Who would win in a war between the USA and China?

Answer 1

First, the possibility of a shooting war with China is remote in the extreme. The US is far more valuable to them as a trading partner than as a conquered subject. In the event there WAS a war, it would HAVE to be nuclear, as we would not be in a position to conquer and occupy (as we did in Germany after WW2), and China would have way too many problems occupying and controlling the US if they were to win and occupy the US. Logistically, it would expend valuable resources for a very small return, as most of the US is already settled and occupied by Americans. A War would immediately send both countries' economies intot he toilet, as the prices for the cheap crap we get a WalMart now would quadruple, and China would lose MILLIONS of dollars a month for every month of hostilities.

Wars are (usually) started because of population pressure. When a country gets too crowded, and there is no more land to explore or into which to settle, pressure of the population will force that population's military to grab living space. The war to watch out for in the coming years is one between China and Russia. The old USSR has HUGE areas of completely unexplored lands, lands China must see as a terrible temptation. The only reason to attack the US would be to attempt what Japan attempted to do in WW2: Remove the US's ability and motivation to enter a conflict between CHin and Russia.

Another conflict to keep your eyes on is one between India and Pakistan. India is as overcrowded as China is, but without China's aggressive birth control programs (it's interesting to note that, if China did NOT have a Communist grip on its population, forcing them to limit themselves to one child per family, they would have had to invade Russia for living space decades ago).

China would need a VERY compelling reason to go to war with the US, and vice-versa.

And for those who talk about China's inferior war capabilities, since China is a closed country, any opinions given on their military capability are just that, only opinions. We have IDEAS about where their missiles are, but it's all educated guesswork. We don't even task survelliance satellites for mainland China, so I would be interested in seeing some legit sources about China military capabilities. Sources such as Defense Dept assessments, Jane's, etc, not "Joe Bob's Ideas About the Chinese Military".

Do you know, at the US Military Foreign Language Schools, the bulk of the translators are being taught Farsi, no one seems to care about Russian or Chinese anymore.

Answer 2

China has a far bigger army, and better tanks. China has fewer ICBMs than does the US, and its navy largely doubles as a merchant marine. The US enjoys air and naval superiority over China.

However, we should expect a major conflict between China and the US to involve nuclear weapons. We probably cannot intercept their ICBMs. The US has a much smaller population than does China, and less land area. I would expect the major population centers of each nation to be reduced to rubble. In this scenario, there would be no winners.

Could the US successfully occupy China? Highly doubtful. China would be better able to occupy the US, as it has a much larger population to draw upon. On the other hand, our average citizen is better armed than the average chinese soldier. They would have more trouble occupying the US than we are having occupying Iraq. I don't see any non nuclear war between the US and China as a realistic possibility.

Incidentally, the US spends more upon its military than China and all european nations combined. For that matter, China's military spending exceeds that of all of Europe.

Addendum: I disagree with part of RajinCajin's analysis. Iraq had a population of 26 million. We destroyed a substantial fraction of Saddam's military capability in the first gulf war. How many soldiers were in Iraq's army, originally, 150,000? China has nearly 3 million ground troops, 8500 tanks, 4000 planes, 60 submarines, 50 surface ships. Granted, the submarines and ships would be quickly eliminated. Not so their tanks and planes--that is a lot of targets. China is not a weakened little middle eastern country. It is larger than the US. Nor do we enjoy control of China's skies, the way we controlled Iraq's air space. Also, where are we staging our invasion of China? This whole proposal would be a logistical nightmare. I see no way to prevent any non nuclear conflict from escalating into a nuclear exchange. We cannot intercept their missiles, nor can they block ours.

If we suppose that nuclear weapons do not exist, we still could not successfully occupy China.

This is an interesting question, but ultimately rather pointless. At the present time neither country would stand to gain anything through military action against the other. However, if present US policies continue unchecked, we will eventually be weak enough to pose a valuable target for chinese aggression. It would still be unlikely to occur, because the chinese society has historically been quite insular. Except for incursions into Tibet and sabre rattling against Taiwan, China is not the empire Europe was and America is trying to become.

Answer 3

It would be the US.

US
PROS:
1.Technologically superior
-When one fighter jet can destroy entire enemy battalions and armored divisions without being seen you have an advantage against superior numbers.
2. Advanced tactics
-We inherited Germany's Blitzkrieg attack. Our forces can take out command and control positions easily and quick leaving our enemy blind, deaf, and dumb. Then we mop up.
3. Financially Superior
-Wars cost money. When you have the resources that the US does you can fight a sustained war longer that anyone else on the planet.
4. Allies
-Our allies in the West are a close match to our own technological and financial strength. If the war happened to escalate and many nations were involved again we would win.

CONS:
War Weariness
-Our appetite for war is limited. The one weakness in a democracy is war weariness. It is not easily overcome.

China
PROS:
Larger standing military
-There numbers far exceed our own
Communist Dictatorship
-This allows them to fight a long war without fear from there people's discontent.

CONS:
Lack financial stability
-Much like Russia, China would fold due to economic stress long before the end of a conflict. However China has learned from Russia mistakes and would last a little longer.
Lack Tecnology
-Their weapon systems are old and useless agains our weapon systems

The US military of today is not the same as the Military that fought in WW2, Korea, Vietnam. We have a new, moble, and very powerful military. Look at what happend to Iraq in both Gulf Wars. There militarys crumbled within weeks of the start of the conflicts. China would last a little longer but not much longer.

EDIT: Natanovich

Where do you get your information? Your numbers for China are extremely inflated. In fact the Chinese not only have a fraction of men and equipment in the military most of their military is outdated. True we don't enjoy air superiority over China skies but it wouldn't be that hard to take when you put a Raptor or JSF up against their 20 year old technology. Plus the annual budget the Chinese have for their military is 14.6 billion US. We, the US, spent that on Wednesday between 2:00pm and 5:00pm. As for a ground war. Well once we have taken control of the skies and destroyed all command and control eliminating their ground forces would be easy even with their greater numbers. In short it would be easy to subdue the Chinese military and render it a non-threat. Occupying it is a different story. We don't need to occupy a country to win a war.

As for Iraq. Gulf war 1 and 2 saw the near elimination of the Republican Guard, surrender or destruction of the other ground forces, and elimination of their air force. The Iraqi air force was similar in technology to Chinas current air force.

As for nuclear war. The Chinese have a large amount of short range weapons and small amount of ICBM, about 20 or 30. The US has already built a missile defense shield along or west coast that would reduce that threat. It would be the short range bombs I would worry about.

I do agree that this is a pointless question. But the US will never be an easy target. Our two societies are not like the US and Russia of the cold war. Why are you trying to say the US is trying to become an empire? That is absolutely ridicules! But I guess your are entitled to your conspiracy theories.

Answer 4

China probably would. They have the manpower, although the U.S. still has the technology. China out numbers the United States by about 1 billion people. The United States no longer has the resources for a prolonged war against a powerful country.

Answer 5

There are waaaaaaaaaaaaaay too many variables that would would need to give an answer.


as the poster above mentioned, China has a lot of people, and therefore can take very heavy losses, however this does not always lead to victory:

Korean War: estimated 900,000 Chinese casualties
33,741 US casualties
Even with that kind of man power were not able to take South Korea, but was enough to take back hold the North

Answer 6

Natonovich is right.

If either side launched its nuclear weapons, the other side would also launch. There would be no way to stop the missiles. The command and control would still exist for an all out exchange. Most of humanity would parish. If global winter set in, then probably everything would die.

Answer 7

Well, the untold story in the 'Nam was the classified number of ChiCom that got killed. In Korea, the ChiCom were a definite factor in pushing the American troops all the way to the southern tip of the peninsular. Wars are dependent on supply lines. Your question has to be asked from what location with what type of terrain such a hypothetical conflict happens.

Answer 8

Let's not find out.


Marc S: Don't forget the agreement signed between Russia and China two years ago.

We need to diffuse this situation of tensions building amongst the three. If we don't, the Asia pacific union, North american Union and European Union will all have an established military superpower. best way to handle this is to dissolve the push for all three unions to begin with. National Sovereignty only with trade.

Answer 9

People only think this is a question because they see stats that say that China has the largest miltary force in the world. But that is the only advantage they have. The United States has better soldiers, better technology, better leaders, more weapons (nukes) better battle plans, etc. We practice for every possible thing you can think of. Our miltary is the greatest fighting force the world has ever seen. The brute strength of the army and navy. The percision killing of the Air force. And not to mention the most dangerous weapon in the world, a marine and his rifle.

Some people will say , this means nothing in the age of nuclear weapons. Well you have to be able to USE those nukes. You have to deliver them to their targets, and acturatly. The United States knows where every nuke China has and would take out it launch capabilties before China could launch it.

Answer 10

well if it was all out. the usa would win by ko in the first round. china would be a smouldering hole in the ground.

in case of invasion the usa would kill chinaman by the millions, until the usa thought their own casualties were too high and the occupation was too expensive, then they would pull out and china would declare victory because they still existed