US 'may ease' export restrictions against Myanmar and Vietnam

[bolo]

is it or isn't it?

The expand of Chinese military is not aimed the same as the goal they used to have, the expand comes with a break through in mind. However, the PLA have 0 experience on fighting an aggressive warfare with modern weaponry. The same goes with Vietnam and much about most country in Asia region.

If you had studied Military Strategy and Tactics. There are no much strategy or tactics one can use to start an offensive, which mean you are actively engaging another military. The reason why this happened simply because when you are attacking, you are actually at the weakest when you attack, and any wrong move would create a major military blunder and usually resulting in a military disaster.

The key for PLA is to understand the stuff they are getting, which is both a brand new item and a brand new concept to them, while PLA need to build a weapon doctrine around the new weapon. The current level as far as I can see is Chinese simply adopt other countries doctrine and tactics, mostly because Chinese themselves have been copying other military equipment without a basic understanding of what they are for. Now I am not saying these copying won't work, but one need to know, who know better than the equipment you copy from? Do you really think Chinese will know better than the country that equipment they copy from? Which some member here seems to think so...

For example, Chinese operate on a US Fleet Model when Chinese mold over their own Carrier Battle Group. From the standard compliment to standard operating procedure. However, US derived those model is for US Navy, which for all intents and purposes serve US interest and not Chinese interest. It operate on US water with US operation, not according to the need of Chinese Operation. Hence when time comes there is a different between US and China about a single mission, the doctrine may not be useful, even harmful to Chinese military.

Instead of Producing Advance weaponry in a massive rate, China should stop and think how to use them to their advantage, which I illustrate by raising this question, What type of Military Doctrine Chinese invented since their formation in 1949? You have German with blitzkrieg, aerial combat warfare, Russian with Massive man power, anti-0submarine warfare, US with advance technological and communication warfare, intelligence warfare and carrier warfare Vietnam wrote the book on asymmetrical warfare, French wrote the book on cavalry charge, British wrote the naval doctrine. And as far as I can see, Chinese wrote none of those. And this is what they should do, otherwise the Chinese would always be adapting how other's fight, and I can tell you this, this is not good on a military point of view

All these tactics you mentioned like blitzkreig , etc are war doctrines that are known to Chinese. The art of war as written by Sun Tzu. Instead of using chariots, tanks and light infantry have replaced these, but the tactics remain the same. Human psychology remains the same.

I'm sure the Chinese military leaders know a lot more about military doctrine than anyone of us on these forums. It doesn't matter what any of us think, China is seeking to develop the most advance weapons regardless on our feelings and rightfully so. China has hostile enemies from the south and East. US has no enemies on their borders.

 

[Mighty Caty]

All these tactics you mentioned like blitzkreig , etc are war doctrines that are known to Chinese. The art of war as written by Sun Tzu. Instead of using chariots, tanks and light infantry have replaced these, but the tactics remain the same. Human psychology remains the same.

I'm sure the Chinese military leaders know a lot more about military doctrine than anyone of us on these forums. It doesn't matter what any of us think, China is seeking to develop the most advance weapons regardless on our feelings and rightfully so. China has hostile enemies from the south and East. US has no enemies on their borders.

ok, if you say so...

 

[Viet]

You would lose badly in an arms race with China, feel free to do what you want.

arms race is necessary...we don´t want to be caught by surprise.

Vietnam tends to copy and follow China development, be economics or military. for instance, in year 1471 Vietnam won the war against Champa as we deployed for the first time massively gunpowder weapons.

 

[Viet]

All these tactics you mentioned like blitzkreig , etc are war doctrines that are known to Chinese. The art of war as written by Sun Tzu. Instead of using chariots, tanks and light infantry have replaced these, but the tactics remain the same. Human psychology remains the same.

I'm sure the Chinese military leaders know a lot more about military doctrine than anyone of us on these forums. It doesn't matter what any of us think, China is seeking to develop the most advance weapons regardless on our feelings and rightfully so. China has hostile enemies from the south and East. US has no enemies on their borders.

In the war against Cambodia, Vietnam took the capital Phnom Penh in just 7 days. The assault combined by tanks, infantry and naval forces let the Red Khmer army no chance...that was a classical blitzkrieg. The war was virtually over after a week.

When was the last time China won a major war (apart from against India) or have you ever conducted a blitzkrieg?

 

[ViXuyen]

In the war against Cambodia, Vietnam took the capital Phnom Penh in just 7 days. The assault combined by tanks, infantry and naval forces let the Red Khmer army no chance...that was a classical blitzkrieg. The war was virtually over after a weak.

When was the last time China won a major war (apart from against India) or have you ever conducted a blitzkrieg?

Their "blitzkrieg" was to march to Ha Noi in 1 day in the 1979 war. We all know how that went about

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

I found it really funny people here tend to oversimplify war and only think of one side - Equipment.

All the time I have heard that My Aircraft is better than you so you should submit, or my ship, my tank or my whatever.

To a military, equipment is only a small part of equation in any war, a small part, and indeed, a war is fought easier if you have more advance equipment, but equipment of all sort can only give you a slight edge, and war have been and always had been fought with superior tactics and strategy, it does not matter you are fighting a war in Napoleon time to gulf war, it is not because of the advance technological edge that win the war, rather how and the mean people fight the war decided the outcome.

I can give you alien weapon, advance information access, however, if you don't know how to use it and did not build a doctrine around it, you will and can lose to anyone with a stick and shield

That's the dumbest shit I ever heard. For start war in the Napoleonic age is vastly different than the Gulf war. During the era of mass volley & line infantry its possible to win a war using superior strategy, but the Gulf war teaches the world that whoever have the "most advanced stick" win. "Superior tactic & strategy" take a backseat over Information & Technology. Let's forget about the gulf war & look into the future where war will become more automated where war will be won not by men, but drones.

I can guess your military education was consisted of watching Star Wars: Episode VI. Where the Stormtroopers was massacred by the fucking Ewoks. Pure fantasy that event was.

 

[Viet]

That's the dumbest shit I ever heard. For start war in the Napoleonic age is vastly different than the Gulf war. During the era of mass volley & line infantry its possible to win a war using superior strategy, but the Gulf war teaches the world that whoever have the "most advanced stick" win. "Superior tactic & strategy" take a backseat over Information & Technology. Let's forget about the gulf war & look into the future where war will become more automated where war will be won not by men, but drones.

I can guess your military education was consisted of watching Star Wars: Episode VI. Where the Stormtroopers was massacred by the fucking Ewoks. Pure fantasy that event was.

military hardware alone does not garantine the victory. that is a fact. that is proved by history of wars.

following your logic and other delusional Chinese, Vietnam has never a chance against China. BUT our victories over China (the Han, Yuan, Ming, Song, Qing and Deng) tell us a different story. In all these encounters, the Chinese had more personnel, more weapons, more everything...but they lost.

Do you think today because Chinese have more modern warships and jets than Vietnam, they would win?

No, I have little doubt, should it theoretically come to a new war between China and Vietnam, we would win again. Why?
Because we are superior to them in warfare. We have a higher IQ in this matter. Very simple.

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

military hardware alone does not garantine the victory. that is a fact. that is proved by history of wars.

Not by Contemporary Military Historian. Iraq (Falkland too) is an eye opener & any war that came after it.

following your logic and other delusional Chinese, Vietnam has never a chance against China. BUT our victories over China (the Han, Yuan, Ming, Song, Qing and Deng) tell us a different story. In all these encounters, the Chinese had more personnel, more weapons, more everything...but they lost.

Just like I said earlier war during the Napoleonic ages to today were different. Yesterday victory never mean tomorrow will be the same.

Do you think today because Chinese have more modern warships and jets than Vietnam, they woud win?

BIG FUCKING YES

No, I have little doubt, should it theoretically come to a new war between China and Vietnam, we would win again. Why?
Because we are superior to them in warfare. We have a higher IQ in this matter. Very simple.

Explain it to me, in what ways are you more superior to China? FYI this is just me stating the obvious. Not ship, nor planes so what is it?

 

[Viet]

Not by Contemporary Military Historian. Iraq (Falkland too) is an eye opener & any war that came after it.

Irak and Argentina are not Vietnam. To win a war you need two things:
- military hardware
- professional personnel
the latter is more important.

Just like I said earlier war during the Napoleonic ages to today were different. Yesterday victory never mean tomorrow will be the same.

agreed...but experience helps.

BIG FUCKING YES

Explain it to me, in what ways are you more superior to China? FYI this is just me stating the obvious. Not ship, nor planes so what is it?

that is a secret. If I reveal it to you, we would lose the advantage... LOL

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

Irak and Argentina are not Vietnam. To win a war you need two things:
- military hardware
- professional personnel
the latter is more important.

& what makes you think that the Chinese lack both? Unlike Vietnamese military I can actually say straight that the Chinese are actual professional & backed by superior technology.

agreed...but experience helps.

That's what military exercises are for to gain experience. You cuntsack, you.

that is a secret. If I reveal it to you, we would lose the advantage... LOL

This is what I'm talking about underestimating your enemy while overestimating your own capability. Face it you guys got shit other than your delusion of grandeur & I'm just stating the fact here.

Vietnamese trail of thoughts:

 

[BoQ77]

it shows that Vietnam get offer from USA and now has demand on few P3C Orion for security and search, rescue task ...

 

[asad71]

It is not difficult to see an Indo-US effort to encourage Burma to get into a conflict with BD.India and USA could come to the "aid" of BD in a proxy war against China-Burma.

 

[BoQ77]

China is funding more on military, that's the starting point for all story.

US could "invest" to whom they think that's more practical to their purpose,

Myanmar and Vietnam is only the NEW, while S Korea, Japan, Taiwan, India, Phillipines, Thailand, Singapore ..are OLD partners.

This is similar to what China gave to Khmer Rouge or current Cambodia.

Anyway, at this moment, Vietnam is not lonely.
we need China support too,... don't hesitate to give ... we will appreciate your support more than anyone else will.

 

[TheTruth]

China is funding more on military, that's the starting point for all story.

US could "invest" to whom they think that's more practical to their purpose,

Myanmar and Vietnam is only the NEW, while S Korea, Japan, Taiwan, India, Phillipines, Thailand, Singapore ..are OLD partners.

This is similar to what China gave to Khmer Rouge or current Cambodia.

Anyway, at this moment, Vietnam is not lonely.
we need China support too,... don't hesitate to give ... we will appreciate your support more than anyone else will.

China has been friendly to Vietnam for a long time - and guess who gave $80 million to arm Pol Pot? America.

Mao Zedong even ordered Tu Youyou to find a malaria cure for Vietnam. And she did. South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and Singapore are definitely not anti-Chinese.

 

[BoQ77]

China has been friendly to Vietnam for a long time - and guess who gave $80 million to arm Pol Pot? America.

Mao Zedong even ordered Tu Youyou to find a malaria cure for Vietnam. And she did. South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand and Singapore are definitely not anti-Chinese.

so who is anti-Chinese ? I means no one ever attacked China.
It's China who attack almost of its neighbor s... including Taiwan, Soviet, India, Vietnam, Laos .. created the anti-Chinese thinkings