America vs China

Is China today stronger than USSR? If yes, why America don't divert its military and propaganda towards China but is still fighting Russia?

China depends on trade with USA and west countires, hence they cant be a threat to us,all we have to do is cut off trade and they are dead.

so ussr was stronker

If china starts messing with the west they will find themselves with 999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 useless slaves

Well, China is stronger than Russia in term of manpower, imo. Also with the sanctions the U.N and European allies placed on Russia, China is economically doing better than Russia.

However, U.S is still much stronger than China and Russia due to technology advancements.

Read an article from a economic expert and it seems China attacking USA in any way would be like shooting yourself in a foot.

USA debt to China is actually an opposite of China owning USA... both countries are to dependent of each other, any war would be futile for both parties.

Ecrit par Eon, 01.10.2015 at 13:42

Well, China is stronger than Russia in term of manpower, imo. Also with the sanctions the U.N and European allies placed on Russia, China is economically doing better than Russia.

However, U.S is still much stronger than China and Russia due to technology advancements.

Not Russia, but USSR, question is whether China is stronger than USSR, not Russia

USSR - 10,000 Nuclear Warheads
China - 400 Nuclear Warheads
USSR stronker

China is morally superior to the west

Ecrit par avatar, 01.10.2015 at 21:28

China is morally superior to the west

They're both pretty fucked morally

Ecrit par Viruslegion, 01.10.2015 at 17:50

USSR - 10,000 Nuclear Warheads
China - 400 Nuclear Warheads
USSR stronker

I never counted number of nukes as only 1 is enough to destroy Gaia(earth), the rest 9,999 are not needed.

Ecrit par Ghostface, 01.10.2015 at 16:22

Economically China has a higher GDP than USSR had but back then the world GDP was quite lower so i dont know if that applies.
In terms of population the USSR had around 300 million back then while China today has around 1.3 Billion , hence more manpower .
The USSR undoubtfully had a better trained , armed and supplied army , airforce and navy than China today , but the Chinnese are yet
starting to modernize their army , although with their conscription method they could easily win a land war with most of their neighbours
simply because they have a huge number of soldiers , the biggest number any country has active personel today.

China doesn't have to use conscription, just ask for volunteers and 100 million will answer The rest of the world combined cannot conscript so much.

Ecrit par avatar, 01.10.2015 at 21:28

China is morally superior to the west

Everyone is morally superior to the west

(legalization of drugs, slave labor, prostitution, gay marriage, satanism)

Ecrit par Skanderbeg, 02.10.2015 at 06:42

China doesn't have to use conscription, just ask for volunteers and 100 million will answer The rest of the world combined cannot conscript so much.

implying they could support such an army,sure they can conscript 100 million but can they supply them? give them all proper weapons and gear,keep them well fed in case of a war?
its a logistical nightmare that would end in million upon million of chinese surrendering because they would run out of food/supplies and weapons/ammo

Ecrit par Evic, 01.10.2015 at 13:25

China depends on trade with USA and west countires, hence they cant be a threat to us,all we have to do is cut off trade and they are dead.

Heh. As if the West depends any less on China as China does on the West.

Ecrit par Evic, 02.10.2015 at 07:36

implying they could support such an army,sure they can conscript 100 million but can they supply them? give them all proper weapons and gear,keep them well fed in case of a war?
its a logistical nightmare that would end in million upon million of chinese surrendering because they would run out of food/supplies and weapons/ammo

That... depends on a lot of factors. The first being the location of the conflict. If China was trying to organize an island-hopping war in the Pacific WWII-style or trying to march across the Siberian front against the Russians, sure. That will end really badly for the Chinese. But if the conflict is fought at or near the Chinese heartland (forget Beijing - the real Chinese heartland is the southeast), I think that they'll easily overwhelm any western force.

After all, in 1950, China's industrial capacity was at par with pre-WWII Belgium's, but they still managed to overrun the allied forces in the Korean War with sheer numbers. Now, China arguably has more industrial capacity than all of NATO combined. If the western world challenges China's military power at or near the Chinese heartland, I have no doubts about what the outcome will be.

Ecrit par Skanderbeg, 02.10.2015 at 06:39

Ecrit par Viruslegion, 01.10.2015 at 17:50

USSR - 10,000 Nuclear Warheads
China - 400 Nuclear Warheads
USSR stronker

I never counted number of nukes as only 1 is enough to destroy Gaia(earth), the rest 9,999 are not needed.

I don't see how a single nuke could destroy the entire world since some pretty huge ones have been tested (tsar bomba) and the earth is still here
or do you mean that it would only take one to make every country fire off their nukes and destroy the world that way?

Ecrit par International, 02.10.2015 at 08:05

west depends on china for cheap consumer goods,in case of a war they dont really need those and they have enough of it anyway XD
china on the other hand completaly depends of the west since they are their #1 economic partner (forget russia,russia is barely 1%),if they were to start a war they would go bankrupt and capitulate very soon.

on your second note, i belive that 70% of chinese population lives of of agriculture (correct me if im wrong),that would make conscription hard since they are majority of population and they are the ones producing all of chinese food,china though big couldnt enforce a large conscription as it would starve them to death (the country,not the people ofc),also your point about korean war is invalid as armies were a lot bigger and lot less advanced back then,nowdays numbers dont mean that much and chinese numbers compared to japan,korea and USA arent that much bigger

N.

Ecrit par Evic, 02.10.2015 at 11:43

west depends on china for cheap consumer goods,in case of a war they dont really need those and they have enough of it anyway XD
china on the other hand completaly depends of the west since they are their #1 economic partner (forget russia,russia is barely 1%),if they were to start a war they would go bankrupt and capitulate very soon.

Money becomes very irrelevant very quickly in a war. How much stuff can you make and how quickly you can make it becomes everything. If you look at the trade balance between China and the western world, it's quite evident that China is the one with surplus industrial capacity - not the West.

Ecrit par Evic, 02.10.2015 at 11:43

on your second note, i belive that 70% of chinese population lives of of agriculture (correct me if im wrong),that would make conscription hard since they are majority of population and they are the ones producing all of chinese food,china though big couldnt enforce a large conscription as it would starve them to death (the country,not the people ofc),

...what do you think China is? Some low-income basket case?

34% of Chinese workforce is involved in agriculture. There are more service workers in China than there are agricultural workers. Considering how many millions the Chinese managed to draft into the army in the Second World War, when the vast majority of the populace was involved in agriculture...

Ecrit par Evic, 02.10.2015 at 11:43

also your point about korean war is invalid as armies were a lot bigger and lot less advanced back then,nowdays numbers dont mean that much and chinese numbers compared to japan,korea and USA arent that much bigger

Please specify what wonderful advancement in military technology made numbers irrelevant. South Korea has a huge military budget that buys a lot of fancy armaments, but they still keep their 9 million reserves around, and for very good reason. Lanchester's square law, applicable in any battle fought using ranged weapons such as firearms, dictates that an army's combat capacity is proportional to the square of its size multiplied by the effectiveness of each soldier. I don't have military numbers handy, but in terms of population, China outnumbers NATO 2:1. NATO will have to give each soldier four times the firepower to compensate. I seriously doubt that NATO has that kind of technological advantage over the Chinese.

Ecrit par International, 02.10.2015 at 21:37

wait wut? money doesnt matter? so china will make its people work for free in factories and such? ofc forcing people to work for free will go well...............no revolution coming there.

and numbers dont mean anything nowdays,they did back in ancient and middle age times but after wwi they stopped being so important,russia dwarfed any other nation in army size in both world wars and yet they lost so badly in both of them.
iraq had 1 million men army in 1990. and yet it got crushed by 150 000 US and allies troops.
same in korean war that you mentioned,china and NK are estimated to have depolyed atleast 2 times as many soliers as SK and allies and yet they suffered 3 times the losses (even more in terms of wounded/out of action).
another example is the yugoslav war,JNA and serbian formations had huge numerical superiority in the beggining (more then 10 to 1) but they suffered huge loses because of poor planing and leadership.

thats why numbers dont matter anymore

Ecrit par Evic, 03.10.2015 at 10:14

another example is the yugoslav war,JNA and serbian formations had huge numerical superiority in the beggining (more then 10 to 1) but they suffered huge loses because of poor planing and leadership.

That's different because Yugoslav Army was controled by Croatian politicians and generals who deliberately planned badly and led infantry into death while encouraging Croatian ethnic group to join terrorist formations. Basically, Croatians fought on both sides so whoever win, Croatia will be there.

Ecrit par Skanderbeg, 03.10.2015 at 12:41

Ecrit par Evic, 03.10.2015 at 10:14

another example is the yugoslav war,JNA and serbian formations had huge numerical superiority in the beggining (more then 10 to 1) but they suffered huge loses because of poor planing and leadership.

That's different because Yugoslav Army was controled by Croatian politicians and generals who deliberately planned badly and led infantry into death while encouraging Croatian ethnic group to join terrorist formations. Basically, Croatians fought on both sides so whoever win, Croatia will be there.

12/14 generals of JNA were serbs,other 2 montenegrin,in 1980. 80% of JNA officers and soldiers were serbs and montenegrins and by 1990. the numbers were the same.

like i said many times before................your numbers and logic are just OP

Lol,China can always trade with non-pro USA states,BRICS will kill dolar and world will be free from capitalist pig.

Ecrit par Kromn, 03.10.2015 at 16:01

Lol,China can always trade with non-pro USA states,BRICS will kill dolar and world will be free from capitalist pig.

thats nice, but if i remember over 70% (if not 80%) of chinese trade is with NATO countires and allies,their trade with non NATO is insignificent considering most of non NATO allies are still influenced hard by NATO

Ecrit par Evic, 03.10.2015 at 10:14

wait wut? money doesnt matter? so china will make its people work for free in factories and such? ofc forcing people to work for free will go well...............no revolution coming there.

Britain 1942? How much could a person do with the British pound then? Pretty much nothing, if you couldn't get some ration tickets. Since you can't buy much with it, money didn't matter very much.

In war, actual production is what matters.

Ecrit par Evic, 03.10.2015 at 10:14

and numbers dont mean anything nowdays,they did back in ancient and middle age times but after wwi they stopped being so important,russia dwarfed any other nation in army size in both world wars and yet they lost so badly in both of them.
iraq had 1 million men army in 1990. and yet it got crushed by 150 000 US and allies troops.
same in korean war that you mentioned,china and NK are estimated to have depolyed atleast 2 times as many soliers as SK and allies and yet they suffered 3 times the losses (even more in terms of wounded/out of action).
another example is the yugoslav war,JNA and serbian formations had huge numerical superiority in the beggining (more then 10 to 1) but they suffered huge loses because of poor planing and leadership.

thats why numbers dont matter anymore

The Yugoslav War is the easiest to dismiss. Yugoslavia was a collapsing failed state by that time. Collapsing states do not maintain the highest performing armies, for obvious reasons.

In terms of the Korean War, one of the two main reasons why having more soldiers is good is because you can take larger losses and not fail. So the North was taking casualties at a 3:1 rate. So what? If the US and China really got involved in the war (I'm not even counting the USSR, since they didn't really have people down there - just weapons) and the 3:1 rate kept up, the Chinese would have lasted as long as the Americans could. So the "North Korea took larger losses" is not conclusive evidence that numbers didn't matter. In fact, if anything it shows why numbers do matter.

Russia in the First World War was also a collapsing state. Ethnic tensions, political violence (the 1905 coup d'etat demonstrates that the Russian Empire couldn't keep itself together in peacetime, let alone in wartime), and semi-feudal mode of thought was crippling the country. There was more factors acting towards Russia's defeat than the German superiority in weaponry. In the Second World War, whether the Soviet Union would really have lost without American aid is a debatable point. What is not debatable is that the Soviet Union and its outdated weaponry, even if it lost, would still have put up a much better defense than France and its up-to-date weaponry.

Ecrit par Evic, 03.10.2015 at 17:24

thats nice, but if i remember over 70% (if not 80%) of chinese trade is with NATO countires and allies,their trade with non NATO is insignificent considering most of non NATO allies are still influenced hard by NATO

Again, the trade balance between the two blocs seem to indicate that NATO will be hurt more than China should trade stop flowing.

Ecrit par Evic, 03.10.2015 at 17:24

Ecrit par Kromn, 03.10.2015 at 16:01

Lol,China can always trade with non-pro USA states,BRICS will kill dolar and world will be free from capitalist pig.

thats nice, but if i remember over 70% (if not 80%) of chinese trade is with NATO countires and allies,their trade with non NATO is insignificent considering most of non NATO allies are still influenced hard by NATO

OK,i will explain to you that you are wrong.Russia sanctioned,not really anything happened to Russia,but Austria stopped growing economy.
You think something different will happen to China? No.They can make all cheap workers,that was doing all material that was traded with NATO countries,into soldiers and kill west capitalist pig.

Ecrit par Evic, 03.10.2015 at 12:43

12/14 generals of JNA were serbs,other 2 montenegrin,in 1980. 80% of JNA officers and soldiers were serbs and montenegrins and by 1990. the numbers were the same.

like i said many times before................your numbers and logic are just OP

Keep inventing numbers, like you always do. Yugoslav Army Staff had 13 generals, not 14, 2 of them Serbs, others Croats, Slovenians and Bosnian Turks

I already posted all informations, links, pictures and proofs 1 year ago. I have no intentions repeating again for every new croat and serbian muslim creating account on this game.

Serbs were mostly infantry and tankers because they were not admitted in NCO schools and military academy as that was reserved for Slovenians and Croatians beacuse Croatian Yugoslavia was national socialist. It was 100% anti-Serbian and history shows us how 1 million Serbs died from 1945 to 1991 by Croatian communists. They even invited Albanians and opened Serbian region Kosovo for them. Today 50 years later that Serbian region is 'independent republic' thanks to croatian communist'.

But you keep inventing numbers and events, your numbers and logic are OP

Ecrit par Skanderbeg, 04.10.2015 at 06:36

tito do you honestly belive in this?
ill give you numbers that are proper.in its existance from 1945. to 1992. JNA had 235 generals,out of which only 32 were croats,26 from croatia,3 from bosnia and 1 from serbia,kosovo and montenegro each.

just where did you possibly get the number that 1 million serbs died in yugoslavia? just where?
what is a fact that over 400 000 croats left yugoslavia to other countires between 1945 and 1990.
you say serbs had it so bad? then why was average salary higher in serbia then any other republic? even though it was croatia and slovenia carrying the economy on bosnian resources,if i was to opress a nation i certainly would give it higher paychecks or build infrastructure in it?

if croats had it sooooo good why was there almoast an uprising in 1970s? (its called croatian spring if you need to look it up) after which tito was forced to make changes but it wasnt much.

me and the rest of the forum are getting sick of your bullshit,just stop

For all thise of you who dont know. When it comes to communism dobt just read the fairytales that some ppl post here about it. Communism was shit. Yes it had free healthcaare,free hospital free school, but no free speech. People had to wait in line ONCE a month for a bottle of milk or 2-5 pound meat....ONCE A MONTH FFS. People had afraid to speak with eachother about what they tjinkrd of the dictator because they never knew if the pther guy would be a spy or not.
If you tried to escape for a better life, they would capture you and take you , your family and all your relatives in prisons where they did inhuman things, one i remember someone said was they would make you fill up a bucket with water, put the soap inside,waited for few minutes then drink all bucket. Communism didnt allow you to practice your own religion. And after you finished highschool they would decide for you what you were gonna study in university.....you wanted to be a doctor? Too bad , you would be a truck driver. They forced kids to build railways and it was called as "volunteer" job. Forcing 10-15 yr old kids to buil railroads and if that wasn't enough their parents had to work in farms. If you denied it....well u know. People were poor as hell they didnt had more than 2-3 pair of clothes for person.
So if you ask me if ussr was better then china, i tell you HELL FUCKING NO

Btw the title is America vs China and the poll question is about USSR and CHINA.

Your obsession with comparing usa with russia went off chart on this one

Another argument over the balkans in this.


Those kebabs just cant let the balkans go

Ecrit par AlBoZzZ, 04.10.2015 at 09:12

For all thise of you who dont know. When it comes to communism dobt just read the fairytales that some ppl post here about it. Communism was shit. Yes it had free healthcaare,free hospital free school, but no free speech. People had to wait in line ONCE a month for a bottle of milk or 2-5 pound meat....ONCE A MONTH FFS. People had afraid to speak with eachother about what they tjinkrd of the dictator because they never knew if the pther guy would be a spy or not.
If you tried to escape for a better life, they would capture you and take you , your family and all your relatives in prisons where they did inhuman things, one i remember someone said was they would make you fill up a bucket with water, put the soap inside,waited for few minutes then drink all bucket. Communism didnt allow you to practice your own religion. And after you finished highschool they would decide for you what you were gonna study in university.....you wanted to be a doctor? Too bad , you would be a truck driver. They forced kids to build railways and it was called as "volunteer" job. Forcing 10-15 yr old kids to buil railroads and if that wasn't enough their parents had to work in farms. If you denied it....well u know. People were poor as hell they didnt had more than 2-3 pair of clothes for person.
So if you ask me if ussr was better then china, i tell you HELL FUCKING NO

Then we can say capitalism is **** as well, because half of Latin America had dictators imposed by USA who tortured people, had spies in population, took everything from civilians to fund corporations which extract resources and sell them to developed countries. That is inhumane, people couldn't speak, didn't had food, clothes, not to mention cars or toilet paper.

I don't know about other communist countries but USSR didn't force people to work or study what they didn't want. USSR encouranged people to study whatever they want and funded them to do that. That's why USSR was first in technology and science, went first to space.

You literally just said 'i've seen human kill human, that mean all human civilization is bad'. Why do you ignore that there are some good people who help other people? You just claim something ignoring all facts.

Ecrit par AlBoZzZ, 04.10.2015 at 09:27

Btw the title is America vs China and the poll question is about USSR and CHINA.

Your obsession with comparing usa with russia went off chart on this one

Clearly you didn't read or you don't understand the question.