What's new

A harder US line? Potential Pentagon chief floated idea to sink China fleet in 72 hours

Yeah.just a single way...and they already took away Vladivostok aka Manchurian lands for good :lol:

So whats wrong wt "mighty "CN ?? u have too much land, so everyone can come and take some pieces ??

yeah they took it away 150 years ago when Vietnamese were still wearing rice cone hats, while we took our islands back from Vietnamese illegals in 1980's and there's still nothing you can do about it.
Whilst china has advanced militarily there is no doubt......its indigenous systems have not been battle tested.

Whilst i doubt USN has the capacity to eliminate all PLAN assets in 72 hours.... i also have doubt that PLAN would really be able to put up that much of a fight before being overwhelmed.

There will be some casualties for USN but they will win comprehensively. China is not there yet to challenge USN.

However this is all mute.....china is not going to risk everything for tiny taiwan. Eventually taiwan will rejoin china.....there really is no need for a war over something so insignificant.

its the opposite. Practice doesn't make perfect, practice makes permanent. Practicing against the weak makes you weaker against the strong.

Imagine a 18 year old school bully that only beats up 8 year olds. He then looks at a 18 year old nerd, and thinks - I've beat up so many 8 year olds, this guy isn't all that tough. I'll just pick him up and throw him on the ground like I do to the 8 year olds.

the problem is that the 18 year old the bully goes after, is actually from the slums, grew up around hardcore drugs, was involved in gang fights, and only looks like a nerd because he is trying to turn his life around by studying.
 
.
impressive, I could only wonder what the US have in secret.

if china is good the US is always better.
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

China keeping a lot more secret.
Look at DF100, I and many others keeping track had no clue until China sprung it out in China National Day parade last year, with hypersonic drones and other weapon systems.

China hardly revealed anything. Even and especially successful tests.

DF21 tested and sank YuanWang 4 in 2010 and China did not even claimed that.

The holes DF21 made in desert floor not claimed by China. Some sharp eyed Argentinian spotted that on Google Earth and revealed to the world and yet China said nothing.

Unlike Murica always shouting how mighty and how powerful they are and how they can sink china fleet in 72 hours.

Murica should go and try that once and for all.

Just remember Murica won only 3 wars since WW2, against Nicaragua, Panama and Grenada.
And even though Murica fought against sheep and goat herders in Afghan and Somalia and Iraq and with fire power 100 to 10,000 times greater, Murica lost and lost and lost.

Murica would not have won WW2 but for Zhukov killing the vast bulk of Werhmacht and miltary machinery
leaving Muricans to take on the German invalids on D Day

DDay operations not even 10% of Operation Bagration.
D Day took on 3 to 4 German Division that consisted of the German invalids send from Russia to R & R. And even so, Muricans and Brits had such a hard and difficult time doing that.

Where Soviet Union destroyed 28 of 34 divisions of Army Group Centre and completely shattered the German front line. It was the biggest defeat in German military history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Bagration


1605582642422.png


EVEN WHEN CHINESE GOT JUST SINGLE SHOT BOLT ACTION RIFLES LIKE IN THE KOREAN WAR, THEY CHASED THE FUCKING AMERICANS AND THE 5 EYES AND THE REST OF THE WORLD WITH AMERICA FROM YALU RIVER TO SOUTH OF THE PARALLEL IN UNDER 3 WEEKS WITH THE ANGMOHS SHITTING DOWN THEIR PANTS.


America forgot about WW2 where China with barely any arms from USA and with single shot bolt rifles and swords and bare hands fought and killed 3,000,000 Japanese invaders?

And USA needed no less than aircraft carriers and battleships and planes and artilleries and automatic rifles to kill 300,000 Japs in the Pacific?

And remember that China in WW2 with single shot bolt rifles and 5 bullets to a rifle were the best armed half of the force. And with swords and bare bodies with explosive strapped to them took on and killed 3,000,000 japanese soldiers.

And USA needed no less than aircraft carriers and battleships and planes and artilleries and automatic rifles to kill 300,000 Japs in the Pacific?





1604839012122.png






1604839027807.png






1604839128293.png







"dare to die corps" http://forlornhopesui.blogspot.com/2015/08/dare-to-die-corps.html

1604839061216.png






Chinese suicide bomber putting on an explosive vest made out of Model 24 hand grenades to use in an attack on Japanese tanks.


The battle involved a Japanese plan to conquer Xuzhou, a major city in the East. However, the Japanese failed to consider the plans of generals Li Zongren and Bai Chongxi, who planned to encircle the Japanese in the town of Tai'erzhuang. The Japanese operation started on 24 March. Overconfidence led the Japanese commanders to overlook the thousands of inconspicuous "farmers" in the area, who were affiliated with Li Zongren and cut communication lines and supplies, diverted streams, and ruined rail lines. By late March, supplies and fuels were being dropped from airplanes to Japanese troops, but the quantities were insufficient.
On 29 March 1938, a small band of Japanese soldiers tunneled under Tai'erzhuang's walls in an attempt to take the city from within. They were caught by the Nationalist defenders and killed. Over the next week, both sides claimed to hold parts of the city and surrounding area, and many were killed in small arms battles.
Finally, the Japanese attacked frontally, failing to consider the greater Chinese numbers. A major encirclement on 6 April, with Chinese reinforcements, preceded a major Japanese defeat and retreat, which the Chinese failed to capitalize upon fully through pursuit due to a lack of mobility.
The Chinese captured 719 Japanese soldiers and large quantities of military supplies, including 31 pieces of artillery, 11 armored cars, 8 armored fighting vehicles, 1,000 machine guns and 10,000 rifles.
A "dare to die corps" was effectively used against Japanese units.
Chinese suicide bomber putting on an explosive vest made out of Model 24 hand grenades to use in an attack on Japanese tanks
Due to lack of anti-armor weaponry, Suicide bombing was also used against the Japanese. Chinese troops strapped explosives like grenade packs or dynamite to their bodies and threw themselves under Japanese tanks to blow them up. Dynamite and grenades were strapped on by Chinese troops who rushed at Japanese tanks and blew themselves up. During one incident at Taierzhuang, Chinese suicide bombers obliterated four Japanese tanks with grenade bundles.
Amid the celebrations of the victory in Hankow and other Chinese cities, Japan tried to deny and ridiculed the reports of the battle for days. It was reported in the world's newspapers, however, and by mid-April had provoked a Cabinet crisis in Tokyo.
The Chinese scored a major victory, the first of the Nationalist alliance in the war. The battle broke the myth of Japanese military invincibility and resulted in an incalculable benefit to Chinese morale.


Japanese learned kamikaze attacks from what the Chinese did to them in China.

And now China weapons are more powerful and reach further and more accurate than that of USA AND ALL HER ALLIES RUNNING DOGS.
And China got much more of those weapons than USA hope to have

Or Korean War where China with single shot bolt action rifles drove USA and all her allies when USA firepower 100 times greater than China and fighting with automatic weapons and artillery and battleships with 16 inch guns .

The military might and strength of USA with heavy artillery and planes and tanks and battleships with 16 inch guns cannot be resisted by China with economy slightly out of stone age and with single shot bolt action rifles. Bolt operated rifles were just one stage above using muzzle loading muskets and black powder.

That Chinese be slaughtered and turned into red pulp should they dare to fight good old Dugout in Korea.

Chinese whacked USA and the UN combined that they had to flee south of the Parallel as demanded by China.Chinese fought with bolt operated rifles against Ma Dueces , automatic weapons and artillery and tanks and planes and chopters and battleships with 16″ guns.

Go read the book by David Halberstam

The Coldest Winter





main-qimg-76ba0450b51799a9dcc51e4a9e9faf5a








Look on the front line at 24 Nov 1950 and the front line of 16 Dec 1950.




main-qimg-f101c7f9b3e6b53ead4cb3a8b4210040
 
Last edited:
.
yeah they took it away 150 years ago when Vietnamese were still wearing rice cone hats, while we took our islands back from Vietnamese illegals in 1980's and there's still nothing you can do about it.


its the opposite. Practice doesn't make perfect, practice makes permanent. Practicing against the weak makes you weaker against the strong.

Imagine a 18 year old school bully that only beats up 8 year olds. He then looks at a 18 year old nerd, and thinks - I've beat up so many 8 year olds, this guy isn't all that tough. I'll just pick him up and throw him on the ground like I do to the 8 year olds.

the problem is that the 18 year old the bully goes after, is actually from the slums, grew up around hardcore drugs, was involved in gang fights, and only looks like a nerd because he is trying to turn his life around by studying.
I just guess that when CN is busy in fighting wt US, Russia may annex more CN lands like they took Manchurian lands .

So, lets see if CN lose more Manchurian lands when focus on fighting wt US :cool:
 
. .
:sarcastic: :sarcastic: :sarcastic:
Waging a war inside China backyard today?
Two USN Aircraft Carriers later and USA has already lost the war and as usual.
All it takes is 4 direct missile hits which is not difficult and it is all over for USA. Is USA prepared to trigger and start a nuclear war?

The real war is not over the Pacific.
USA is already feeling the heat and pressure.
 
.
Imagine a 18 year old school bully that only beats up 8 year olds. He then looks at a 18 year old nerd, and thinks - I've beat up so many 8 year olds, this guy isn't all that tough. I'll just pick him up and throw him on the ground like I do to the 8 year olds.

That bully could not even win with against the 8 years or or 6 years old.
That bully only won against the 3 year old 4 year old like Panama, Nicaragua and Grenada.



What was the military edge USA have over a bunch of separate goat herders in Afghan? Do not even need the entire fucking country of Afghan.
10,000 to 1 ?
Or is it the Afghan goat herders have military technology greater than USA??
I finished reading “the Outpost” by Jake Tapper. How a bunch of goat herders in Afghan with AKs and rpgs and IEDs (because they do not have billion dollar industry to make bombs like USA, can only make bombs in backyard on a DIY basis) taking out USA brave men despite they having 155 howizters , 120 mm mortars , Ma Deuces, A-10s, properly build bombs, B52s and helicopter gunships , AC-130 Spectre Gunships and billions of dollars backing them and not so good in protecting them.
If USA fought bravely with massive firepower behind them, then what about the goat herders with only AKs and RPGs fighting against USA knowing they fighting against 155 howizters , 120 mm mortars , Ma Deuces, A-10s, properly build bombs, B52s and helicopter gunships , AC-130 Spectre Gunships ?
Even more fucking brave is the least I can say of the Afghans goat herders. Who were untrained knowing only how to herd goats unlike the USA special forces who went through countless hours and weeks and months learning how to kill and kill.
Yet who won? And who left Afghan?
Maybe USA army should consider making their fighting folks do a course in goat herding . As who knows, maybe herding goats might be better to build up fighting skills.

main-qimg-39381da9e4b73e7adef3555c34c64b3b


1605584339573.png



1605584441990.png








main-qimg-3cffc265f3767c49fd74dd965cc525e5

1605584285402.png





USA got fucked when USA tried that in Afghan . Against a bunch of tribesmen when USA had 1000 the firepower over them. And after a trillion of dollars what have USA got to show in Afghan?
Why did the United States of America fail to win the war in Afghanistan even after 17 years? Why does the lone superpower fail to defeat a group of goat herders?
And in Somalia. A bunch of ex fishermen and part time goat herders with nothing more than AKs and RPGs chased USA out running with tail between legs

main-qimg-cfc065f51a2640e2d89100de02c9b4ae






1605082409170.png

1605584519087.png





What military edge USA got in Iraq over Sadr? 1,000 to 1?
Please dont say Murica won Saddam.
It will be like saying Tokyo won after they did Tora Tora Tora

Or is it Sadr got better and more advanced military technology over USA?
In Iraq losing out to Sadr who had 1000 times less firepower than USA.
Having no more than AKs and rpgs.

main-qimg-7fdadbeaa1412351d13ee68b5295f12e


1605584582103.png
 
Last edited:
.
It’s best when chinese go back to the home land where they came from, the central plain.
The grass is there greener. And...there is no typhoon.
 
.
  • Michele Flournoy, who is reportedly in the running for the top US defence job, suggested in June that a stronger American deterrence in the South China Sea might make the Chinese military think twice
  • But her proposal might be difficult to achieve as it involves a huge reallocation of resources, observers say

Liu Zhen in Beijing
Published: 10:00pm, 14 Nov, 2020

4043c9ee-24ee-11eb-8a46-f186a810a22a_image_hires_192443.jpg


One contender for Pentagon chief has suggested that American forces could bolster deterrence with the ability to “sink all” Chinese vessels “within 72 hours” in the South China Sea. Photo: Weibo


The next Pentagon chief could cement the US’ already hard defence line on China, with one contender suggesting that American forces could bolster deterrence with the ability to “sink all” Chinese vessels “within 72 hours” in the
South China Sea
.
Michele Flournoy
, an undersecretary of defence in the Obama administration, has been touted as a possible defence secretary in the cabinet of
US president-elect Joe Biden
.
In an article in the journal Foreign Affairs in June, Flournoy said that as Washington’s ability and resolve to counter Beijing’s military assertiveness in the region declined, the US needed a solid deterrence to reduce the risk of “miscalculation” by China’s leadership.
“For example, if the US military had the capability to credibly threaten to sink all of China’s military vessels, submarines, and merchant ships in the South China Sea within 72 hours, Chinese leaders might think twice before, say, launching a blockade or invasion of Taiwan; they would have to wonder whether it was worth putting their entire fleet at risk,” Flournoy said.


Defence and diplomatic observers said that realising that idea would come at huge cost but appointing its advocate would signal that the US would keep piling military pressure on China.

Collin Koh, a research fellow from the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University, said one point was certain no matter who took office.
https://www.scmp.com/knowledge/us-china-relations?module=widget_banner&pgtype=article
“Irrespective of who’s in the White House, the ability to sustain credible deterrence and if necessary, defeat [People’s Liberation Army] aggression against Taiwan in line with the Taiwan Relations Act, would have been seen as a given,” Koh said.


In the article, Flournoy also stressed the need for innovation, especially on unmanned systems augmented by artificial intelligence, as well as cyber and missile defence, and resilient communication and command networks.

She said the United States had overinvested in “legacy platforms and weapons systems” while underinvesting in emerging technologies that would determine who had the advantage in the future.

“To re-establish credible deterrence of China, the United States must be able to prevent the success of any act of military aggression by Beijing, either by denying the PLA’s ability to achieve its aims or by imposing costs so great that Chinese leaders ultimately decide that the act is not in their interest,” she said.
The US military should rely more on smaller and more agile forces such as unmanned underwater vehicles, and highly mobile units that could move around to complicate China’s planning.

But observers said that with the coronavirus pandemic casting a shadow over the future US defence budget, there was added uncertainty about whether investment could be reallocated from competing programmes to realise such plans.
Wu Xinbo, director of Fudan University’s Centre for American Studies, said that even if the US did make such a shift and ramp up its deterrence, Beijing’s military plans regarding Taiwan would not change.

“Such a threat could hardly work, because the PLA has already and always taken direct American interference into calculation when planning for military operations on Taiwan,” Wu said.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/dip...sing-private-spy-planes-keep-tabs-china-think
Flournoy also highlighted the unique US advantages over China – a network of allies and partners, and suggested Washington should reach out to countries in the region to jointly resist the “authoritarian, revisionist” China and its “coercive measures”.

She proposed more regular military exercises with allies and partners, more senior officials and military forces deployed in the region in a more dispersed manner, and a portfolio of economic, technological and political measures in addition to military.
Su Hao, director of the Centre for Strategic and Peace Studies at China Foreign Affairs University, said that compared to Trump’s unilateralism, a Biden administration would obviously prefer collective and multilateral approaches to contain China.

These could include strengthening military ties through the US-Japan-South Korea alliance, the US-Japan-Australia-India “quad”, and in partnership with Southeast Asian countries around the disputed South China Sea.
He said that although the Biden administration would strengthen its alliance ties, a “Nato in Asia” against China was unlikely, as the Asian countries would avoid a total hostility or confrontation with the biggest economy in the region.


You know wht the30+ yaogan satellites and millimetre accuracy beidou is used for? Lol
I just guess that when CN is busy in fighting wt US, Russia may annex more CN lands like they took Manchurian lands .

So, lets see if CN lose more Manchurian lands when focus on fighting wt US :cool:
It's okay the Russians took our land and we will slowly take it back in the future when their demographics changes and our power increases even more. The question is why is supapowa Vietnam doing nothing when we slaughter your sailors in the 80s. We sliced you like CHEESE like bullying a small toddler. A poor underfed Viet baby unable to fight back but cry papa papa. Lol
 
.
nahhh they just need to blow you oil storage and the PLAN will be port queens instead.
Then how do American can survive without made in China products? They are addicted. :enjoy:

If they could blow up PLAN, they would do it many decades ago. Why would they wait until now then talk about it?

Talk is cheap. PLAN can blow up USN in 48hrs. :enjoy:

All DF-41 fitted with ASBM and that can hit any ship anywhere USN can go.... :enjoy:
 
. .
I don't think US bases in Western Pacific would last 24 hours if war starts.
 
.
I don't think US bases in Western Pacific would last 24 hours if war starts.
Sorry to have to correct you.

Muricans air bases and naval bases in Japan Okinawa Guam Diego Garcia and Phillipine and Singapore will not last 10 minutes. See my earlier posting for details.
First Strike: China's Missile Threat to U.S. Bases in Asia
A Missile 'Pearl Harbor': How China Could Win a War Against America?
Missile Strikes on U.S. Bases in Asia: Is This China's Real Threat to America?


That not China claimed. But report from top Western military think tank🤣🤣🤣🏔🐲

:pleasantry: :pleasantry::pleasantry:
 
Last edited:
. . . .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom