USA vs China: Army Colonel Analyses Who Would Win In All Out War

Former Army Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon takes a deep diver into which country would win if the USA and China went to war.
TalkTV’s international presenter Madeleine Hale speaks to Hamish about the weapons, capabilities and likely outcomes should the two superpower countries ended up in open warfare.
Click here for more from TalkTV talk.tv
If you need any help visit: talk.tv/helplines
#talktv #china #usa #military

[@djsapien3448]

How exactly is China a threat to the United States? Does China have dozens of military bases throughout Central America and the Caribbean like the United States does in the Pacific?😂

[@PepeCoinMania]

Not yet

[@djsapien3448]

@@PepeCoinMania China has zero interest in doing so lol. You all are projecting because you think every superpower shares America's imperialist hegemonic ambition.

[@spikermike2843]

it just hurts the white men's pride LoL.

[@SD-tn9ce]

If a country is not a vassal state is a threat to Warmongers in dc.

[@hardheadjarhead]

China doesn’t even have a Bluewater navy. They can’t sail their fleet to South America. But China is a potential threat to the United States strategic interests in the western Pacific . We have economic ties with Singapore, Vietnam, South Korea, Japan, Thailand, India, the Philippines, Australia, Indonesia, Malaysia. Oh… And Taiwan. That’s the threat. China and Russia have both stated that they want to realign the world order to where they are the ones in charge economically and strategically. That isn’t flying very well in the western world.

[@shundi4264]

Hardly anyone talks about war in China. They have a life I guess.

[@Dark__69]

Oh really? They don't talk about war in their media because their media is censored af.

[@SenorJuan2023]

They're too busy dealing with a collapsing economy and a dictator.

[@1313hyme]

They do. They can retire better because they didn't throw away their money like in Ukraine! Remember, if US or UK use those money on its citizens, all the retirees could retiree happily. Now the US is threatening the SS because they're running out of money for Ukraine. Ukraine is a very dumb stupid war USNATO started with nothing to gain!!!

[@lakedistrict9450]

A better question maybe: “which country has served the world better?” Or “which country has done the least damage?”

[@debasismohanty1952]

Usa

[@lakedistrict9450]

@@debasismohanty1952 are you Chinese?

[@debasismohanty1952]

@@lakedistrict9450 no Indian

[@debasismohanty1952]

@@lakedistrict9450 for me usa should lead the world because usa supports democracy

[@lakedistrict9450]

@@debasismohanty1952 interesting, thanks. What about the US regime change activity in South America overthrowing elected socialist? How about Vietnam where they supported the right wing dictator in the South, and killed 2 million locals in that war? How about the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan? Not democracies it’s true, but so much suffering for the locals. China invaded Tibet. They both have mass surveillance of the internet. India will become a superpower soon enough. Hopefully it will be the best of the 3🙏🏻

[@nsng1298]

Americans should remember General MacArthur's warning to JFK about getting involved in a land war in Asia. MacArthur said, " Anyone wanting to commit ground troops to Asia should have his head examined." Unfortunately, most Americans have poor memory!

[@raevj]

This would be a air & naval war….no land war.

[@mohammedmustaphamohammedmu4380]

Really and would you like Washington looking like Gaza​@@raevj

[@alansyb232]

War, war, war. Only talk about war. Why not peace for the sake of humanity and the future of mankind. Its a small world, don't let it disappear in the vast universe.

[@danielbb8570]

Totally agree with you

[@giftkorope5968]

this is America they love wars

[@chongzhouliu7893]

The United States is a warmonger, and the non belligerent President of the United States is named Kennedy. Everyone knows where he is

[@guan1963]

Because US leaders must create the wars to support their weapon industry,

[@JohnAkaSB]

Cos USA can't flourish in peacetime when MNCs raking banks while there's wars

[@FarahAbdul]

There is no threat from China we are the ones who are threatening them at their doorstep. The question we should be asking is what are we doing at their doorstep and also in Taiwan.

[@loremasteringwion9930]

We are protecting Taiwan, and you spin it as if we are threatening them?

[@derricktruong2760]

@@loremasteringwion9930protecting Taiwan from what? Taiwan is part of China. Oh, maybe you meant protecting Taiwan from having peace?

[@General_MacArthur]

The chinese are threatening us overseas without effort already hijacking us companies

[@yump5222]

What for?

[@ouronlyhome2462]

​@@loremasteringwion9930don't forget, Taiwan is part of China

[@sethb9545]

3 Billion dollars is nothing when your country is in debt almost 40 Trillion dollars .

[@alp8409]

This is the Elephant in the Room for military strategists. When the Dollar loses its’ status as the global reserve currency, America will no longer be able to sustain its armed forces. China has been stockpiling precious metals and avoiding trading in the dollar.

[@jacksmith-mu3ee]

That's usa😂

[@buravan1512]

120 Trillion$ ... still Counting...

[@jacksmith-mu3ee]

@@buravan1512 that's china gdp

[@buravan1512]

@@jacksmith-mu3ee you don't know the real US Debt?

[@harrylooi]

When it comes to nukes, once you have a reasonable number there is no difference as an overkill has no meaning.😂

[@PepeCoinMania]

There are bunkers radiation pass

[@Saj14356]

This is where USA is wrong the speed China has after it made to hypersonic what chances are there for nukes 😂 Get your facts right

[@jaylenflanagan1295]

@@Saj14356You a clown wtf🤡😂

[@bken525]

you cant stop MAD , the whole atmosphere above is radioactive, every living thing will parish.

[@umbrellastudio7481]

it has real meaning, maintaining those nuclear bombs cost taxpayer alot of money. the more you have, the higher maintance fee you need to pay.

[@Jennyeq]

"Who Would Win In All Out War" - no one. We will all loose. Humanity needs to find a way to work together.

[@dbzfan952]

Good and evil cannot live in harmony

[@BlueSteel331]

*lose

[@eddylee3826]

@@dbzfan952 Evil America

[@giftkorope5968]

@@eddylee3826 hahahah indeed evil Amerika loves war

[@iwalkalone5358]

How? Would you like to be a wife in a home that live by strict Islamic law? If not how will you make people that thinks that's the best way for humanity to move forward? If you don't agree you will ultimately end up in war when the two society's meet.

[@hetienyi8628]

This guy is living in the past.

[@jackc4551]

Fully agree, this guy is living in the past. The US has lost nearly every war including the retreat from Vietnam, stalemated in Korean Peninsula to the exit from Afghanistan, but managed to bully bow and arrow countries like, Iraq and Libya in the name of human rights and democracy but plainly because of Iraq and Libya wanting to trade oil in Euro and gold. Till now both countries were bombed to stone age and USA still station troops in both countries. While USA and the West kept bombing bridges and railways, China BRI is helping Global South to develop their economies by building infrastructure like airports and high speed rail so they can free themselves from "foreign aids". Because of the loss of influence they label China for causing predatory debts. On the question of naming China as a threat, the colonel should read to see China had never invaded any country other than border disputes. How can China be a threat to USA while over a 100 US military bases are encircling China (in Japan, S Korea and Philippines), while the only military base China has is in Djibouti. The Colonel should check up his geography too. As for China-Taiwan conflict in West Pacific, US has countless war scenarios showing USA will lose a war at Chinese backyard. US aircraft carriers are now a shadow of its former self since Chinese successfully tested its Dong Fung hypersonic missiles. The colonel has only one point right. The clash of 2 nuclear powers could mean the end of the planet. But why should the US need to keep its unipolar hegemony and not agree to a multipolar world for world peace?

[@ricotheman8139]

Exactly. WWII mentality.

[@marvinfok65]

That is why Brits had screwed themselves so badly! Brits learned nothing from Brexit and UK's economy & influence is in tatters. UK is now so insignificant with nothing left except that empty arrogance!

[@buravan1512]

His facial expression, as well as his nervous voice tone, betray him big time 😂

[@nightowl7261]

Most Americans are still living in 1890s-1950s.

[@desmondho9567]

US can't even win against Vietcong and Taliban 😅😂

[@user-hb9jq7wb7l]

当时我们中国不允许美国越过17°线追击越共，越共的防空是解放军换服装支援的。17万防空部队。中国解放军训练的越共，武装的越共。粮食和军火。春节攻势是解放军陈赓大将指挥的

[@wzhang318]

You mean US military is like a paper tiger? 🤣

[@MMLL369]

shhhh... you are not suppose to bring out the truth...

[@desmondho9567]

@@MMLL369 😬 oops sorry, very sensitive 😬

[@cajunpower]

@@desmondho9567 Yes I agree Albania world superpower, average Albanian man can beat China, Russia and US. Paper US don't got stomach for Albania, neither does Weak Russia in Ukraine or Fish China. . 🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱

[@freespeech8520]

Chinese military is not gonna come to American shore. Any all-out war is gonna be around China (aka Taiwan). Looking at the history of Korean War and Vietnam War, you get your answer.

[@RonaldSelalame]

He does not mention the Chinese anti satellite weapons. He does not mention the vastness of the waters and space.

[@user-ml3jo9cy9v]

He is in a circus or maybe dream

[@Dragon-Headed-Caterpillar]

In the Korean War, we were definitely a much much mightier military power than the then China. However, I would not call us the winner in the war.

[@jgo8717]

US military was handicapped by the President Truman not to touch China which sent soldiers and weapons to North Korea and caused the stalemate. The same situation we are now that US polititicians are avoiding an to start or escalate war in the world due to up coming elections.

[@kimchiba4570]

Most Americans wun accept that it's a stalemate

[@user-hb9jq7wb7l]

志愿军秦基伟将军说过，如果我们有美联军一半儿的后勤和火力，那么美联军早已经被赶到海里

[@Art-is-craft]

@@kimchiba4570 No it would not be a stalemate. The size of the US military would be 10 to 30 times its current size in a global war and with double the current fire power. So the US military would have a fire power nearly 100 times greater than it currently has.

[@linphilip6389]

​@@Art-is-craftand u think China is not 10 to 30 times now, dont be naive.

[@fisheryu6287]

The two countries are totally different. China is people ‘s motherland. US looks an incorporation business. Chinese defense for their motherland. American employee solider fight for their boss , ruling class. One is fight for justice to defend their country. The other fights for profit.😅

[@sih9696]

Wow, bull's eye!

[@goldenteacher5g626]

Lol its obvious you have never been in USA.

[@MarvinChenFantasy]

Drug users are joining army and Boeing.

[@user-ii2lm6kg2g]

Precisely, The American won't tolerate 58K casualties over a period of 20 years in the Vietnam war. And this took place when there was no instant social media. Information arrives very late and easily manipulated through newspaper, TV or Radio. Imagine losing 10,000 casualties in this instant messaging era for the soldiers to make more money for the rich? Add to that, over a territory that the US said belongs to China. The Chinese will be fighting for their motherland. The Chinese won't blink if they lose 100,000 a week.

[@sih9696]

@@goldenteacher5g626 I was educated in the US (both college and Graduate school) and worked there for five years in one of the largest US corporations. Just FYI

[@Unclesam404]

This genius said one American tank is worth 4 Chinese tanks. In reality, China technically can use a less than a hundred drones to destroy entire inventory of that thousand of American tanks with or without control of air. China can manufacture as many drones and as quickly as no one else on earth can. Secondly, Chinese J20’s only competitor is F22 which has outdated electronic/ radar system. F35 is useless within western Pacific Ocean. Unless China is having a war on US shore, what this genius said is completely bulshit. And most like China will have the war in East Asia which China will win 100% at small cost. So yeah peace with China 🇨🇳 is the only suggestion here.

[@jonindianasalsa7345]

The day , China ´ll demonstrate his army power, the world will shock

[@kakogberoland4703]

Like we're surprised with Russia, huh?

[@dddddh1]

Influenced by conventional thinking and habitual thinking, social consciousness often lags behind social development, I understand. So, I will tell you this: China's technology is indeed more advanced than the United States.

[@morrisongao852]

@@kakogberoland4703 Your comparison of China and Russia shows that you know nothing about the current military structure. Moreover, Russia does not want to go too far. It only takes 5 minutes for a nuclear bomb to end the war in Ukraine.

[@elmohead]

Game changer weapons in Ukraine is not the HIMARs or Abrams or Patriots or Leopards. It's the Chinese-made DJI drones.

[@chongzhouliu7893]

@@morrisongao852 Compared to Israel, Russia is simply an angel

[@junizhao]

This “expert” army colonel doesn’t even know PLA Army has been equipped with a large number of 99A MBTs!

[@user-wp1dv9zj3v]

现在坦克已经不算什么了，无人机才是真正的战争机器。只要我们愿意中国可以生产几百万上千万无人机❤

[@lagrangewei]

this is not true. 99A are used only by the capital defence force. China prefer lighter tank due to the mountainous geography in most of China. also there is no point investing in tank when China see naval and air power as its future. if the enemy can't land, you don't need tanks.

[@junizhao]

@@lagrangewei 99/99A have exceeded 1000 units as of now. With lighter BT2000 and AT4 the number has reached over 2000…

[@BRUCE_the_MOOSE_]

Be aware of the PLA People's Ladyboy Army. They will come at you with their lippy and handbags swinging

[@junizhao]

@@BRUCE_the_MOOSE_ I’m aware of LGBTQ being officially acceptable in the US military and most Western forces. Even some American generals are transgendered. I’m not against any LGBTQ, but be aware of what you’re talking about.

[@inuwooddog3027]

The question is, who wins in a full scale peace?

[@cnwong5942]

China

[@nmew6926]

Great Question. In my opinion, if there is WAR both parties lose But if peace prevails, China will be the biggest winner because China knows best how to benefit most of peace time for its economy. So either way., Peace or War, US is considered a LOSER and they are getting mad.

[@dirkhouben9960]

The world

[@gkmail8718]

The aggressor is going to be the loser

[@taiwansocal3121]

India, as even in peace, US will be anti-China. If war results in US and China destroying each other, India will be #1 by default.

[@sychan3513]

the question is not who has the better military power, but who has the will to lead the world to better living prosperity. You can never have peace if you insist to sit on top of the world with so much inequality.

[@SpruceWood-NEG]

The core of China's military development lies in three aspects: 1. Protecting the country from aggression and achieving national reunification. 2. Protect China's trade. 3. If the Earth is invaded by aliens, we will take responsibility. Protecting the world? Please forgive us for not being interested!!!

[@itsme-nt6yu]

After WWII, US and China fought two wars. In Korean War, US troops got pushed back to 38th parallel after US failed to listen to China's warning, even though China was so backward. In Vietnam War, US troops stopped at 17th parallel (an arbitrary red line drawn by China), having learned the lesson from Korean War. US ended up losing the war. Does the US have the stomach for another war with China, near China's coast line, even after China has modernized its military for several decades?

[@yuejiang4601]

cn:38° usa:no cn:17° usa:yes sir

[@adamang3655]

this is embarrassing for US lose to china when china dont even have better technology during korea war

[@powergrassp7769]

Honey, if you study history well, uh, you'll find that the troops fighting the US in Korea were the ones that the Soviets trained up in Manchuria（13th crops）,Moreover, in order to reduce casualties, the United States withdrew its own knives near the 38th parallel, where the front line was relatively short,Although China and Korea had large populations and the support of the Soviet Union, they suffered heavy casualties,As a proxy of the Soviet Union, the war was a failure and did not achieve the same victory as the Vietnam War,Of course, their historians can forcibly interpret these things as their victories, which depends on personal cultural accomplishment. If most people are outsiders and do not understand history in depth, they will certainly be misled by them,The Ninth Army Corps, which fought in Chonsin Lake, was an army dominated by veteran cadres of of the Communist Party,Well, their superiors are all tied to the Soviets,It is not a real Chinese army at all,at that time, the Chinese army had already been driven to Taiwan,the rest of the people who were incorporated by the Communist Party to suppress their own people at home were engaged in contributing to the later opposition to the Soviet Union,In the early days, the CCP was subordinated to the former Soviet Union. After the Chinese joined in, they fell out with the Soviet Union in the 1960s,Now China is only a Chinese regime, not a Communist regime, so what will happen to them? It must be like Chiang Kai-shek

[@powergrassp7769]

​​​​@@adamang3655In Korea, the United States was at war with a Soviet proxy, something MacArthur did not expect.however, the United States wrongly supported the the Corrupt Rhee Regime.South Korea's Corrupt Army Puts US and Turkey in a Sink in the battle of chongchon river.But the United States has overcome this without a numerical advantage.Most Americans don't know the real history of Asia, and you don't know who you're fighting.Macarthur was wrong to underestimate Moscow's control over the CCP, assuming they would not go to war in Korea

[@itsme-nt6yu]

@@powergrassp7769 If Soviet trained Chinese army was not really Chinese army, Chiang Kaishek's army was US armed and trained and therefore it was not Chiang Kaishek's army? How marvelous!

[@tcblue901]

Contemplating the harsh truth, war leaves no genuine winners, only a trail of sorrow, death, and destruction. May our collective efforts be guided by the pursuit of peace. ✌️✌️

[@pinnysun8442]

This guy has a mindset of 10 years behind what is going on today, such ashamed that he didn't realized american regime is the world biggest threats of peace.

[@ericyeo805]

Including the Ukraine Russia war displacement of weapons and comments.

[@musgrave6886]

just missed the point...

[@segagenysis6918]

America is the guarantor of our freedoms and stability.

[@Vg-my7ib]

Maybe if the rest of the world would quit asking for more money and troops then we wouldn’t have too. No alliance is forced to house American troops.

[@mrsentencename7334]

Your one of those disinformation bots I’m guessing

[@bigtony4829]

if its in the South China Sea then China will win When was the last time the Untied states won a war against anyone let alone a country as powerful as china ?

[@giftkorope5968]

thats what i was saying , it only one in WW2

[@Uchenna-db7ql]

US never lost a war. Tell me one.

[@bigtony4829]

@@Uchenna-db7ql Vietnam Afghanistan Didnt win also in Korea if we add in proxy wars they currently losing in Ukraine Syria ..

[@chuekaothao6329]

​@@Uchenna-db7qlthe question should be " when have usa ever fought a war alone like Russia or China?

[@Uchenna-db7ql]

@@bigtony4829 Was US defeated? There's military victory, political and ideological victory. Let's take Isreal -Hamas war in perspective. Military victory is to have Hamas military infrastructure degraded and kill top leaders. Also well as return the hostages or take more hostages than Hamas took or kill more than Hamas did. Having state that , if Isreal decides to withdraw from Gaza would you say they lost militarly? Then, politically is Israel replacing Hamas with another government in charge of gas. If they are to withdraw today, Isreal didn't with politically. Lastly, ideology. Even if Hamas is removed in power in Gaza , provided one Hamas member can till spread the ideology. Isreal didn't win.

[@stylishfirestylishfire6134]

Excuse me, did he say the silk belt by the Chinese is the same as British colony to India?😂

[@user-hb9jq7wb7l]

中国是合作。英国是殖民掠夺

[@brian.z6592]

That's a rediculous claim

[@KayyHong]

no one believes that.

[@zeth479]

So delusional lol.

[@ricardosmythe2548]

It's the modern equivalent of colony building. China is endebting nations with poorly built infrastructure Chinese businesses will benefit from in the short term that will have a short lifespan and allow China to take control over ports and such of the nations involved when they can no longer afford to repay the debt. China will also retain a level of control over the goverments of these territories as they are in debt to China allowing them to shape internal and external policy at the international level

[@user-ch3so3bt4m]

USA fight many wars,but in the end, they ran away with their tails between their leg.Vietnam is one example.

[@MrGibamao]

UK and US ought to spend more effort and funding in uplifting their own people.

[@jam-fam]

Trying to start a war with the world's factory, goodluck getting those 'goods' your consumers love.

[@buravan1512]

*It's insane to wage a War with your CREDITOR, who keeps you a float 🛟 FINANCIALLY.*

[@jam-fam]

Creditor? Laughable at best@@buravan1512

[@joshuamorgan2831]

India is catching up to that. China is no longer the worlds factory that it was before covid

[@historylover7394]

This ex- British army colonel seems to have somewhat limited understanding of conflict between Chinese military versus US military. One, US and China will likely fight in Western Pacific in the beginning, which means there is really limited land warfare, except in Taiwan and maybe Korea. Two, US need to transfer most of its forces across the Pacific. So, Chinese will have the initial superiority in forces as well as the home field advantages fighting close to its country. Third, China has developed asymmetric warfare to counter the main US threat, which is its naval power. China has developed hypersonic missiles and anti-ship ballistic missiles to sink the US ships from Second and First Island Chains to prevent it from operating close to China. Fourth, China is very capable of destroying US GPS and satellite assets which will control how sophisticated weapons work. This ex-colonel fails to mention these key points. Historically, many of the generals, who were schooled in outdated warfare, always misjudged how the future wars will unfold. During the Russo-Japanese war, many of the commanders in UK, Europe and US thought Russia would defeat Japan. They were wrong. New technology, such as hypersonic weapons, are game changers and still many military experts in the world doubt they will make a difference. But the history have shown the experts who doubt new types of weapons were proven wrong again and again.

[@toddlawrence6872]

I think it's you who has a somewhat limited understanding. We have bases in Japan and we're about to have 4 in the Philippines. Hypersonic missiles are not that good. Our Patriot system has already shot down a bunch of Russia's Hypersonics in Ukraine. They are not getting through multiple Aegis systems. On top of that reports have come out this week detailing the widespread corruption in the Chinese military which means their stuff probably doesn't work as good as they think it does.

[@kongwee1978]

You don't even dare to step in Ukraine. @@toddlawrence6872

[@teoeehuat8742]

US can only bully those small countries like Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan etc. Majority of their Ship & plane are my grandfather age. LOL😂

[@traviskillsback9445]

also what alot of people forget is that the rear admiral for the us navy's pacific fleet said the united states would win a war against china but we would lose 40 to 60 percent of our military and our srarus as a super power

[@historylover7394]

@@toddlawrence6872 For one thing Russian kinzhal is not a hypersonic missile. It is a ballistic missile that travel in a flat predictable parabolic trajectory at hypersonic speeds with almost no maneuverability . Dongfeng 21d and DF 26 YJ 21 are also ballistic missiles. Hypersonic missiles, which is a misleading term coined by the pentagon, travel at hypersonic speeds and they can maneuver. DF17 DF27 are true hypersonic missiles. U.S. assets in Korea Japan and Philippines are a fraction of US military and far smaller than Chinas entire military. Normally U.S. only operates one carrier fleet in East or South China Sea. Others they have to bring it from Hawaii and Mainland. As are most air assets. U.S. Navy is cautious of even operating in Guam because DF27 can reach Guam and perhaps Hawaii as well. And you think U.S. is not corrupt? USA failed in many projects LCS and Zumwalt to name just a few. Do more research before you dispute

[@Rockieoo]

Who is the most cruel terrorist organization in the world? People all over the world know it.

[@johnmwangiirungu2885]

English language doesn't translate to being civilised or being intelligent. For a fact asians and Russians are very good in sciences and English is not their first language

[@SenorJuan2023]

If Russia is so good in science, how come their weapons and infrastructure are terrible?

[@georgekwakuntigroup]

In 21st century war is not about past history, you can't actually know what your opponent have and hidden secret until you you engage them in battle. Don't underestimate your enemy.

[@davidhuang5318]

What a naive colonel. Full of baseless conclusions

[@RamonPatterson9481]

He speaking facts...you could learn something from him

[@1809steph]

Biased and one sided views are not facts.

[@RamonPatterson9481]

@@1809steph Everything he said can be verified if you do your research

[@btgan3838]

​@@RamonPatterson9481 It's not about what he said. It's what he failed to say. 😂

[@RamonPatterson9481]

@@btgan3838 Give an example of what he failed to say

[@JulioSang]

😂 pero China nunca llevará guerra a terreno de EUA, tendría que ser lo contrario, se hicieron 18 simulacros en súper computadora y las 18 veces perdió EUA.

[@user-hb9jq7wb7l]

我们中国是国土防御型军队

[@TimVoktwo]

First you have to define the battlefield. If they are both on land and the same supply line, they can be be on stalemate at 2 to 1. If the US is fighting at 40 to 1, the US will retreat. If the battle is ocean to land. The Chinese have an edge. If there are 350 coaltion ships in South China, there is a big probability that China will win by attrition. The West's supply line will be sailing for weeks while China's is just next door. In addition, China has over 1000 fishing vessels that are armed with torpedoes plus their submarines; battleships, aircraft, and aircraft carriers. If the US use nuclear weapons, that will be the end of the world. The gentleman is not updated, and they appear to be mostly about WW2, and British colonial experience. That's obsolete information. Today's war is a technology war and alliances. If the US starts a war in South China Sea, North Korea and Russia will also be in the front line. Its gonna be messy. Btw the UK no longer matters in today's geopolitical issues. They are no longer a super power. Just saying.

[@jimwuhan5336]

Well said

[@kevinyin5081]

Yes, your are much better than the speaker.

[@SukhdevSingh-ge5rj]

China is more interested in economic cooperation with the rest of the world. Military preparedness of the USA is a SECOND priority.

[@rolandwong9306]

" Who has the most impressive military, do you think?" This is a question that a six-year-old child may ask. "Is my dad stronger than your dad?" It is more important to ask," Where, when, why and how long do you want to fight?" The answer given was at the same level as the question. Counting sheep would be more exciting.

[@damocles8417]

And yet you took the time to comment. We’re you disappointed with the results?

[@gj8550]

You hit the nail on the head. This is a question that ONLY a six-year-child would ask. Anyone with a more developed intellectual capacity would understand the importance of stamina.

[@joeblack888]

Agree. The result will be different where fight happened in Taiwan or in Florida.

[@milsimgamer]

@@joeblack888 Nope, the result Will Be the same in Taiwan, just as if the fight happened in Florida. Higher casualties though, sadly, for the Taiwanese.

[@joeblack888]

@@milsimgamer It is different. If fight in Florida, it will be a nuclear war. If fight in Taiwanese, the war will just use Thermobaric weapon.

[@user-tl1vx8yg8l]

Vietnam war ... Korean war

[@buravan1512]

Viet Nam war was more of RUSSIA vs US. Russians were planning attacks, supervising the operations, Anti US Air force operations, intelligence gathering...

[@jamiemcgow2041]

Not much said about manpower here. I would havee thought that massive population of China would be considered a big strength but it wasn't even mentioned.

[@hzhao7109]

Does it really matter that we're at war with a country 10,000 miles away?

[@mariocarpio122]

There must be a powerful country to stop china of bullying small countries like our country the Philippines..china is already a huge huge huge in land area and still not happy and planning to occupy our country EEZ..greedy xi king ping

[@user-ho2hg1pf3k]

as a Chinese i have to you are so damn right. we always listen the news from America about how America attack china etc. the media in China don't do that at all. the focus on people's lives in china that we all know people would like to protect the country which give them good life

[@InterestedCitizen]

Very informative. Thank you.

[@mmaker88]

This kind of question only benefits the military industry complex. Why can’t we learn to live together?

[@tttuu3309]

As long US exit and is on top we will not because is the only nation that creat thr own enemy to give the reason to arm themselves against the same enemy

[@iROChakri]

America gets rich by making wars and stealing resources

[@SpruceWood-NEG]

US military industrial complex: profit. Chinese military industry enterprise: state-owned enterprise. What is profit?

[@chongzhouliu7893]

The US government is under the command of the military industrial complex, and they are born for war

[@CL-ig6vw]

why is it that China never talks about waging a war against another country while the US always talk about that and accuse the other country a threat?

[@mauimillaro2564]

The US is advanced in technology and weapons are sophisticated even the pilot are more trained and very well experienced in war than Chinese soldiers.

[@gj8550]

One critical factor that wasn’t explored is manufacturing capabilities. A major conflict between two super powers is a marathon as opposed to a sprint. US won the Second World War largely because of its ability to replenish the massive amount of weapons and ammunition. US and NATO are stretching to provide munitions to fight the war in Ukraine. Being the world’s factory, China clearly has the upper hand in a prolong conflict. It is undeniable that US has more advanced weaponry, significantly more nukes and better trained personnel. But for one reason or another, they have been unable to get their acts together in recent history. One could argue that US has withdrawn from Vietnam, Korea and even Afghanistan with their tail between their legs. If they can’t even win a war against a bunch of militias wearing sandals, will they be able to beat a bonafide army?

[@stardust-rv7mr]

i wouldn't say that, china has to import everything, supply lines would be long, and very dangerous , nothing moves without been seen, they can''t even feed their own people. and they would be fighting to take land, we would be defending, and there is so many other reasons they would not win.

[@Vikingpoints]

Couple things to point out. The US has the ability to manufacture what WE need. We used very little artillery in our wars. We don’t use it a lot because we fight differently than Russia. Hence there was no need for a lot of artillery. We have plenty of other advanced weapons. Second, we left those places because the population was sick of spending the money. Why keep pouring billions into the wasteland that is Afghanistan? We took the whole country in 2 months and held it for 20 years. We didn’t need to leave, we chose to. No coalition forces were lost in the last 18 months there. China can be cut off from resources. The US can’t be. We control them. We can cut off food and fuel to China. They would starve and run out of energy in no time. Add in that we have allies with big militaries and it wouldn’t even be fair.

[@gj8550]

@@Vikingpoints It is true that US has plenty of food, energy and natural resources. But in the past few decades, it has relinquished much of its manufacturing capacity to China. It had to go to China to get masks during COVID. Critical minerals such as rare earth and (processed) lithium had to be imported from China. In a speech that Elon Musk made recently in a hotel ballroom in Shanghai, he reasoned that he opened a Tesla plant in China partly because he couldn’t find enough robotic engineers in the US. He said that if he assembles all the qualified robotic engineers in the US, he might be able to fill that ballroom; whereas in China, he’d be able to fill a football stadium. TSML has to ship a large number of engineers from Taiwan for the plant that they built in the US and is still having difficulty getting it up and running. US as do many western countries talk big in the media. But actions speak otherwise. Despite its immense military might, US could not even withdraw from Afghanistan on its own timeline without one department tripping over another. By the same token, US has the most advance medical technology and yet leads the world in COVID deaths. Sadly, most of its ‘powerful’ western allies are all facing economic crisis and are scrounging energy worldwide to replace the oil and gas from Russia. If a war breaks up between US and China, NATO countries would participate and more than likely, Russia, Iran and N Korea would be drawn in. There would be no clear winners. Let’s pray that both sides exercise restrain.

[@jacksmith-mu3ee]

​@@VikingpointsThe only ones running backwards in the Korean War were the Yanks. They called their running backwards, J an advance in a different direction" The "Chinese laundrymen' M gave US their longest advance in a different direction" in US military history Even though the Chinese army was poorly equipped, it forced the U. S into its longest retreat in military history - 195 kilometers (120 miles down Korean peninsula. The Chinese attacked retreating vehicles with gauntlets of fire and bayonet attacks on men hanging on the sides of the retreating trucks.

[@Liboch]

​​@@Vikingpoints 1) china is a major food exporter, but they do import some grain for animal feed. Cutting off their grain import will cost them some fine cuisines but will not starve them. 2) if the US wants to cut off fuel from china, it has to do now, because china is increasingly using renewable energy, now at around 50% of their total energy need. They also have their own petroleum and coal mines but they import quite a bit to compliment their own fuel. Edit: spelling, reneable to renewable.

[@raygan777able]

Nobody wins. Everybody loses!

[@cprijesh]

USA ran from Afghanistan in the middle of night for some Taliban savages. You want me to believe they can fight 1.5 billion in South China sea. With tanks ? How

[@franktoh3041]

The US couldn't defeat Vietnam and Afghanistan. The answer is so obvious.

[@muzikizfun]

It all depends on how you define "winning." When 2 countries both have numerous nukes, winning is not the same as in the past.

[@irwan3064]

_China has to beef up its nuclear-armed submarines which are the US greatest fear_

[@Kiev-en-3-jours]

What the hell nukes have to so with war? If you are at war then the nukes have already failed at their job.

[@muzikizfun]

@@Kiev-en-3-jours Ask Japan

[@Kiev-en-3-jours]

@@muzikizfun That is so irrelevant and stupid. 😂 OMG.

[@irwan3064]

US used to threaten,to intimidate and coerce non nuclear-armed countries when losing ground in war ex.The Korean War,Japan WW2

[@freedumb_3.0]

This is the biggest crock of 💩 I've ever heard. This guy still has the we fight poor farmers with cold war weapons mentality. I remember not too long ago, these same doltz were saying one leopard 2 tank was worth 5 Russian tanks. Yeah, we all saw how that turned out.

[@tokming4003]

Why can’t the United States and China cooperate for win-win cooperation? I look forward to seeing both countries as families, not enemies

[@legendslog3911]

Why didn't usa and ussr cooperate during cold war??

[@dinabalaquiao6838]

Democracy and Communism don't mix.

[@ttc1661]

Don't ask who can win or lose, ask yourself are your country and you better off ??? That is the single most important question you shoud ask !

[@ricotheman8139]

That's the very question need to be answered by the West.

[@user-ho2hg1pf3k]

because America always want to war

[@jackma1548]

China army confused why US armed forces spending 20 years to fight enemy in Afghanistan who enemy only have AK47 and RPG rocket.

[@josemarijrzuniga6060]

Why? Did you win in mongol? In vietnam?

[@xdgao3015]

funny, when it comes to major.power wars, it is manufacturing, period. China's manufacturing value add is more.than G7 countries combined, so what re we talking about?

[@brianpeterson754]

America can’t afford to Aid their Allies anymore, never mind a War with China!😂😂😂

[@ganboonmeng5370]

It is crazy ..in these age and time...we still hv people thinking about winning...in a near peers war..,

[@weewahgan6922]

This guy is an Army Colonel who has a very narrow perspective of China. Anyway you need a host of the same calibre to match the dialogue. Glad to have such people around to help China to excel US and the West in no time.

[@bernardtado7310]

Still can't beat Afghanistan

[@aungminoo4964]

this analysis is like playing war between two kindergarden kids. how many toy tanks do have? how many soldiers do you have? he didnt know how many war front US is facing now

[@triple8331]

My money is on China 🙄

[@hardquestions01]

This man doesn’t know what he is talking about. Never underestimate your enemy

[@donkeychan491]

Russia and China should be considered as one unit: and they are more than a match for the US.

[@cnwong5942]

It is NATO, the United States and the European Union that force Russia and China back to back.

[@DaniloSantos-gy9pf]

In your dreams 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@Robert-hy3vv]

how many aircraft carriers do russia and china have compared to the US lol?

[@donkeychan491]

@@Robert-hy3vv The American war games from 2022 concluded that they would likely lose 2 aircraft carriers and up to 20 other ships to Chinese anti-ship ballistic missiles. LOL.

[@RamonPatterson9481]

If you're gonna consider Russia and China as one unit. Then you should check consider the US and NATO as one unit...along with Japan, phillipines, Australia, Taiwan, and South Korea as one unit

[@manist3163]

But I think the US would lose terribly from the past records. The US lose in the war in Vietnam, Korea and Afghanistan.

[@Bjonnet55]

The USA didn’t loose; America never really commit to the war they are not war like fighting America itself , and they are far away, and America public was tired of this war so yea the USA didn’t loose any because it was not a war declaration that out America in war footings

[@justinchen8181]

@@Bjonnet55The same excuse will be applied again 🤣

[@jetli740]

@@Bjonnet55 so start a war, run away make up excuse and call yourself the winner. is this Usa logic?

[@thomassenbart]

Not correct across the board.

[@loremasteringwion9930]

@@jetli740The US never started the Korean or Vietnam war, it came to the defence of these nations that were under attack

[@mkang666]

No point talking who wins when the whole world lose.

[@ayoCanada0921]

Thank you for your expertise, Sir

[@laukokhun-8461]

US have all the advantages in millitary and why not face them now instead of proxy war using provocation,

[@traviskillsback9445]

alot of parts for the military and alot of our economy come from china so we would have to throw all our resources in this war and china isnt some poor country. its a economic and military giant like the US so its best not to underestimate them like we do to every other country

[@chuekaothao6329]

My view exactly. if China should ever say "you want Taiwan so bad, come and get it", will the USA has the pairs to directly go get it immediately or will it wait until it can muster a proxy.

[@leeming2781]

Because we do have destructive weapons

[@cb250nighthawk3]

​@@leeming2781 Yes, US has very destructive weapons but so does China. China already has hypersonic missiles that can reach US mainland. I really don't think US and China should go to war. Both will lose big time. And a weakened US would benefit NATO.

[@leeming2781]

@@cb250nighthawk3 I don't want war, but the United States has been shrinking our living space. The history of Western aggression against China is right before our eyes. If the United States does not withdraw its hands from Asia, especially regarding Taiwan and the South China Sea, it may directly trigger a war.

[@cristinaximera9663]

And yet, in the 18 wargames of the Rand Corporation, the US lost 18 times : (

[@user-zo4ut8mw7n]

这只是为了要军费

[@cristinaximera9663]

@@user-zo4ut8mw7n 你可能是对的，确实如此

[@ajaykumarsingh702]

Because the USA is the one traveling across the planet to fight.

[@gobyhsu]

一三五 喊中国威胁 美军输-军费不够 国会打钱，二四六 中国崩溃 推翻独裁 继续国会要钱。采购百万美元的马桶不就这么来的么。😂

[@mytube30005]

All these talks are numbers on paper. In reality, how many wars have the US won since the Vietnam war, zero. The bottom line is it takes a lot more than weapons to win a war and the US don't have that. Therefore, we should avoid wars at all cost. Talk about cost, the US waste so much money on wars we didn't win. Imagine how our country would be if the government use that money to build infrastructure. We would have high speed trains run across the country. We wouldn't have all the homeless in all the major cities.

[@nik_hithu]

Nobody wins in an all out war !

[@alexgonzalez8904]

Tanks lol China is on the other side of the world 😂

[@jeffyu3488]

China won't play the game as u think.

[@JJ02979]

China has better hypersonic missiles and drones technology.

[@aliciakennedy8138]

China is the most impressive military and could easily win

[@yandingo]

Hamish dreaming as usual 😂😂😂 name a single war the USA has ever won? It ran with it's tail between it's legs from Vietnam and everywhere since 😂 Couldn't even beat some goat herders in Afghanistan 😂😂

[@WhatNow-vj8wk]

Atleast tried not like china who has never gone to a war

[@thomassenbart]

You don't know your history nor do you understand apparently, why the US was involved in those countries.

[@yandingo]

@@thomassenbart know my history extremely well actually, prove me wrong rather than writing a one line ,non factual, non content , pathetically uneducated response 🤣🤣🤣

[@thomassenbart]

@@yandingo This latest response of yours, satisfies your own assessment, i.e. nonfactual, non-content and pathetically uneducated... If you want to see a piece of my knowledge on this subject read anything above under my name. I am battling the disinformation crowd from China here and have given quite a few details on the multiple writings I have done. However, I'll answer your question. Wars the US has won, would first require a definition of winning. Does this mean the surrender of the opposing side? If this is the only criterion for a victory, then it is problematic, since after WWII, the US has not engaged in a single declared war. Revolutionary War Mexican American War Spanish American War WWI WWII Korea Panama Gulf War Iraq War All the above are very much victories. Vietnam was a stalemate, when the US left in 1973. The Afghan withdrawal was not a military defeat, especially after 20 years in country, with no force in the field capable of forcing US/Coalition forces from any city or base occupied. Leaving Af. was a disastrous political decision, done very badly and was disgraceful but all of that was simply Biden's fault. No one or thing forced this outcome. It came because he decided to order the withdrawal and did it in a horrible fashion. Korea was a UN police action, to stop the N. Korean aggression. Vietnam happened under the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which simply paid for the military to intervene in S. Vietnam, again, in the face of communist aggression. Afghanistan was directly related to the 'War on Terror', which means terrorist groups. The Taliban was defeated within a few weeks and for the next 20 years the US and the Coalition ruled the country. To completely eradicate the Taliban would have required an invasion of Pakistan, where the leadership lived in the Northwest Province and where their supplies and training camps were located. Iraq was initiated on the idea of WMD, which really turned out to be incorrect. However, Saddam, his sons and the Baathist party were defeated, and a better regime is now in power. ISIS, AQI Al Queda in general have all been crushed by the US. In each of these conflicts the US achieved its ends, which would be labeled victory. In Vietnam, the US withdrawal and then two years later the collapse of the regime was a strategic defeat in the Cold War but since the war itself was won...it served its purpose. The view you are pushing is incorrect and an unsophisticated view of the above conflicts. It also fails to understand what exactly the US is trying to achieve. The USA is not an empire and does not seek to conquer anyone, at least not since the Spanish American War. In none of the wars listed above, did the US take resources, exploit people, enslave them etc... all of the above conflicts were done under the umbrella of larger agendas, the Cold War and containing expansionist communism and the War on Terror, to halt Jihadist Islam. Both of these objectives were met. Compare that with China which did conquer Tibet, has repressed Hong Kong and the Uyghurs and its own people through the Cultural Revolution, the Great Leap Forward, the COVID lockdowns and multiple other measures. The Chinese intervention in Korea was a catastrophe for the CCP. 400,000-1,000,000 dead v. 36,000 US dead. And for what? N. Korea initiated the war of aggression and had been routed, when Mao decided to attack. By May 1951, his armies were exhausted and had suffered massive losses and had also been pushed back across the 38th parallel. The only thing that saved them from complete annihilation, was Truman's order to halt the UN forces from continuing their advance. There is a piece of history for you. If you want to dispute something specific, let me know.

[@Jr-mr2jk]

If US don't use nuclear weapons, I'm sorry to say this but, america will struggle, let's face it america lost to the Vietnamese with flipflops, lost in the Korean war against, lets face it to the Chinese, could have in ww2 if not for the atomic bombs and recently in Afghanistan to the taliban with Ak 47s. Technology and machinery alone is nothing as we can see in Ukraine, russia is getting its bottoms kicked.

[@shaneg2499]

Totally Agree, and most. USA soldiers are just plain tired of fighting. America has been at war all of it's existence to some capacity all but a few years since its' birth. But then they call Iran and N Korea terrorist which are never hardly ever at war with neighbors LOL, go figure.

[@jetli740]

if US use nuke what make china not use nuke. question is is US prepare to lose 1/2 of it city

[@horridohobbies]

China is building up its tank fleet with lighter and more agile modern tanks that use the latest technologies. The British colonel has outdated information. The USA's Abrams tanks were designed for a style of warfare that is largely obsolete. The Chinese are preparing to fight future wars, not past wars.

[@jetli740]

even if UUS has a millions tank, how the hell they transport them, tank is pretty useless for attack a country 7000km away

[@danwelterweight4137]

You can see this guy has absolutely no combat experience in a peer to peer conflict. What matters is not the numbers in the paper but the overall picture. The fact if you want to look at a country's military strength you can't look at the number of soldiers or weapons they have. You have to look at their manufacturing base and industrial capacity. You also have to look at the number of man power available to the country and their access to resources. China's industrial capacity is larger than the United States, Germany, Japan and South Korea combined. If the US gets into a war with China the Chinese will out manufacture the United States into oblivion in weapons. China manufacturers 12x more steel than the United States. It manufacturers 2x more shipping in peace time than the United States used to manufacture at the peak of its full scale war production in WWII. China graduates 7 to 8 times more engineers, scientists, technicians and mathematicians than the United States. In a war China would be able to mobilize a 30 million to 50 million able body men of military age in a single week. Plus in a war China would have access to Russia's massive raw materials, natural resources and military industrial capacity for which the US and all of NATO combined seem unable to even match half of their military production. If you are talking about a war in a peer to peer you have to understand that the military you have on paper doesn't mean much. Germany at the beginning of WWII had the best air force and army in the world. Japan had the best navy in the world. Yet look at what happened to them when they went up countries with much larger populations and industrial capacity? The fact is a countrys military strength is its industrial base and population size. the US cannot match China in any of those. Furthermore the US is unable to meet its recruitment numbers. All US branches are unable to meet their recruitment numbers with the exception of the Marine Corps. The US does not have enough ammunition nor the industrial base to supply the US military in facr to face conflict with a peer to peer conflict. The PLA on the other hands only accepts 1/4 candidates. China's logistics and manufacturing base together with access to Russia's massive natural resources are unmatched.

[@antonytalia]

What happens if US blockades oil import routes to China near the Middle East/ South Asia? What if Australia as US ally stops exporting ore to China for their steel production? Australia accounts for 60%+ of china’s iron ore imports which it uses for steel production.

[@glumour3081]

🎉🎉 For 23 minutes, American weapons are the best... easy question, how are Vietnam and Afghanistan doing ? Libya and Iraq were invaded by Uncle Sam because of nuclear allegations... why not Iran and North Korea ? (the answer is because it has nuclear)... so choose a war that is not worthy of being considered great...

[@vicentecouto4977]

Iraq was the biggest military advancement in military history. Alqaeda was destroyed in Afghanistan in a matter of weeks. The issue is that the US can't impose its views on other country so, eventually the war goes to where. However, a conventional war no one has a chance

[@thomassenbart]

Iran does not have nuclear weapons.

[@glumour3081]

@@thomassenbart you are too innocent to see everything... you know the wars that are being fought in the modern era, always mentioning other countries as dictators, terrorism, etc., even though western countries have interests in it, namely oil... and you know that Libya and Iraq were attacked, including the narrative of terrorism, dictatorship,,,, back to the original question, why not invade Iran, which has accusations of terrorism and dictatorship and also has oil ? The answer is easy, don't start a war you can't possibly win...

[@lgflanang]

Who has the determination wins. Remember the Alamo, remember Vietnam, Afghanistan,Iraq..... and WW2.

[@TafsiirTV]

he said whatever he wanted to say but the facts says otherwise

[@buravan1512]

He dodged the main question, though 😂 Who would win?

[@boogieman4170]

Of course China is more impressive compared to to US!China has technological, cyberspace advantage!

[@rajsedhain9114]

US is just a paper tiger.

[@darkhorseinamerica1935]

Yes, but in their mind, they are not a paper tiger.

[@shafnaw9676]

No the US is good at bluffing and fooling people. Within the "American dream" - attracts most talents, with the "external debts" fake dollar money, which allowed them to used people and countries to build them such an army, specially use of honest chinese hardworking people. Their true warfar skill was shown in Veitnam, afghanistan etc, the other wars they have won was simply when they stepped in late and when both armies lost everything through war. So all the west anglo world is just creating these rules on paper such a creating fronts though lies and fronts, they cannot fight wars. Even the British empire was stealing from Spanish ships first, then stealing what Dutch already took and then eventually fooling the French, so what is noble about these?

[@akdragosani]

Americans are the most powerful people on the planet 👊🏼🖕🏻

[@tonyyin6955]

The US has no chance to win the war around Taiwan strait based on 18 Rand wargames due to the distance involved.

[@Jkl62200]

I stopped listening when this 'pundit' said, not too far from the beginning, China is still using 40 year old Soviet battle tanks tech. 😅

[@vgangi1]

Yes china has less nuclear weapons but if any country has the ability to destroy the world 1 nuclear weapon is equal to 5000 .

[@pengzhang5081]

中国🇨🇳有核武器更厉害的 超级氢弹

[@iROChakri]

Why does he sound so nervous lol

[@buravan1512]

-His heart and brain are not aligned... -Translation: he doesn't believe in what he's saying 😂

[@manwan9370]

He knows what he talk is totally bullshit！！！

[@SmokePoppa]

I'm laughing my ass off at the British Colonel talking about the importance of tanks on the battlefield. Obviously this dude is retired and trying to ride his rank in retirement to pad his nest egg. Tanks are 1 step above worthless on the modern battlefield. Outside of a few very specific tasks, they're a bigger liability than anything else and in certain environment's you can't even use them. I mean this guy might as well be talking about horseback cavalry. Even on top of that though, China's tanks aren't that bad. The type 99a is on par with the Abrams in regards to it's range, penetration, etc. It's lighter and faster, but the killer for the 99 is its fire control systems giving it a 5 km lock on range. Chinese doctrine wants to keep maximum standoff to keep the enemy at that maximum range. The Tow for instance has a maximum range of 4500 meters which gives the Type 99 an opportunity to make a kill shot before they can be engaged.

[@wzhang318]

Good analyses, buddy. You describe it so funy.

[@ModernHeaven]

After the birth of missiles, tanks have actually lost their deterrence. Today, China has minimized the cost of missiles and established a separate military rocket force. Since the US has been engaged in ground wars all year round, US military is not more advanced than China in rocket technology, may be further behind.

[@SmokePoppa]

@@ModernHeaven very much correct. Avoiding the whole "what's qualifies as a kill" debate, the Abrams costs $24M for each tank but they can get killed by a $215k Javelin or a surplus Dragon. Due to that fact, you need to keep tanks moving or keep them protected from man portable anti-tank. If you add in drones, now you need to add an entirely new piece of equipment to the battlefield to defend against drones. Then again, drones aren't equal which just complicated the entire subject further. So on the other side, what are they good for? Soldiers on the ground are always in "hostile territory" unless they're inside a guarded perimeter. That means they have to use some kind system to provide protection if they want to reduce their combat readiness. You need that for sleep, meals, weapon maintenance, etc. That means you can't react as quickly to what someone else does and that delay is what tanks exploit which is why mines are commonly used outside of defensive perimeters. It buys time to neutralize the tank, but 10 tanks makes it 10^10 harder to defend. That's why we know that tanks are obsolete, or they will be shortly, but we don't have an actual solution to how it will change military doctrine by removing them. Think battleships and aircraft carriers. Before Yamato, and Iowa were built, we knew that battleships were obsolete but planes and munitions didn't "win" the fight yet because technology was missing. Then we developed missiles and it was the writing on the wall. That's the real reason why NATO is so interested in Ukraine. It's the ultimate testing grounds to decide how we should go forward. Mark these words, we will be going to war with China inside the next 10-15 years or everything we know will change fundamentally.

[@itsme-nt6yu]

It is indeed laughable when mentioning tanks for a possible war over Taiwan Strait

[@SmokePoppa]

@@itsme-nt6yu That's how you know this is just a propaganda piece to make everyone feel good.

[@khanhchan5234]

one advice to you sir, dont bet China loses, Chinese never bets American loses.

[@user-hs8ho7jn1l]

中国人的战略一直都是不败，无为而无不为-这是老子和庄子的思想

[@ragnarokws2670]

IF China was weak, they are loser in WW2 then or no longer exist but now China back to World top 2 military power and GDP and not forget that land been exist for over 5000 years , their culture, knowledge, and of cos their mindset , Its so stupid to understimate on China.

[@artsamuel2907]

Any news about what’s going on at the ICJ?

[@yutakago1736]

China have more UAV drones than USA. The Ukraine and Russia war show that UAV drones have replace tanks as the important factor for conventional war.

[@muzikizfun]

If military history has taught us anything, it's that every time a new element is added to the military chess board, it won't be long before a counter device comes out. Then, for the next 20 years, a cycle of counter and recounted will prevail. Tanks, as always, will adapt and will remain a viable, powerful weapon.

[@jetli740]

@@muzikizfun tank is useless in war when you not border with the country,

[@muzikizfun]

@jetli740 Normally, that is true, but the US has been known to move several thousand of them overseas and conduct combined arms warfare pretty well.

[@jetli740]

@@muzikizfun how long to move serval thousand tank? last check us take a years to move 31 to ukraine. where us put those 1000s of tank? before the war? S korea is the only place, but when N korea see that what you think it will do.

[@muzikizfun]

@jetli740 hundreds are aboard special ships at Diego Garcia Island and more are prepositional elsewhere. The sealift command can get a thousand to a preselected location in several weeks and thousands more within several months. Any initial deployment first becomes a bridgehead that is later expanded into offensive combined arms warfare.

[@eurowebs]

NONE. THE ENTIRE WORLD LOST AND THIS CENTURY THE LIFE WILL BE WORST LIKE HELL

[@mmkr0000]

Leave China and Taiwan alone. How hard can that be? It's not worth starting WW3 on a small island. The world is bigger than that.

[@ChrisMurray-iw9ij]

The share holders obviously are the winners

[@heycidskyja4668]

As it should be.

[@-TheMaskedMan-]

Wait what stock!??!? 😬😬

[@KayyHong]

@@-TheMaskedMan- --- Raytheon (RTX), Lockheed Martin (LMT), General Dynamic (GD), General Electric (GE), Northrop Grumman (NOC) ----

[@-TheMaskedMan-]

@@KayyHong thanks but some of these stocks have barely moved. Would it be a good idea to play puts on these stocks or almost any stock for that matter if there is a world war 3? I feel like all stocks would crash as we suck money out of every possible place to aid in the war.

[@KayyHong]

@@-TheMaskedMan- --- long term, my friend --- they are steady winners, not like Nvidia (NVDA) and Crowdstrike (CRWD). If you bought them 10 years ago, you made big bucks and 10 years from now you will be rewarded once again unless the U.S. runs out of money and collapses.

[@HmongMotorcyle]

Goings to be hard for US since they cant even win against the taliban in sandals with only AK.

[@czts4778]

It's not how much spending. It's where the spending goes.

[@jetli740]

$1200 for a coffee cup is pretty well spend

[@joezhou5542]

Well just ask Hollywood , why don’t they wanna make a blockbuster movie about Korea war ?

[@Rob_F8F]

One just came out in 2022 called Devotion.

[@henk4165]

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣LOOK AT AFGANISTAN DO THEY HAVE A GREAT MILITARY FORCE NOOOOOOO BUT THE U S WHENT OUT OF AFGANISTAN WITH THEIR TAIL BETWEEN THERE LEGS .LOOK AT VIETNAM THE SAME 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 RICHES MILITARY WELL TRAIND CANN'T WIN A WAR THEY STARTED.🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@user-hb9jq7wb7l]

美国是强大的，但是在我们中国附近发生军事冲突，美国毫无胜算。我们的工业实力，工业规模相当强大，解放军战斗意志坚定，人民团结，人口众多。就无人机和导弹来说，我们的汽车工业公司就可以源源不断的制造出来。现在全是工业机器人。美国出兵也就是航母舰队。根本靠近不了中国沿海。一但战争开始，共产党组织转战时工业。解放军火箭军饱和公里 第一岛链所有美军基地，至于日本，我相信日本会反水。不然会遭到疯狂报复。包括核武器

[@pangitko3142]

😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@user-hb9jq7wb7l]

@@pangitko3142 笑什么

[@marcuswilson3485]

Makes a lot of sense. I am from Scotland and we don’t have any choice but to be part of aggression because we are under English rule. It makes us sad because we are being drawn into a situation we don’t have any voice on. I love and respect China.

[@SmokePoppa]

您做出了经过深思熟虑的清晰的分析。我同意你所看到的大部分内容，只是你不了解美国“震慑”战术的破坏性。 美国的军事理论将通过完全饱和天空来压倒中国的防空系统，直到所有防御被摧毁。他们将用数千架战斗机和轰炸机充斥天空，直到中国工业陷入停顿。 从海上和空中，中国无法威慑美国的战斗力，但这正是美国战争机器失败的地方。所有北约和金砖国家的全部联合军事力量将没有足够的士兵来保卫中国的领土，因此中国要么变成乌克兰，要么变成另一个阿富汗。在这两种情况下，中国和美国都将给对方造成致命的伤害，如果有的话，也需要几十年的时间才能恢复。 但是，如果中国使用核武器，我可以保证，中国公民将不复存在。 You make a well articulated analysis which is well thought out. I agree with much of what you see, except that you don't understand the devestation of American "Shock and Awe" tactics. The American military doctrine would overwhelm Chinese air defenses with complete saturation of the skies until all defenses were destroyed. They would flood the sky with thousands of fighters and bombers until Chinese industry ground to a halt. From the sea and the air, China would not be able to deter American combat power but that's where the American war machine would fail. The entire combined military force of all NATO and BRICS nations would not have enough soldiers to secure the ground in China so it would either turn into Ukraine or another Afghanistan. In both cases, China and the United states would be dealing each other mortal wounds that would take decades to recover from if ever. However, if China were to use nuclear weapons, I can guarantee that there wouldn't be a single Chinese citizen left.

[@yosoydpfknr2855]

You as China citizen me as US citizen should protest against war . I don't want to kill you in a war you didn't do nothing to me . US and China are the strongest military in the world and I understand your point but you are a little bit wrong. China would not be able to keep up production because that's what US will cut first. China imports around 70% of oil from other countries and US will block all imports to cut the production. China would suffer big time as well US . At the end nobody wins .

[@gerardoberdin6036]

War is inevitable though we want peace when a leader ignored and disrespectful to international law.

[@user-dc1ud6px3s]

In the last Pacific War, Japan started out with a stronger fleet with larger number of bcarrier, but it is the US who won because it has a stronger industrial base and a larger population.

[@Blanzalot]

That is untrue. The United States had a much much larger Navy and fielded larger Carriers. Quit learning history from war thunder

[@user-dc1ud6px3s]

@@Blanzalot Right at the start of the war Japan had 10 carriers, the US had 7, and only 3 in the Pacific. You are the WarThunder gameboy here. Do read once in a while.