today's North Korea. Only Soviets were looking after them economically. But it was a huge burden. An entire country was at a point of economic starvation and Soviet Union was the only caregiver. Of course this resulted a lot of complaints from Soviet officials.



This is not relevant to the 1979 conflict and its objectives. This reminded me of a Chinese member who claimed that China won 1979 conflict because China’s economy and GDP is now better than Vietnam’s. lol. What he said, and what you’ve said, was irrelevent to objective of the 1979 operation. It is as relevent as saying China won the 1979 conflict because China now manage to file patents more than VN.




Lure said:


> Also China protected Chinese minority (Hoa people) in Vietnam. Hoa people lived hell because of Vietnamese regime. They would live a lot worse if China hadn't invaded. When China opened it's border to accept Hoa people, cunning Vietnamese government started to attack Hoa people and triggered an ethnic cleansing.



Ethnic cleansing? First time I’ve heard that lol, now please provide credible source to back that claim. (my bet is that you can’t)




Lure said:


> I don't see a failed China in that conflict. The entire event resulted in larger control of China in SCS, Vietnamese economic development is crippled and isolated from the World, Hoa people are 6th largest minority group in Vietnam and they still exist in there, Soviet Union no longer exist, China gained territory from Vietnamese border, Thailand and Cambodia has very good relations with China and they are thankful for what China did.



lol you are again bringing stuff that were not part of the objective for the 1979 operation to desperately paint China as the victor of that 1979 conflict...Soviet collapse, present day Cambodia on good terms with China, etc. while ignoring the facts of that 1979 era, where Cambodia got occupied and controlled by a Soviet-back country, etc.

You might as well claim China won, the proof is that Yao Ming made a good career in the NBA. Yes, your argument and reasons given are just as valid and relevent to the 1979 conflict.




Lure said:


> You decide who win.



OK, I’m convinced, China clearly won the 1979 conflict because Monster hunt, a Chinese movie, can generate more profit than any Viet movie could.


----------



## Lure

William Hung said:


> Friend, even in 1988, Vietnam still had around 100,000 soldiers in Cambodia, and I don’t mean undercover soldiers, but fully uniformed soldiers with VPA badge stationed in Cambodia.



_To avoid engaging in a debilitating conflict with various local armed resistance groups within the context of international pressure, Vietnam began withdrawing its military forces from Kampuchea as early as 1982. But the withdrawal process lacked international verification, so foreign observers simply dismissed Vietnam’s movement of troops as mere rotations.
_
Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian–Vietnamese_War



William Hung said:


> And what was that message that was “well received”?



_On November 3, 1978, the Soviet Union and Vietnam signed a 25-year mutual defense treaty, which made Vietnam the "linchpin" in the Soviet Union's "drive to contain China." _

Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War

Soviets sign a mutual defence treaty in 1978. China invades Vietnam anyway. Are you really asking me the message China broadcasts to entire World? 



William Hung said:


> Vietnam troops occupied Cambodia not for weeks, but for 10 years, is this not a more clear case of China “failing to protect its ally”? Or are you going to use the twisted logic that its a failure on the Soviet’s part but not a failure for China???





William Hung said:


> lol what? China went inside the Soviet-backed VN but withdrew within weeks with a bloody nose while the Soviet-backed VN troops occupied the Chinese-backed Cambodia for *10 years*, but somehow you have managed to twist this as a humiliation for the Soviet but not for China?? lol



China never signed any mutual defence treaty with Cambodia. What happens when a NATO member is invaded and US doesn nothing? What would be the image of US? That's a binding agreement. China had no such agreements with Cambodia. China simply stated this as a cause for war with Vietnam. Failure of honoring the mutual defence treaty with Vietnam was a disaster for Soviet politics. After such agreements you can't wait for "weeks" to see what happens. You simply react as if your own land is invaded. China saw Soviet bluff and Soviets did nothing. 



William Hung said:


> Those “territory” are insignificant, and more importantly, that wasn’t the objective for the 1979 conflict. Come on, even* no Chinese official source ever claimed that that was the objective*. You are clearly trying to find every small excuses to paint China as the victor.





William Hung said:


> Ethnic cleansing? First time I’ve heard that lol, now please provide credible source to back that claim. (my bet is that you can’t)



_The reason cited for the attack was to *support China's ally, the Khmer Rouge of Cambodia*, in addition to the *mistreatment of Vietnam's ethnic Chinese minority* and the *Vietnamese occupation of the Spratly Islands *which were claimed by China.
_
Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War_
_
China started to control 6 reefs of Spratley Islands during border clashes. 

Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_conflicts_1979–90

_At present, Sino-Vietnamese comprise a small percentage in the modern Vietnamese economy, now mostly Kinh-run, as many Hoa had their businesses and property confiscated by the Communists after 1975, and many fled the country as Vietnamese boat people due to persecution by the new Communist government. Hoa persecution intensified in the late 1970s, which was one of the reasons for the Sino-Vietnamese War._

Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoa_people



William Hung said:


> lol you are again bringing stuff that were not part of the objective for the 1979 operation to desperately paint China as the victor of that 1979 conflict...Soviet collapse, present day Cambodia on good terms with China, etc. while ignoring the facts of that 1979 era, where Cambodia got occupied and controlled by a Soviet-back country, etc.



One doesn't need to fight further if the objectives are fulfilled one way or another. Every objective that China wanted has been realized until 1990. Chinese statesment are running a government, not making a one man show to impress you. If they decided sooner or later Vietnamese Armed Forces will be withdrawn from Cambodia (which it did) then they simply say this is enough. 

They took control of six more reefs of Spratley Islands from Vietnam and Hoa people are still living in Vietnam with dignity. Mission accomplished. 

However your twisted thesis about that "_China couldn't even destroy Vietnam in 1979, how the hell they will win against US_" thesis is still on the table. The war didn't even intend a full scale invasion of Vietnam. I've answered all your questions and you owe me an answer now. How the hell can I estimate the power of Chinese military in 2016, with a brief border clash happened in 1979. Can you enlighten me please?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## T-Rex

Waqas Bajwa said:


> well china is a new emerging state with lot of army and economy,on the other hand US had more enemies then friends and in russia is a great ally of China.


*
The US will back out, it has to if history means anything!*


----------



## The SC

T-Rex said:


> *I believe you but do the western warmongers see it this way? That is the danger!*


If they are insane and too arrogant they will taste the bitterness of war with another superpower..I think they are insane when attacking relatively easy prey, but very lucid, logical, objective, rational and calculating when facing a real threat..


----------



## William Hung

Lure said:


> _To avoid engaging in a debilitating conflict with various local armed resistance groups within the context of international pressure, Vietnam began withdrawing its military forces from Kampuchea as early as 1982. But the withdrawal process lacked international verification, so foreign observers simply dismissed Vietnam’s movement of troops as mere rotations.
> _
> Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian–Vietnamese_War




Nice wikipedia researching. But that wikipedia just supported my point that Vietnam troops occupied Cambodia for another 10 years, 180,000 troops stationed in 1984, and *still* 100,000 troops in *1988*, and it even said that Vietnam still controlled Cambodian politics after 1982. Are you still trying to say that that is not a humiliation for China? And finally, what you have quoted from wikipedia did not say that the *1979 conflict *caused VN to withdraw troops. You are trying to use your own words and attribute it to that wiki quote?




Lure said:


> _On November 3, 1978, the Soviet Union and Vietnam signed a 25-year mutual defense treaty, which made Vietnam the "linchpin" in the Soviet Union's "drive to contain China." _
> 
> Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War
> 
> Soviets sign a mutual defence treaty in 1978. China invades Vietnam anyway. Are you really asking me the message China broadcasts to entire World?



Again, China had to withdraw within *weeks* and Vietnam didn’t even have to withdraw its main force from Cambodia to contront China up north, it only needed to use local militia and local troops to inflict thousands of death on the PLA. VN didn’t even needed its main troops from Cambodia, so what makes you think it needed Soviet troops or intervention? If anything, the message was that China tried to test the Soviet-VN, got a bloody nose, then ran away. Then you are now trying to say its a humiliation for the Soviet but not for China?




Lure said:


> China never signed any mutual defence treaty with Cambodia. What happens when a NATO member is invaded and US doesn nothing? What would be the image of US? That's a binding agreement. China had no such agreements with Cambodia. China simply stated this as a cause for war with Vietnam. Failure of honoring the mutual defence treaty with Vietnam was a disaster for Soviet politics. After such agreements you can't wait for "weeks" to see what happens. You simply react as if your own land is invaded. China saw Soviet bluff and Soviets did nothing.



Again, you are trying to use your twisted logic. Vietnam didn’t require or asked for Soviet intervention/troops yet, even its local militia and troops could handle against the PLA, the PLA withdrew within a matter of weeks, and somehow you have twisted it as a failure and humiliation for the Soviet but not for China? China didn’t have a formal MDT with Cambodia, but saying that Cambodia is a cause for the conflict is enough. And VN continued to stationed troops in Cambodia for another *10 years* and controlled its politics, with 100,000 Viet troops still stationed as late as 1988. But you are still desperate to use the twisted logic that it was the Soviet that failed or got humilitaed and not China! lol



Lure said:


> _The reason cited for the attack was to *support China's ally, the Khmer Rouge of Cambodia*, in addition to the *mistreatment of Vietnam's ethnic Chinese minority* and the *Vietnamese occupation of the Spratly Islands *which were claimed by China.
> _
> Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War_
> _
> China started to control 6 reefs of Spratley Islands during border clashes.
> 
> Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_conflicts_1979–90
> 
> _At present, Sino-Vietnamese comprise a small percentage in the modern Vietnamese economy, now mostly Kinh-run, as many Hoa had their businesses and property confiscated by the Communists after 1975, and many fled the country as Vietnamese boat people due to persecution by the new Communist government. Hoa persecution intensified in the late 1970s, which was one of the reasons for the Sino-Vietnamese War._
> 
> Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoa_people



And China’s support for its friend the Khmer Rouge is a total failure, they got booted out by the Soviet-backed VN and never came back, even until now.

Spratly Islands was one of the objective for the 1979 conflict? lolwat? First time I have ever heard that! Site some credible sources please!

Also, I am still waiting for you to provide credible sources for your claims about Hoa ethnic cleansing in Vietnam! Please do so.

I can go on with your reasoning. Either you are being desperate or dishonest here. Can you provide credible source to back your claims even just for the 2 points above, the Spratlys as a 1979 objective and the ethnic cleansing? Please do so if you want to have credential.



Lure said:


> One doesn't need to fight further if the objectives are fulfilled one way or another. Every objective that China wanted has been realized until 1990. Chinese statesment are running a government, not making a one man show to impress you. If they decided sooner or later Vietnamese Armed Forces will be withdrawn from Cambodia (which it did) then they simply say this is enough.



One doesn't need to fight further if the objectives are fulfilled one way or another? So the objective of supporting the Khmer Rouge was fullfilled, really? Even your desperate attempt to use a wikipedia quote said VN started to withdrew some troops in 1982, that’s years late after the PLA withdrew with *weeks* in early *1979*, so how on earth does it make sense for you to reoly that “One doesn't need to fight further if the objectives are fulfilled one way or another”???? That is what you call twisted logic, or time travelling.




Lure said:


> However your twisted thesis about that "_China couldn't even destroy Vietnam in 1979, how the hell they will win against US_" thesis is still on the table. The war didn't even intend a full scale invasion of Vietnam. I've answered all your questions and you owe me an answer now. How the hell can I estimate the power of Chinese military in 2016, with a brief border clash happened in 1979. Can you enlighten me please?



Why are you trying to quote me as saying "_*China couldn't even destroy Vietnam in 1979*, how the hell they will win against US_"??? I didn’t say that so dont put words in my mouth. And all you have shown are twisted logic and unverified/unsupported bold claims, like the ethnic cleansing.


----------



## BoQ77

beijingwalker said:


> *A war with China in 2025 would be bloody and unwinnable*
> 2016-8
> A top defense strategy think tank recently released a report hat looks at the implications of a possible war between the US and China.
> 
> The news is almost universally bad, but the assessment of a full-scale war between the US and China in 2025 paints a dire picture of the aftermath of a conflict between the world’s two biggest superpowers.
> 
> While a war today would be costly for the US, China’s increasing anti-access, area denial arsenal as well as its growing carrier capability and aircraft strength could make it impossible for the US to establish military dominance and achieve a decisive victory in 2025, the report by the RAND Corporation says.
> 
> “Premeditated war between the United States and China is very unlikely, but the danger that a mishandled crisis could trigger hostilities cannot be ignored,” RAND says. “Technological advances in the ability to target opposing forces are creating conditions of conventional counterforce, whereby each side has the means to strike and degrade the other’s forces and, therefore, an incentive to do so promptly, if not first.”
> 
> Instead, the two sides would fight until its home populations got fed up and demanded an end to hostilities, something that may not happen until the body counts get too high to stomach.
> 
> RAND declined to state a number of expected casualties in any potential war, but it estimated the loss of multiple carriers and other capital platforms for each side. Nimitz-class carriers carry approximately 6,000 sailors and Marines on a cruise. The loss of a single ship would represent a greater loss of life and combat power than all losses in the Iraq War.
> 
> The study predicts a stunning display of technological might on both sides, which isn’t surprising considering what each country has in the field and in the works. The paper doesn’t name specific weapon systems, but it predicts that fifth-generation fighters will be able to shoot down fourth-generation fighters with near impunity.
> 
> The US recently fielded its second fifth-generation fighter, the F-35 Lightning II. America’s other advanced fighter, the F-22 Raptor, has been in service since 2005. China is developing four fifth-generation fighters — the J-20; the J-32; the J-23; and the J-25.
> 
> The J-20 and J-32 will likely be in the field in 2025 and would potentially rival America’s fighters.
> 
> By 2025, China could have two more aircraft carriers for a total of three. It currently owns one functional carrier purchased from Russia and is manufacturing a second.
> 
> Despite America’s greater numbers of both fifth-generation fighters and total aircraft carriers, China’s growing missile arsenal would force America to act cautiously or risk unsustainable losses, RAND argues.
> 
> Outside of the conventional war, cyber attacks, anti-satellite warfare, and trade disruptions would hurt both countries.
> 
> Both belligerents have anti-satellite weapons that are nearly invulnerable to attack, meaning that both countries will be able to destroy a substantial portion of each other’s satellites. The destruction of the American satellite constellation would be especially problematic for the rest of the world since nearly all GPS units connect to American satellites.
> 
> Cyber attacks would cripple vulnerable grids on both sides of the Pacific, likely including many of the computer servers that maintain public utilities and crucial services like hospitals.
> 
> Trade disruptions would damage both countries, but China would be affected to a much greater extent, RAND says.
> 
> A lot of American commerce passes through the Pacific, but China does a whopping 95 percent of its trade there and is more reliant on trade than the US. For China, any large Pacific conflict would be very expensive at home.
> 
> While it’s very unlikely that China could win a war with the US, RAND says the fighting would be so bloody and costly for both sides that even average Americans would suffer greatly. Service members and their families would have it the worst.
> 
> “By 2025, US losses could range from significant to heavy; Chinese losses, while still very heavy, could be somewhat less than in 2015, owing to increased degradation of US strike capabilities,” RAND says. “China’s [anti-access weapons] will make it increasingly difficult for the US to gain military-operational dominance and victory, even in a long war.”
> 
> There are two pieces of good news. First, leaders on both sides are hesitant to go to war. Even better, RAND’s assessment says that neither country is likely to risk nuclear retaliation by firing first, so the war would likely remain a conventional affair.
> 
> The bad news is that increasing tension could trigger an accidental war despite political leaders best intentions. RAND recommends that leaders set clear limits on military actions in the Pacific and establish open lines of dialogue.
> 
> The American and Chinese military do participate in some exercises together. The Chinese hospital ship Peace Ark and the Chinese frigate Hengshui took part in the Rim of the Pacific exercise, but continued Chinese espionage against America and reported cyber attacks prevent a happy relationship.
> 
> Hopefully the US and China can come to friendly terms because a war tomorrow would be catastrophic and a war in 10 years could be crippling for everyone involved.
> http://www.businessinsider.com/china-war-2025-bloody-unwinnable-2016-8



According to the report, until 2025, China still depends on the coastal missiles for Anti Access.
Someone said wrong things about the war.

War is losses, damages ... so several shotdown aircrafts, some sunken aircraft carriers are predictable.
But who reach the purpose is the winner. The full scale conventional war would be more lethal.

The Korean war was more bloody, despite the poor armament.

Vietnam didn't consider their advancing to Cambodia as invasion.
If you consider that an ongoing invasion, you are wrong. Actually, Vietnam occupied and protected entire of Cambodia territory from Khmer Rouge as early as 1980-1981.
After 1981, or 1982-1988 Khmer Rouge operates in Thailand territory as Thailand was requested by China and USA to accommodate Khmer Rouge after they were swept out of Cambodia
Khmer Rouge sometimes reenter Cambodia territory for raids. That causes the counter strikes and clashes in Thai territory. Thailand should feel sorry about their accommodation giving to Khmer Rouge, as nowaday the whole world opposed Khmer Rouge.

The facts tell us that, "de facto invasion stopped in 1982" is totally meaningless.
In the point of view from nowaday Cambodia govt, they also don't call that an invasion, but liberation from Khmer Rouge regime.
I don't know where my Turk friend get his idea from.
How are you?



Lure said:


> De Facto invasion stopped as early as 1982 and Chinese invasion had a huge impact on this. De jure invasion stopped in 1990.
> 
> After Sino-Soviet split main Soviet hypothesis was, China would eventually fail as a state since it was very vulnerable without Soviet help. However China proved that not only it can function on it's own, it can also cross Soviet Union when their interest conflicts. During the invasion bulk of the Chinese army was waiting in the Soviet border, not invading Vietnam. Clearly the message was to Soviets and it was well received. Soviets not only failed to protect their ally Vietnam but also couldn't stop China from invading it.
> 
> So China's aim was humiliate Soviets and it did that.
> 
> But as I've said in my previous message, Soviets and China had a lot of positive implications to politics. It's a sad part of history seeing them fight eachother.
> 
> Secondly, until 1990 China made a series of border clashes with Vietnam. Gained territories from that clashes. Even gained territory from the so called "failed" invasion.
> 
> Thirdly; while China was enjoying integration to World economics and trade, Vietnam was isolated from the entire World until 1990 and had even less allies then today's North Korea. Only Soviets were looking after them economically. But it was a huge burden. An entire country was at a point of economic starvation and Soviet Union was the only caregiver. Of course this resulted a lot of complaints from Soviet officials.
> 
> Also China protected Chinese minority (Hoa people) in Vietnam. Hoa people lived hell because of Vietnamese regime. They would live a lot worse if China hadn't invaded. When China opened it's border to accept Hoa people, cunning Vietnamese government started to attack Hoa people and triggered an ethnic cleansing.
> 
> I don't see a failed China in that conflict. The entire event resulted in larger control of China in SCS, Vietnamese economic development is crippled and isolated from the World, Hoa people are 6th largest minority group in Vietnam and they still exist in there, Soviet Union no longer exist, China gained territory from Vietnamese border, Thailand and Cambodia has very good relations with China and they are thankful for what China did.
> 
> You decide who win.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

Sinopakfriend said:


> I have said it many times before...the monentum of Life is with China. The Toa is with China. Only those with wisdom can truly understand this Fact.
> 
> @Kiss_of_the_Dragon @beijingwalker @Chinese-Dragon @TaiShang @T-Rex friends instead of reacting to these Pschyological Warefare articles and reports...*why do not you come up with scenarios in which this wishful attack on China can happen.*



The scenario in which this wishful attack on China can be happen is when China become gradually weak like during Chin Dynasty that will give US to harmlessly attack China but when China is strong, everyone is trying to avoid the collision course. In 2025 China will be capable to bring war to US's homeland by placing weapons on space directly over US head, this will nullify US advantage to have such bases in Asia and used proxies like India or JP.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lure

@William Hung

I really don't have time to go on this. You don't even properly read and process what I've written and go on telling same things over and over again. Go on and believe Your alternative history.

You think wikipedia links not good enough for you? Bring some books or high quality publications to falsify them. Hack even go the extra mile and make corrections on wikipedia so that mortals like us can access true information.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Brainsucker

Blue Marlin said:


> aren't we all forgetting the next gen of warfare? proxys.



This is what I think would happen if US and China are enrage to each other. Whoever win the battle, it is the Philippine, Vietnam, and Japan who will suffer. Because that's the only way they prevent a nuclear war. They will choose these three countries as the proxy, the meat shield.

So let see how the war will happen. This is just the example

China strike Vietnam, US will come to defend Vietnam. Vietnam will become the battlefield. But China and US will still continue their trade relation. The likely scenario is, because Viets are fierce, China will retreat. US got prestige because they can defend the Viets, China get humiliated because they lose, but Vietnam will flattened to the land. Because the battle will happen in their land.

Well, it's bad for China, but worst to Vietnam. Do you like the result, my Vietnamese Friends? Do you want the war soo much? This the fate of Vietnam people here, not an empty pride.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

Lure said:


> De Facto invasion stopped as early as 1982 and Chinese invasion had a huge impact on this. De jure invasion stopped in 1990.
> 
> After Sino-Soviet split main Soviet hypothesis was, China would eventually fail as a state since it was very vulnerable without Soviet help. However China proved that not only it can function on it's own, it can also cross Soviet Union when their interest conflicts. During the invasion bulk of the Chinese army was waiting in the Soviet border, not invading Vietnam. Clearly the message was to Soviets and it was well received. Soviets not only failed to protect their ally Vietnam but also couldn't stop China from invading it.
> 
> So China's aim was humiliate Soviets and it did that.
> 
> But as I've said in my previous message, Soviets and China had a lot of positive implications to politics. It's a sad part of history seeing them fight eachother.
> 
> Secondly, until 1990 China made a series of border clashes with Vietnam. Gained territories from that clashes. Even gained territory from the so called "failed" invasion.
> 
> Thirdly; while China was enjoying integration to World economics and trade, Vietnam was isolated from the entire World until 1990 and had even less allies then today's North Korea. Only Soviets were looking after them economically. But it was a huge burden. An entire country was at a point of economic starvation and Soviet Union was the only caregiver. Of course this resulted a lot of complaints from Soviet officials.
> 
> Also China protected Chinese minority (Hoa people) in Vietnam. Hoa people lived hell because of Vietnamese regime. They would live a lot worse if China hadn't invaded. When China opened it's border to accept Hoa people, cunning Vietnamese government started to attack Hoa people and triggered an ethnic cleansing.
> 
> I don't see a failed China in that conflict. The entire event resulted in larger control of China in SCS, Vietnamese economic development is crippled and isolated from the World, Hoa people are 6th largest minority group in Vietnam and they still exist in there, Soviet Union no longer exist, China gained territory from Vietnamese border, Thailand and Cambodia has very good relations with China and they are thankful for what China did.
> 
> You decide who win.



Man you know more China than me, one thing I would like to add it's by slapping Vietnam in 1979 has indirectly earned western trust and opened up more for China and consequently this has made China a second economy power of the world as today...which it's not bad at all



William Hung said:


> Again, China had to withdraw within *weeks* and Vietnam didn’t even have to withdraw its main force from Cambodia to contront China up north, it only needed to use local militia and local troops to inflict thousands of death on the PLA. VN didn’t even needed its main troops from Cambodia, so what makes you think it needed Soviet troops or intervention? If anything, the message was that China tried to test the Soviet-VN, got a bloody nose, then ran away. Then you are now trying to say its a humiliation for the Soviet but not for China?



After giving Vietnam a bloody noise, Deng flown to US for rodeo shown, what's China humiliation you're talking . And for Soviet, when they couldn't come to rescue Vietnam, this has sent a strong message all Warsaw pack allies that Soviet was not a serious as communist leader and when these eastern European countries saw China economy was booming, this has gave them great envy to tilt toward the west...and you know the rest of the story.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## BoQ77

China is the king of twisting the history. 
PLA suffered a bloody nose and must retreat after less than 1 month,
vietnam pull back from Cambodia after 10 years.

China spent several years to create a Pol Pot who was swept from Phnompeng by Vietnam after 1 week.
Vietnam gifted Cambodia a new govt. that lasts until today.

Without Vietnam, King Sihanouk cant return to power.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

BoQ77 said:


> China is the king of twisting the history.
> 
> China gave Cambodia a Pol Pot.
> Vietnam gave Cambodia a Hun Sen.



And...Hun Sen is on our side now


----------



## Brainsucker

BoQ77 said:


> China is the king of twisting the history.
> 
> China gave Cambodia a Pol Pot.
> Vietnam gave Cambodia a Hun Sen.



This is not true. It's not Pol-Pot that China see / respected. It was the Cambodian king himself, King Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia that considered as China's friend. Pol-Pot was only influence his faction, but Norodom Sihanouk influence all Cambodia people, as he was their king; their head of state.

You should seek Norodom Sihanouk's book. He wrote about what he saw in China. His close relationship with the CCP high command; including Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping, etc are the proof that it is him that China respected, not Pol-Pot.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## William Hung

Lure said:


> @William Hung
> 
> I really don't have time to go on this. You don't even properly read and process what I've written and go on telling same things over and over again. Go on and believe Your alternative history.
> 
> You think wikipedia links not good enough for you? Bring some books or high quality publications to falsify them. Hack even go the extra mile and make corrections on wikipedia so that mortals like us can access true information.



I must admit, no matter what your views, you’re always polite and I haven’t seen you troll. However, you have made some very bold claims, even some serious abhorent allegation such as an ethnic cleansing in Vietnam, which you still cannot provide any credible sources for that claim. The wikipedia quotes you provided didn’t even mention it. I even doubt any Chinese official source went as far as claiming an ethnic cleansing in Vietnam. 

No, wikipedia links aren’t good enough. It doesn’t necessarily mean your quotes are wrong, and it could be that itself had quoted from credible source, but it is commonly accepted that wikipedia articles in general can be questionable due to its open policy for editing and you would need to provide other credible sources.

And finally, I have previously provided plenty of academic sources for this Sino-Viet war debate, it is still there in my post history, you’re not the first person to argue about it. Also, you have been the one who have made claims (ethnic cleansing, 1979 caused VN to withdraw, etc.) so the onus is on you to provide your sources. Posting quotes from wikipedia and think you have made your case is inadequate. We can end the debate here, but dont try to spin things around.


----------



## BoQ77

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> And...Hun Sen is on our side now



That is your wishful thinking. Cambodia is harmless to ASEAN.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

BoQ77 said:


> That is your wishful thinking. Cambodia is harmless to ASEAN.



I didn't said otherwise, I just said he's on our side such SCS issue

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brainsucker

BoQ77 said:


> China is the king of twisting the history.
> PLA suffered a bloody nose and must retreat after less than 1 month,
> vietnam pull back from Cambodia after 10 years.
> 
> China spent several years to create a Pol Pot who was swept from Phnompeng by Vietnam after 1 week.
> Vietnam gifted Cambodia a new govt. that lasts until today.
> 
> Without Vietnam, King Sihanouk cant return to power.



This is also wrong. After the invasion of Vietnam, Sihanouk lead a Cambodian resistant faction to kick Vietnam out of Cambodia. His faction was called FUNCIPEC. Also he joined force with Khmer Rouge; Khmer People National Liberation Front (KPNLF). So basically, Vietnam wasn't save Cambodian people. They occupy the country. You are the aggressor, not their savior. And they hate you to an extent that FUNCIPEC, KPNLF, and rouge united to fight for their independent.


----------



## hoangsa74

This is why the U.S will not wait until 2025 to confront China. By that time, China will be too strong for the U.S. War will happen before 2025 even if China do not want to fight the U.S, the U.S will force China into attacking the U.S so the U.S can obliterate China. The U.S have already baited China 5 times but China is just too afraid and back down. China will be in the same situation like the Japanese prior to Pearl Harbor even if China does not want to. China will be eradicated from the Spratlys, Paracels, Scarborough, and even Hainan island. The U.S will proceed this war full scale so China won't have a chance and return to make trouble in SCS.


----------



## William Hung

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Man you know more China than me, one thing I would like to add it's by slapping Vietnam in 1979 has indirectly earned western trust and opened up more for China and consequently this has made China a second economy power of the world as today...which it's not bad at all
> 
> 
> 
> After giving Vietnam a bloody noise, Deng flown to US for rodeo shown, what's China humiliation you're talking . And for Soviet, when they couldn't come to rescue Vietnam, this has sent a strong message all Warsaw pack allies that Soviet was not a serious as communist leader and when these eastern European countries saw China economy was booming, this has gave them great envy to tilt toward the west...and you know the rest of the story.



Don’t you mean, China became a turncoat, tried to test the Soviet-Vietnam, got a bloody nose, and became a lackey to the US/west. Look at these photos, CCP leaders picking up food for the leaders from the US/west. It is disgraceful, a true display of being a lackey. I dont think you will ever find pictures of leaders from Vietnam, Philippines, Japan, etc. picking up food for these folks.


----------



## hoangsa74

hoangsa74 said:


> This is why the U.S will not wait until 2025 to confront China. By that time, China will be too strong for the U.S. War will happen before 2025 even if China do not want to fight the U.S, the U.S will force China into attacking the U.S so the U.S can obliterate China. The U.S have already baited China 5 times but China is just too afraid and back down. China will be in the same situation like the Japanese prior to Pearl Harbor even if China does not want to. China will be eradicated from the Spratlys, Paracels, Scarborough, and even Hainan island. The U.S will proceed this war full scale so China won't have a chance and return to make trouble in SCS. The U.S will make its allies Japan, Korea, Australia, Phillipines to join this war even if they don't want to; they still hold a stake in this conflict


----------



## BoQ77

Brainsucker said:


> This is also wrong. After the invasion of Vietnam, Sihanouk lead a Cambodian resistant faction to kick Vietnam out of Cambodia. His faction was called FUNCIPEC. Also he joined force with Khmer Rouge and call their resistance as Khmer People National Liberation Front (KPNLF). So basically, Vietnam wasn't save Cambodian people. They occupy the country. You are the aggressor, not their savior. And they hate you to an extent to build a resistance army to kick you out of their country.



I didnt say that Vietnam bring King Sinanouk back to throne. 
Let say Vietnam throw Khmer Rouge out of power, give benefit to King Sihanouk.
Before the Vietnam intervene, the King has no chance with Khmer Rouge


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

William Hung said:


> Don’t you mean, China became a turncoat, tried to test the Soviet-Vietnam, got a bloody nose, and became a lackey to the US/west. Look at these photos, CCP leaders picking up food for the leaders from the US/west. It is disgraceful, a true display of being a lackey. I dont think you will ever find pictures of leaders from Vietnam, Philippines, Japan, etc. picking up food for these folks.



That's our tradition since immortal time that we pick up food for our guests to show our hospitality, after millennium as tributary state of China, you Viets should have known that

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Brainsucker

BoQ77 said:


> I didnt say that Vietnam bring King Sinanouk back to throne.
> Let say Vietnam throw Khmer Rouge out of power, give benefit to King Sihanouk.
> Before the Vietnam intervene, the King has no chance with Khmer Rouge



That's I can't argue. But it's not Vietnam's intention to help him.

Hun Sen is not under the grasp of Vietnam. He is an opportunist. In 1985 he betrayed Vietnam by established a relation with CGDK (the alliance between FUNCINPEC, KPNLF, and Rouge. Then in 1995 he did coup de'etat against the government (after they kick out Vietnam from Cambodia). He was the wild ball in Cambodia at that time.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## William Hung

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> That's our tradition since immortal time that we pick up food for our guests to show our hospitality, after millennium as tributary state of China, you Viets should have known that



I know that tradition, it means picking up food for your daddy. You will never see other Asian leaders displaying such a disgraceful act.


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

hoangsa74 said:


> This is why the U.S will not wait until 2025 to confront China. By that time, China will be too strong for the U.S. War will happen before 2025 even if China do not want to fight the U.S, the U.S will force China into attacking the U.S so the U.S can obliterate China. The U.S have already baited China 5 times but China is just too afraid and back down. China will be in the same situation like the Japanese prior to Pearl Harbor even if China does not want to. China will be eradicated from the Spratlys, Paracels, Scarborough, and even Hainan island. The U.S will proceed this war full scale so China won't have a chance and return to make trouble in SCS.



You Viets are dreaming ...sure US has made provocative moves but they didn't dare to cross the red line and send their generals, rear Admiral to China to cool down the heat . But we will baited Vietnam to attack China and we will confiscate by force all islands and reefs stolen by Vietnam as 1988

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Brainsucker

William Hung said:


> I know that tradition, it means picking up food for your daddy. You will never see other Asian leaders displaying such a disgraceful act.



Nope, it's picking up food for a buddy; brothers; etc. It is a symbol that you care to the person that you picking up food into. A hospitality to our friend.


----------



## BoQ77

Brainsucker said:


> Hun Sen is not under the grasp of Vietnam. He is an opportunist. In 1985 he betrayed Vietnam by established a relation with CGDK (the alliance between FUNCINPEC, KPNLF, and Rouge. Then in 1995 he did coup de'etat against the government (after they kick out Vietnam from Cambodia). He was the wild ball in Cambodia at that time.



That's Cambodia internal affair. Don't call him as betray or anything else.
Vietnam did a good job, to remove Khmer Rouge from power and establish a good enough govt to keep them away. 
I must tell you "Vietnam support is much better than what US doing in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan" or "what China "helped" Cambodia with Khmer Rouge"
and benefit for Cambodian people.


----------



## William Hung

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> You Viets are dreaming ...sure US has made provocative moves but they didn't dare to cross the red line and send their generals, rear Admiral to China to cool down the heat . But we will baited Vietnam to attack China and we will confiscate by force *all islands and reefs* stolen by Vietnam as 1988



You confiscated *ALL* islands and reefs from VN? Then what is this map showing? This is the reality of which Islands/reefs are currently being occupied:






You folks are so delusional and out of touch with reality its no longer worth my time. Have a good day.



Brainsucker said:


> Nope, it's picking up food for a buddy; brothers; etc. It is a symbol that you care to the person that you picking up food into. A hospitality to our friend.



Lol you know what that embarassing gesture is for a leader to be doing. You are now all in delusional and denial mode.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

William Hung said:


> I know that tradition, it means picking up food for your daddy. You will never see other Asian leaders displaying such a disgraceful act.



Pick up food for someone is not begging for food from someone, there is nothing to be shame about that , Chinese leaders had shown themselves as wise men by doing that (礼贤下士)



William Hung said:


> You confiscated *ALL* islands and reefs from VN? Then what is this map showing? This is the reality of which Islands/reefs are currently being occupied:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You folks are so delusional and out of touch with reality its no longer worth my time. Have a good day.
> .



Read over again of what I wrote

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## William Hung

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Pick up food for someone is not begging for food from someone, there is nothing to be shame about that , Chinese leaders had shown themselves as wise men by doing that (礼贤下士)
> 
> 
> 
> Read over again of what I wrote



Yeah, you wrote confiscate all islands/reefs...*as in 1988*. And we are still occupying +20 islands/reefs while all you could do is start dreaming and talking of how to take it back. Maybe you need to “talk less and do more” like you folks had always preached about?


----------



## Kiss_of_the_Dragon

William Hung said:


> Yeah, you wrote confiscate all islands/reefs...*as in 1988*. And we are still occupying +20 islands/reefs while all you could do is start dreaming and talking of how to take it back. Maybe you need to “talk less and do more” like you folks had always preached about?



Wrong again , I was replying to @hoangsa74 that we will bait Vietnam to attack China and we will confiscate all reef and island stolen as we did in 1988


----------



## William Hung

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> Wrong again , I was replying to @hoangsa74 that we will bait Vietnam to attack China and we will confiscate all reef and island stolen as we did in 1988



Yeah okay, then the Viet troops shall sit and wait while you can keep dreaming and talking how you will get it back.

BTW, just realized how off-topic this thread has become. It was supposed to be about China challenging the US military but somehow we ended up talking about CCP leaders picking up food for US leaders and the dream about how China can take, what it deemed as stolen, islands and reefs from a small country like Vietnam.

As said a while ago, I should stop wasting my time, or yours. Have a good day.


----------



## BoQ77

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> I didn't said otherwise, I just said he's on our side such SCS issue



Hun Sen oppose the engagement of ASEAN to SCS issue, as Cambodia isn't claimant.
No matter you could consider there're 60 countries including Cambodia to your side.
Any country could express their thinking. Just like Japan, US, India, Australia opposed China's movement

But, in my opinion, Hun Sen never said that Cambodia sides with China to oppose their neighbors


----------



## T-Rex

The SC said:


> If they are insane and too arrogant they will taste the bitterness of war with another superpower..I think they are insane when attacking relatively easy prey, but very lucid, logical, objective, rational and calculating when facing a real threat..


*
In other words the US is mighty strong against weak nations but like a pussy when faced with an equally formidable foe. This is always the nature of the vultures.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Mangus Ortus Novem

Kiss_of_the_Dragon said:


> You Viets are dreaming ...sure US has made provocative moves but they didn't dare to cross the red line and send their generals, rear Admiral to China to cool down the heat . But we will baited Vietnam to attack China and we will confiscate by force all islands and reefs stolen by Vietnam as 1988



My brother, many people forget that there was originally an 11 dash line. China in a gesture of friendship gave two dashes to Vietnaam. But they returned the favour in a wrong way.

Now China will never give away any of the dashes away. Might be time to claim back the gifted two dashes back.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BoQ77

Sinopakfriend said:


> My brother, many people forget that there was originally an 11 dash line. China in a gesture of friendship gave two dashes to Vietnaam. But they returned the favour in a wrong way.
> 
> Now China will never give away any of the dashes away. Might be time to claim back the gifted two dashes back.



Poor knowledge


----------

