Syrian Strikes Would Battle-Test Chinese Radars

[gambit]

Why you find that harsh reality hilarious?
A military with a proper air force equipped with modern fighter jets,army with proper training and equipment for halting attacks from it,s enemy and a navy with the ability to stop invasion from sea is called an overall modern military.

That is just outright idiotic.

Every country can be conquered, even US. The issue is the might required. We are not talking about tanks versus horse cavalry here but tanks versus tanks. We are not talking about WW II era tanks versus the M1 Abrams. We are not talking Korean War era jet fighters versus the F-16 but about Iraqi MIG-25s and MIG-29s. We are not talking about muskets versus M-16s but AK-47s versus M-16s. I can go on and on.

I am willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that you are not old enough to remember Desert Storm but I was in Kuwait a few days after we routed the Iraq out of the country. By 1990s standards, the Iraqi military met all the criteria that constitute a 'modern military'. No one in the region could take on Iraq. China could not take on Iraq. The press and military experts, including the Soviets and Chinese military leaderships, were predicting tens of thousands of casualties for the US. Why would they make those predictions if the Iraqi military was not a 'modern military' in their eyes?

The fact that Iraq was easily defeated was because everyone, from the Iraqis to the Soviets to the Chinese, severely underestimated US and became unprepared. Preparations for war takes decades on continuous examinations of current doctrines, history, exploitation of technology, manpower quality and quantity, organization, and most important -- self criticisms. And no one did self criticisms better than US after the Vietnam War.

Spare me your feeble attempt at playing 'military analyst' and criticize US by way of reducing Iraq.

look for a political solution rather than posing a military threat

Are you saying we did not sought out any diplomatic solutions? If yes, then you are even more sorry than thought. Further, diplomacy does not mean one should be unarmed or even appear weak. Diplomacy is worthless without at least the appearance of being able to physically resist should diplomacy fail.

Your politicians follow a typical brutal style against such poor countries but when it comes to argue with powers like china and russia you people look for a political solution rather than posing a military threat

Wrong. The US does very much pose a military threat to both Russia and China. Clearly you are someone with no military experience.

And the whole world knows what soviets did with you back there in 1960,s you were scared like goats during Cuban missile crisis

That is funny. We blockade Cuba and the Soviets backed down and removed those missiles. So who got scared?

Even north korea is enough for you.

Har...We can take NKR out easier than Iraq. Go back to playing video games, little boy.

Finally there is no absence of modern military powers and these military powers have direct conflict of interests with you.

Direct conflict of interests does not automatically equate to war. But it is funny that you do not apply the same argument to them. Why are they so afraid of US? After all, they are 'modern', right?

What a pathetically laughable line of 'logic'.

 

[420canada]

Tells other countries not to mess with America or it will happen again.

maybe if your failed foreign policy should mind its own. then the grass will look greener.

 

[Penguin]

They never faced a modern military and when they will face i believe they will S-hit in their pants.

1. Kindly point out which military HAS.

2. If true, seems a consequence of being in the top 3 of modern militaries.

3. Ignores blue against red training inside the own military.

 

[Penguin]

Richard Fisher, again, this news first come out by one person :Richard Fisher

Richard Fisher is the biggest mouth on China threat, Syria radar are all from Russia, China never sell radar to Syria, one man at home can get so “secret” info, what a joke

Fisher has worked on Asian security matters for over 20 years in a range of critical positions -- as Asian Studies Director at the Heritage Foundation, Senior Analyst for Chairman Chris Cox’s Policy Committee in support of the report of the Select Committee for US National Security and Military/Commercial Concerns with the People’s Republic of China, and a consultant on PLA issues for the Congressionally chartered US China Security & Economic Review Commission. The author of nearly 200 studies on challenges to American security, economic and foreign policy in Asia, Fisher is a frequent commentator on Asian issues for radio and television and has testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, the House International Relations Committee, the House Armed Services Committee, and the U.S. China Security Commission, on the modernization of China’s military. Fisher has been Editor of the Jamestown Foundation’s China Brief, and a regular contributor to publications such as the Wall Street Journal, Far Eastern Economic Review, Jane’s Intelligence Review, National Interest, Air Forces Monthly, and World Airpower Journal. He has served as an election observer in Cambodia, the Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan, and performed field research in China, Taiwan, Russia, India and Pakistan. Fisher studied at Georgetown University and at Eisenhower College where he received his BA with honors. He is currently President of Pacific Strategies, Inc.

International Assessment and Strategy Center > Scholars > Richard Fisher, Jr.

Republican, obviously

 

[truthlover]

That is just outright idiotic.

Every country can be conquered, even US. The issue is the might required. We are not talking about tanks versus horse cavalry here but tanks versus tanks. We are not talking about WW II era tanks versus the M1 Abrams. We are not talking Korean War era jet fighters versus the F-16 but about Iraqi MIG-25s and MIG-29s. We are not talking about muskets versus M-16s but AK-47s versus M-16s. I can go on and on.

I am willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that you are not old enough to remember Desert Storm but I was in Kuwait a few days after we routed the Iraq out of the country. By 1990s standards, the Iraqi military met all the criteria that constitute a 'modern military'. No one in the region could take on Iraq. China could not take on Iraq. The press and military experts, including the Soviets and Chinese military leaderships, were predicting tens of thousands of casualties for the US. Why would they make those predictions if the Iraqi military was not a 'modern military' in their eyes?

The fact that Iraq was easily defeated was because everyone, from the Iraqis to the Soviets to the Chinese, severely underestimated US and became unprepared. Preparations for war takes decades on continuous examinations of current doctrines, history, exploitation of technology, manpower quality and quantity, organization, and most important -- self criticisms. And no one did self criticisms better than US after the Vietnam War.

Spare me your feeble attempt at playing 'military analyst' and criticize US by way of reducing Iraq.


Are you saying we did not sought out any diplomatic solutions? If yes, then you are even more sorry than thought. Further, diplomacy does not mean one should be unarmed or even appear weak. Diplomacy is worthless without at least the appearance of being able to physically resist should diplomacy fail.


Wrong. The US does very much pose a military threat to both Russia and China. Clearly you are someone with no military experience.


That is funny. We blockade Cuba and the Soviets backed down and removed those missiles. So who got scared?


Har...We can take NKR out easier than Iraq. Go back to playing video games, little boy.


Direct conflict of interests does not automatically equate to war. But it is funny that you do not apply the same argument to them. Why are they so afraid of US? After all, they are 'modern', right?

What a pathetically laughable line of 'logic'.

Honestly you are typically stupid american who grew up watching propaganda on fox news
The whole point you conveyed in your post is that in USA is unbeatable and the mess he caused in this world is justified.I think there is no pint further arguing with a arrogant like you.But trust soon a huge s-hit storm is coming your way and you gonna pay for your sins.
And you hilarious claims on the modern iraqi army and the cuban missile crisis really made my day Thanks for making me laugh

Tells other countries not to mess with America or it will happen again.

Another arrogant american douchebag )

 

[HumanRights]

the threat is from Russian weapons, not Chinese ones.

 

[Penguin]

The quality of discussion in this thread is sinking. Could we all - noobs as well as vets - try and strive for a better standard?

the threat is from Russian weapons, not Chinese ones.

Could you elaborate a little?

 

[Oldman1]

Honestly you are typically stupid american who grew up watching propaganda on fox news
The whole point you conveyed in your post is that in USA is unbeatable and the mess he caused in this world is justified.I think there is no pint further arguing with a arrogant like you.But trust soon a huge s-hit storm is coming your way and you gonna pay for your sins.
And you hilarious claims on the modern iraqi army and the cuban missile crisis really made my day Thanks for making me laugh



Another arrogant american douchebag )

Name calling is not the way to go. That tells us you are losing.

 

[ExplodingSnow]

the threat is from Russian weapons, not Chinese ones.

The origin of the weapon is negligible. Each machine has a task and together it forms a defense system.
The threat is each individual behind the machine.
The Machine is designed to do x-y-z, it's the training hours that will count.

 

[truthlover]

Name calling is not the way to go. That tells us you are losing.

Yea yea after wasting billions of dollars and butchering our soldiers from the hands of taliban and ISI in Afghanistan in the name of our false propaganda war, we accepted our defeat and in 2014 we will leave Afghanistan .After 2014 again taliban will control Afghanistan.It clearly shows that we are loosing so badly.
Also once we also got but f-ucked in Vietnam

 

[Rain]

Yea yea after wasting billions of dollars and butchering our soldiers from the hands of taliban and ISI in Afghanistan in the name of our false propaganda war, we accepted our defeat and in 2014 we will leave Afghanistan .After 2014 again taliban will control Afghanistan.It clearly shows that we are loosing so badly.
Also once we also got but f-ucked in Vietnam

Wrong deductions sir, Iraq, Libya etc underestimated the threat hence they paid the price. Syria is no difference, difference is only to see to what extent Russia stand by Syria.

It is also Wrong the to compare Afghanistan or Veitnam or Korea to Syria Conflict. USA want to teach Assad a lesson and soften its defences so that the Rebels+Alqaeda finish off the business.

we Muslims countries should hav learned the lesson by now but sorry to say Muslim world is dominated bypegheaded leaders Whether its KSA, Syria,Egypt Pakistan AlQaeda or Talebans all are Damned and all will go down one by one......

 

[truthlover]

Wrong deductions sir, Iraq, Libya etc underestimated the threat hence they paid the price. Syria is no difference, difference is only to see to what extent Russia stand by Syria.

It is also Wrong the to compare Afghanistan or Veitnam or Korea to Syria Conflict. USA want to teach Assad a lesson and soften its defences so that the Rebels+Alqaeda finish off the business.

we Muslims countries should hav learned the lesson by now but sorry to say Muslim world is dominated bypegheaded leaders Whether its KSA, Syria,Egypt Pakistan AlQaeda or Talebans all are Damned and all will go down one by one......

oh come on man stop being such a stupid..it,s all about a false propaganda for controlling the natural reserves so their mighty economies in future will never shrink.I was doing comparisons because that american cun-t was arrogant beyond any recognition.It,s a character trait of the Americans to first support terrorists and later blaming others for being terrorists.

 

[Lure]

People in here doesn't want to communicate. They want to insult eachother.

For a proper communication you need to try to understand what one says, and then give a proper response to it. But right now it seems like individuals making "deliberate" misunderstandings even in the most optimistic way.

Modern is a wrong term to coin for classifying today's militaries since most militaries are so. Modernity is an era that represents the early 20th century. Right now most militaries are, way developed then the "modern" times.

However, even the international media coins the term modern as the synonym of something "up-to-date". That's why when someone says "Iraqi army is not modern", if I'm not deliberately try to seem like a smartass and "win" the discussion, I won't picture an Iraqi army in my mind with "pre-modern age" weapons like muskets.

If one tries to support the idea that, Iraqi military wasn't a "modern age" military with it's literal term that would be true. But if one claims that Iraqi army had the abilities of an "up-to-date" military with a complex military-industrial structure to support it and proper training in the Gulf War, I wouldn't probably bother discussing with him.

One side states that, US Army was much more capable and advanced compared to Iraqi army and the other side rejects that just to win some discussion. It's just absurd. I wouldn't support idiotic things like a child even when I support something I strongly believe.