What's new

Take Note, America: 5 Weapons of War China Should Build Now

It was their disbelief that we, Japanese, would dare to attack their possessions in Malaya, Singapore and Borneo that enraged them. In fact, they actually thought that their bastion in Singapore would hold as they did not believe we had the capability of taking it.

In 7 days, the British Army in Malaya - Singapore (144,000 strong) was routed and SIngapore + Malaya was taken by a Japanese Force of only 28,000. As for their Naval Force , we eradicated their entire Oriental Fleet by 1942.

Had it not been for America, there was no way the British or French were able to defeat us. :coffee:

Come on be realistic...London was being bombed in 1940 by the Germans (before the Japanese invasions). You really think they were going to defend their territories to the max when their own homefront was in danger of being Invaded/overrun?? They were lucky to have ANY soldiers there. It was the Imperial Army against basically a skeleton crew.

As for "enraging"... I think Hitler had 100% of their attention. Hard to be enraged at Japan over say Singapore when a German bomber flies overhead and blows up your house in London.

You are not putting things into perspective.
 
Last edited:
@Nihonjin1051 @Peter C

Hey guys, strategically it was a mistake for Imperial Japan to open new fronts (internally their army and navy did have divided strategic opinions) just like Nazi make the same mistake in Europe. From China's (or similar case Britain's) POV sure that gave some breathing room or otherwise maybe can't run away from fate of total annihilation like France.

Militarily speaking Japan did beat hands down all British (which even outnumbered the invading forces by >4 times in Singapore), Dutch and French forces combined, period (maintain their history of invincible vs any European forces). We can open a new thread to discuss and review what exactly happened 60 years ago, a paragraph seems not enough. Big WWII topic, tag me.

Now back to topic, what are your POV on this article?
 
We can draw the production/innovation divide too starkly. The Chinese military industrial complex has long concentrated on incremental innovation, learning as much as possible from a platform, then incorporating improvements in new designs. This ties innovation and production together, although the lack of wartime experience means that many systems are never tested under combat conditions.

Still, even China faces a tension between solving current security problems, and solving projected future defense problems. International conflict is unpredictable, and both the East and South China Seas have flashpoints that could draw the PLA into war much earlier than it expects.

Now back to topic, what are your POV on this article?

Here's my opinion on the article. Innovation and military exercise is critical to success in actual combat. As per the author of the article, China's lack of combat experience in modern times , China's military is thus supposed to be unqualified. I see an error in that assumption, as I had stated in my early posts in this thread.

If i may expand, then let me state that China does have military / combat experience. The PLA had combat experience during the 1969 Sino-Soviet Border War, which resulted in a strategic success because China did not lose territory against a much more stronger Soviet Army. There was status quo ante bellum. In 1962, the Chinese had an unprecedented strategic victory against the Indian Army during the 1962 Sino-Indian Border War. In the Korean War Campaign, the PVA (People's Volunteer Army) was indispensable in preventing an Allied (UN) take over of Pyongyang and the North. Rather, the PVA, supported by the NKPA were able to push the allied forces to the 38th parallel until a ceasefire was brokered. In 1979 the Sino-VIetnamese War gave the PLA yet another opportunity. Recently in 1987, the PLAN was able to negate a Vietnamese naval force during a minor skirmish they had.

Since then, China has had no war, but her armed forces were able to not only able to develop her strategies and new doctrines, but have cooperated with partners such as the Pakistanis, Singaporeans, Thais, Malaysians, in ground to amphibious warfare training. They've tested all their new technologies (just like any other world power) . So for me, I think that the Chinese have been actively applying new technologies, warfare doctrines into their officer cadres, which then is diffused down to the ranks.

Let me end this by stating a rhetorical question: "What factors do military forces of Nato, and Europe have to define military capability, technical capability?"

Let's be serious now. There are only 3 militaries in Europe that are active in foreign wars in this modern age: US, UK, France. What about the rest? Germany? Italy, Spain, Greece, et al --- these all contributed not entire armies, but in minor peace keeping operations or strikes, they've not contributed in actual invasions or full blown wars. Yet , due to their "experiences" in "actual combat" , they're supposed to be ranked higher than China? I don't think so. An Army's ability to defeat an enemy depends on :1) culture in the armed forces, 2) extensive training and more training, 3) military technology, communication and inter-dependency within the branches, and last 4) size and breadth of military forces.
 
Last edited:
As long as the Chinese auto industry produces 22 million+ vehicles a year...

2013 Statistics | OICA

ShVffPh.jpg


As long as there are roads and highways spreading across Asia...

K2Tq3kX.jpg


China will control the entire Asian mainland within this century just like the Mongol Empire did during the 13th century. The Mongols built their empire with horses and cavalry. They never had much of a navy.

OOk7t2R.jpg


No carriers are needed at all. It won't take several decades for China to prepare for war. The PLA can annex large portions of Asia right now if Xi Jinping ordered it. Stop getting your information from crap Western articles and do some critical thinking for once. :lol:

China will have 99A2s on the ground.

ktrxIMz.jpg


J-20s in the air.

wYO9Ndf.jpg


Millions of Chinese soldiers will be armed with ZH-05 OICW.

iBBEq2S.jpg


How do you stop the world's largest army from expanding across Asia during WW3? That is the question you need to answer.
 
The biggest weapon needed, outside more nukes, is the SSGN.

The SSGN is the single most devastating offensive/defensive combined platform there is in close-packed waters. It can fire 24 huge cruise missiles carrying warheads that can 1 shot carriers, destroyers or large buildings like power plants, or 100+ smaller cruise missiles that can take down numerous smaller targets. Likewise, a single SSGN with can defend against an entire fleet from hundreds of km away as long as there's sensors to guide its missiles.

Acquiring an SSGN would be a game changer bigger than type 055 and conventional subs combined. Those are incremental capabilities,while SSGN would add a new dimension to offensive PLAN warfare.
 
As long as the Chinese auto industry produces 22 million+ vehicles a year...

2013 Statistics | OICA

ShVffPh.jpg


As long as there are roads and highways spreading across Asia...

K2Tq3kX.jpg


China will control the entire Asian mainland within this century just like the Mongol Empire did during the 13th century. The Mongols built their empire with horses and cavalry. They never had much of a navy.

OOk7t2R.jpg


No carriers are needed at all. It won't take several decades for China to prepare for war. The PLA can annex large portions of Asia right now if Xi Jinping ordered it. Stop getting your information from crap Western articles and do some critical thinking for once. :lol:

China will have 99A2s on the ground.

ktrxIMz.jpg


J-20s in the air.

wYO9Ndf.jpg


Millions of Chinese soldiers will be armed with ZH-05 OICW.

iBBEq2S.jpg


How do you stop the world's largest army from expanding across Asia during WW3? That is the question you need to answer.

Wow seems very radical concept bro, considering it only covers the Eurasian landmass.
China reply much on maritime trade routes, at least in the short future.
 
China is developing some tech which only US is working on and that is rail gun and laser weapons and both will change the way wars are fought. So China in future will be only country who could be able to challenge and beat hell out of US, although they will take huge losses too. but they will be a formidable foe US have never faced till now.
 
Japan almost did. The only reason Japan didn't is because it got distracted by expanding the war outside China. If Japan had just stayed in China it would probably still be there today. How the heck would anybody be able to kick you out???

If anything it was Japanese arrogance that lost the war not Western arrogance. Japan simply opened too many fronts (like Hitler did by invading Russia). If it didn't there probably wouldn't have been as much re-supply of Chinese forces from the India/Russia route to help bog you down. Japan gave the British a good reason to start that.
Not accurate IMO. Japan initally wanted a limited war against China but the conflict got blown out of proportion. There was simply no way Japan could win since the war will ultimately bring Japan to economic collapse. Sustianing a 3 million man army over sea for anything more than a year was unrealistic for Japan yet they did so for 8 years. By middle of war, average Japanese ate a bowl of rice a day. Her army had to resort to canibalism due to lack of food.

This is compounded by the fact that Americans were not happy about the Japanese military adventure since America had a lot of business relations with China at that time.

America and her allies had pretty much given Japan the complete embargo by 1939. The American's position was for Japan to completely pull out of China or no oil. Since Japan had only 2 year supply of oil in the reserves, there was only 2 strategical moves.

1: Call quits on the China adventure and try to repair relations with the Great Powers

2: Preemptive attack on Pearl Harbor, steal resource from South East Asia, hope Nazi can keep UK and USSR busy, and extend the war with USA.

Basically Japan had no way to win in 1937. It was a foolish strategy. Japan had everything going for her before the war. She had a rapidly growing economy, 3rd largest navy, leader of the League of Nations. The war cost Japan all her territory taken from China, Korea, Russia, destroyed her economy, sunk her navy, killed 3 million Japanese, left many more injured and psychologically damaged. More importantly she lost her political standing in the international system. To this day, Japan still wishes to regain her position as a permanent member of UNSC.
 
Now back to topic, what are your POV on this article?
Not accurate IMO. Japan initally wanted a limited war against China but the conflict got blown out of proportion. There was simply no way Japan could win since the war will ultimately bring Japan to economic collapse. Sustianing a 3 million man army over sea for anything more than a year was unrealistic for Japan yet they did so for 8 years. By middle of war, average Japanese ate a bowl of rice a day. Her army had to resort to canibalism due to lack of food.

This is compounded by the fact that Americans were not happy about the Japanese military adventure since America had a lot of business relations with China at that time.

America and her allies had pretty much given Japan the complete embargo by 1939. The American's position was for Japan to completely pull out of China or no oil. Since Japan had only 2 year supply of oil in the reserves, there was only 2 strategical moves.

1: Call quits on the China adventure and try to repair relations with the Great Powers

2: Preemptive attack on Pearl Harbor, steal resource from South East Asia, hope Nazi can keep UK and USSR busy, and extend the war with USA.

Basically Japan had no way to win in 1937. It was a foolish strategy. Japan had everything going for her before the war. She had a rapidly growing economy, 3rd largest navy, leader of the League of Nations. The war cost Japan all her territory taken from China, Korea, Russia, destroyed her economy, sunk her navy, killed 3 million Japanese, left many more injured and psychologically damaged. More importantly she lost her political standing in the international system. To this day, Japan still wishes to regain her position as a permanent member of UNSC.

Fair analysis. And to reiterate what I said in a previous post in this thread --- the war in China was the greatest mistake. The adventurism started and initiated by the Kwangtung Army -- in the end -- became the source of National Travesty. You also need to read into the political climate and culture in Tokyo at the time. Arisawa Hiromi wrote a book that explained this political climate , his book is titled "Gakumon to Shiso to Ningen toh". I'm sure they have English renditions of it -- but i suggest it for you and others who are interested in early 20th century Japanese politics.

What Japan should have done early in 1931 should have arrested the junior officers of the Kwangtung Army who initiated the Mukden Incidents. They should have been executed by firing squad; it would have prevented the trouble in China.
 
As far as military analysts saying the PLA is untested and possibly corruption ridden.
I believe on the contrary that PLA is very well trained and organized.

I believe this due to the hard working nature of Chinese students. Many PhD students in top American universities are from China and I have personally witnessed them studying day and night without breaks. It is diligence unmatched by any American student.

When it comes to the Olympics, Chinese train like a beast. China, along with USA and Russia are Olympic superpowers.

I believe the PLA is the same when it comes to training.

It will be foolish to think that the PLA is still the undisciplined, cowardly, and disloyal force of the Qing Dynasty.
 
As far as military analysts saying the PLA is untested and possibly corruption ridden.
I believe on the contrary that PLA is very well trained and organized.

I believe this due to the hard working nature of Chinese students. Many PhD students in top American universities are from China and I have personally witnessed them studying day and night without breaks. It is diligence unmatched by any American student.

When it comes to the Olympics, Chinese train like a beast. China, along with USA and Russia are Olympic superpowers.

I believe the PLA is the same when it comes to training.

It will be foolish to think that the PLA is still the undisciplined, cowardly, and disloyal force of the Qing Dynasty.

Doing academically good have Zero relationship on how good they will fight. I can be fully of military knowledge and know all Military History from the begining of warfare. That does not translate me into the "best fighter in the world"

In fact i personally see some supposedly top of the class USMA trained officer perform so badly in war I wish i can go up and execute them myself.

Let me give you a hint, the best soldier in the battlefield is the one that have nothing to look for, nothing to live for, then and only then they can perform their duty, otherwise Its all BS

I am not saying Chinese soldier were bad, but the fact that they are untested, which mean until they do fought in a war, it can swing either way
 
1941 after pearl harbor, US had troops had way less experience than Japan, but US was able to turn the war around just 6 month later at Midway.

Same goes for JSDF now, they have not had fought in a large scale conflict since 1945, but does not mean they are weak.

Doing academically good have Zero relationship on how good they will fight. I can be fully of military knowledge and know all Military History from the begining of warfare. That does not translate me into the "best fighter in the world"

In fact i personally see some supposedly top of the class USMA trained officer perform so badly in war I wish i can go up and execute them myself.

Let me give you a hint, the best soldier in the battlefield is the one that have nothing to look for, nothing to live for, then and only then they can perform their duty, otherwise Its all BS

I am not saying Chinese soldier were bad, but the fact that they are untested, which mean until they do fought in a war, it can swing either way

lol that is why they let most West Point graduate fly in Apache's anyways, not afraid to die doesn't make you a better fighter, yet a better commander. if you go by this mentality jihadist should win every war.
what's important is fighting spirit, certain country always teach their solider how to say "i Surrender" in the native tongue before sending them to war
 
Doing academically good have Zero relationship on how good they will fight. I can be fully of military knowledge and know all Military History from the begining of warfare. That does not translate me into the "best fighter in the world"

In fact i personally see some supposedly top of the class USMA trained officer perform so badly in war I wish i can go up and execute them myself.

Let me give you a hint, the best soldier in the battlefield is the one that have nothing to look for, nothing to live for, then and only then they can perform their duty, otherwise Its all BS

I am not saying Chinese soldier were bad, but the fact that they are untested, which mean until they do fought in a war, it can swing either way

What I mean is that it is the culture of the PRC to train very hard. They do this academically, in olympics, ect, so most likely, they do so for the military as well.
 
1941 after pearl harbor, US had troops had way less experience than Japan, but US was able to turn the war around just 6 month later at Midway.

Same goes for JSDF now, they have not had fought in a large scale conflict since 1945, but does not mean they are weak.



lol that is why they let most West Point graduate fly in Apache's anyways, not afraid to die doesn't make you a better fighter, yet a better commander. if you go by this mentality jihadist should win every war.
what's important is fighting spirit, certain country always teach their solider how to say "i Surrender" in the native tongue before sending them to war

First of all, hah and lmfao....

No, i am just saying who would i scare more, a dude that have nothing to live for or a dude that have studied well.

and No, West Point grad mostly ended up in infantry or armored and not flying Apache, we have a specialist school for it and most apache pilot is warrant officer

Secondly, teaching I surrender in different language is not a shame or lack of fighting spirit, live and fight for another day is a very important concept for war fighting, when its time to let go, you let it go, better then holding out aginst odds and waste valuable resource just to carry on your "fighting spirit"

In fact, most country have a never lose ground policy usually ended up losing the war anyway

What I mean is that it is the culture of the PRC to train very hard. They do this academically, in olympics, ect, so most likely, they do so for the military as well.

Can you tell me how you can train for war? If you can do it, probably pentagon willpay you a good salary for a job...
 
America and her allies had pretty much given Japan the complete embargo by 1939. The American's position was for Japan to completely pull out of China or no oil. Since Japan had only 2 year supply of oil in the reserves, there was only 2 strategical moves.

That's not quite the timeline of events

Chronology 1940

June 25, 1940 Japanese Warships in French Indo-China Taking advantage of the French armistice, the Japanese government demanded the right to land military forces in French Indo-China. In support of this demand, the Japanese navy dispatched warships to ports in French Indo-China.

September 4, 1940 U.S. Warning on French Indo-China Secretary of State Cordell Hull warned the Japanese government that aggressive moves against French Indo-China would have an adverse impact on American public opinion.

September 12, 1940 Japanese Warning to the U.S. U.S. Ambassador to Tokyo Joseph Grew warned Secretary of State Cordell Hull that Japan might interpret an American embargo on oil exports as sanctions and retaliate against the U.S.

September 22, 1940 Japanese Occupation of French Indo-China Japanese forces began to move into French Indo-China after the Vichy French government negotiated an agreement with the Japanese government to turn over three airfields and other concessions to the Japanese. The Japanese army then crossed the border and advanced into China 120 miles from Hanoi.

September 26, 1940 U.S. Embargo on Scrap Iron and Steel In an effort to undermine the Japanese war economy, the Roosevelt administration placed a ban on the exportation of scrap iron and steel from the United States to countries outside the Western Hemisphere (with the exception of exports to Britain), effective October 16th. The Japanese considered the policy as an act of economic warfare and declared the policy an "unfriendly act" on October 8th.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronology 1941

June 25, 1941 Japanese Demands on French Indo-China. With the collapse of the French army in Europe, the Japanese government demanded that the French allow the landing of Japanese troops in French Indo-China. Japanese warships took up naval stations off Indo-Chinese ports.

July 24, 1941 Vichy French Approval of Japanese Occupation of Indo-China The Vichy French government granted the Japanese government permission to establish military control over French Indo-China. The French held tenuous administrative control over the colony.


July 26, 1941 U.S. Freezing of Japanese Credits President Franklin Roosevelt "froze" all Japanese credits in the United States in response to the Japanese occupation of French Indo-China. The British government adopted the same policy in the United Kingdom as well. This brought American-Japanese trade to a halt. President Roosevelt placed all armed forces in the Philippines under the control of United States and assigned General Douglas MacArthur the Commander-in-Chief in the Far East. President Roosevelt also warned Japanese Ambassador Admiral Kichisaburo Nomura that additional Japanese attempts to expand Japanese military control in the Far East would force the U.S. to take immediate steps to protect American rights and interests.

October 17, 1941 Tojo Government in Japan Prince Fumumaro Konoye was forced to resign and General Hideki Tojo became the new Japanese Prime Minister and Minister of War. General Tojo was more pro-Axis in his policies.


November 20-December 7, 1941 U.S.-Japanese Negotiations in Washington To defuse the growing crisis in the Far East, Japanese delegates met with U.S. State Department officials to work out a modus vivendi. On November 20th, Japanese ambassador Admiral Nomura and special envoy Saburo Kurusu proposed that the U.S. unfreeze Japanese credits, reopen trade relations, assist Japan in the exploitation of resources in the Dutch East Indies, halt the American military build-up in the Western Pacific, and end support for the Chinese. Secretary of State Cordell Hull responded on November 26th with a proposal which called for the Japanese evacuation of French Indo-China and China, recognition of the territorial integrity of these states, extend official recognition to the Nationalist Chinese government, and conclude a multi-lateral non-aggression pact. Once the Japanese acted on these points, the U.S. would begin negotiations to establish a liberal trade policy between the two nations. Special Envoy Kurusu concluded that this proposal effectively ended the talks, but requested two weeks to study the offer. On November 29th, Secretary Hull informed the British ambassador to the U.S. that the talks had virtually collapsed. On December 1st, the Japanese government publicly rejected the Hull proposals. Despite President Franklin Roosevelt's personal message to Emperor Hirohito to use his influence to preserve the peace on December 6th, the two Japanese representatives met with Secretary Hull again on December 7th, to inform the U.S. government that the Japanese empire had severed diplomatic relations. Due to the complexity of the Japanese government instructions and the secrecy involved, the two Japanese representatives met with Secretary Hull after Washington officials learned about the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.

December 2, 1941 Definition of Japanese Aims in Indo-China President Franklin Roosevelt asked the Japanese government for a definition of Japanese aims in French Indo-China. American trade with Japan depended on a reversal of Japanese expansionist policies in the Far East.

December 7, 1941 Japanese Attack on Pearl Harbor Japanese carrier aircraft launched a surprise attack on the U.S. Pacific Fleet, anchored at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. Japanese forces simultaneously conducted attacks on U.S. military installations in the Philippines, Guam, Wake Island and Midway Island, as well as attacks on British military bases in Hong Kong and Malaya. The Americans, caught unprepared, lost a large number of aircraft (177) and warships, including five battleships and three cruisers at Pearl Harbor, in the attack. Over 2,340 Americans were killed plus another 876 were reported as missing. The Japanese, however, did not destroy the American aircraft carrier task forces and left the logistical infrastructure in Hawaii intact.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Japan invaded French Indo-China to cut off some backdoor supply routes to China.

The US only ramped up sanctions against Japan for invading French Indo-China. The oil embargo effectively started on July 26th, 1941.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom