Nonsense, number not a consideration during WW2 when Japan and US are peer enemies, unless you claim Chinese technology is miles ahead of France, what you said does not make sense.
Quantity has quality all it's own. Haven't you heard about that?
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/795954-quantity-has-a-quality-all-its-own
So it is your own theory that number not a consideration which is nonsense here. You must have miss interpreted WW2 cases.
You do know what does it mean by "NEUTRAL" right? India is brought up because it will be neutral to a hypothetic war between China and France, and being Neutral, they won't allow China to resupply in their port. In case of international law, if China try to resupply in India. Indian government have to intern the Chinese ship. Now, tell me a way China can go around Indian Ocean without resupply in India?
Why should China use Indian ports?
I've told you: China's Navy have 18 Replenishment Ships in their Battle Fleet, including 2 Type 901 Fast Replenishment ships + Djibouti military base. That may not be enough for total warfare but would be enough for skirmish in mediterenian sea or north sea.
What's a naval base in Gulf of Eden have to do with fighting a war off France coast, which is in the Atlantics.
You may as well use Pakistan to resupply if you put your LOG STAT all the way back to Djibouti
You are hilarious
Didn't you ask me : "a way China can go around Indian Ocean without resupply in India"?
Once i told you Djibouti military base, then you are asking what it has to do with the fighting in france coast?
By the way, Chinese base in Djibouti is not Chinese, they are a good will base from Djibouti government, French also have a base in Djibouti. In case of a war between France and China, both base will be closed by Djibouti Government as per neutrality agreement. Unless Djibouti government officially align with either French or China.
That is still fine.
As I told you, chinese navy ammunitions + 18 replenishment ships will be enough for skirmish warfare.
Dude, you are dreaming. First of all, fighting a war outside French coast you do not just need to deal with French Navy, it will be a combine effort of French Air/Land force with the Navy. Which mean sustainment, which mean repair, which mean resupply.
Unless you claim China can annihilate French Navy (which have 1 carrier and 13 destroyer with 11 Frigate with assorted OPV in the opening minute, every minute China stay within French Navy AO is working against China.
Ad do you even know where Djibouti is? The only way you can move supply from Djibouti thru the med is thru Suez Canal. China is not that dumb to use it in time of war, it would be like the Battle of Atlantic fought in Panama Canal.
Djibouti is useless in case of a war in that side of the Pacific.
Britt still could win the Malvinas war against Argentina, the war that was 15,000 km away from England.
Tell me why Britt could sustain her navy in the such a distant war while China wont?
LOL dream on.
You cannot use missile against Aircraft carrier, Carrier can STAY OFF the range of the missile. And it's laughable when you said H-6K can sink Amreican fleet, by that logic, wouldn't the B-52H stationed in Guam alone can sink the whole Chinese Navy?
With what the B-52H will destroy Chinese Navy?
Does US has equivalent to YJ-12, the supersonic anti ship cruise missile deployed already?
For short-range anti-ship attacks, the H-6K carries the potent YJ-12 supersonic anti-ship missile. “The YJ-12 poses a number of a number of security concerns for U.S. naval forces in the Pacific and is considered the ‘most dangerous anti-ship missile China has produced thus far,’” according the Missile Defense Advocacy group. “
The danger posed by the YJ-12 comes from its range of 400 km, making it the longest-ranged ACBM ever engineered, and its ability to travel at high rates of speed (up to Mach 3). This makes it difficult for Aegis Combat Systems and SM-2 surface-to-air missiles that protect U.S. carrier strike groups to identify and engage the missile since it can be launched beyond their engagement ranges, which greatly reduces the U.S. Navy’s time to react.
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/chinas-h-6k-the-old-bomber-could-sink-the-us-navy-25913
You do know anti-ship missile is not a concept developed from ground up from China right? The US developed similar ballistic antiship missile in the 70s, and guess why they are not further developed and in favour of subsonic cruise missile?
Because the technology was not mature yet at that time, hence US choosed subsonic path.
But now US is interested and have her own supersonic anti ship missile, which is SM-6
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/how-sink-battleships-us-navys-anti-ship-sm-6-missile-15436
However SM-6 is not deployed yet, and inferior to Chinese counterparts in some important feature.
The U.S. Standard Missile-6 (
SM-6) ASCM variant, which may be deployed before 2020, has less range than its Chinese counterparts.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/anders...-missile-failure-and-preemption/#544d5742638f
Just because China is making it does not make it wonder weapon. Weapon designer knows better than me and you.
You need to get your head check. By the way, you spell frigate wrong.
They are wonder because of their speed (supersonic or even hypersonic) and maneuverability. This is coming from the analysis of the military experts including from western analyst.
Your ignorance doesn't mean somebody else need to head check
What you need is just to educate your self:
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/chinas-h-6k-the-old-bomber-could-sink-the-us-navy-25913
https://www.forbes.com/sites/anders...-missile-failure-and-preemption/#544d5742638f
Do you think if you go to war with France, US and North America will sit on their arse and laugh at the French?
If the war happen in SCS, the chance for US and her European alliance to win is not big, with reasons explained above: chinese numerous submarines + destroyers + frigates + regiments of H-6K + DF-21D & DF-26 + big carrier (artificial islands equipped with fighters, SAMs, and anti access weapons).
Yeah yeah yeah, you are right, missile see all and hit all, happy?
They are called "MISS"ile for a reason.
Denial is not smart argument. What you need to do is give plausible explanation supported by facts/data that those chinese anti access weapons are total failure.
There are enough evidence that YJ-12 is supersonic and hit target, and evidence accuracy and reliability of Chinese missile tech.
