if we were to go to war with china, how bad would we lose.?

Answer 1

Just a few points...

(1) Bush didn't give China "favored nation" status.
(2) If we're going to fight China, we'll have to go there. They don't have the logistical capability to field an army large enough to come here. And we're not going to do that.

But, for the sake of discussion, suppose we did. We wouldn't have a prayer. Their army is so large that they'd simply overwhelm us.

But, since we're not going to attack them. And since they can't attack us conventionally, war with China, should it ever occur, would probably be nuclear. If that happens we'll lose terribly... so will China... and so will the rest of the world.

Answer 2

We would not loose.

We have the advantage in every catagorey of military warfare. Air Dominance, Sea Dominance, Land Weapons, Training, Training, and Training.
The only area we are behind in is available able bodied men (this is the whole countries male population 17-40).

Depending on where the battle took place would dictate the ease or difficulty of our victory.
China attempting invasion of the US = easiest victory
The Us would destroy the entire task force(s) in the open sea with relative ease. The US Navy is second to none. Most would be destroyed in or near Chinese terroritorial waters by submarines, with the skimmers picking off whats left.
US attempting invasion of China = Very difficult, but winable.
The Us would not conduct an outright invasion, but a siege on national proportitions. We would blockade anything in or out, while Air Power gained control of the skies, and destroyed the Chinese ability for command and control, resupply, and manufacturing. We would basically strangle them to starvaion before attempting a landing.

Answer 3

Right now we wouldn't fair too well since were exhausted from Middle East involvement, but we can say that we're "Battle Hardened Veterans".
Prior to 9/11 we would've won.
In a few years after some rest we would win.
Remember that we fought China(indirectly, but the suckers still came in over the Yalu river and fought) during the Korean war and forced it into a stalemate! That was us and minimal involvement(percentage wise) from other UN member states against large percentage involvement of both North Korea and China.
Read SSN by Tom Clancy. It shows very well the logisitcal matchup between the US and China.

Answer 4

You've already decided that you're a looser . I agree with you , I feel that you're a looser too .
In an all-out war with China , my money will be on America . China is doing wonders , and maybe in the far distant future they might even catch up with us .
China shows-off it's new wealth , but the remaining ninty percent of the population is still living primitive lives . They have five times our population , but only a fraction of our automobiles , washing machines , TVs ,etc . The living conditions of those away from the large cities are primitive . In the factories , work conditions are very hazardous . Nobody cares - - - - get the junk out and the bucks in , is all that counts.

Answer 5

The U.S. probably wouldn't loose. China already said that they would use nuclear weapons so it would be a nuclear war. Americans are spread around the world in greater numbers than the Chinese. China doesn't have enough nukes to kill every American. While Americans would probably rebuild and get the immigration to start over, nobody wants to be Chinese and it would be a dead culture after the nukes flew.

Answer 6

Unfortunately, your question (other than the stupidity of the final phrase) supposes a condition with many possibilities. A limited war with China over some area of mutual interest could be problematic. General war (a virtual impossibility) would be a quick annihilation of China's cultural centers, due to our ability to deliver nuclear weapons while preventing their meager capability to attack us intercontinentally, But because of their huge land mass and almost-uncountable population, we could never hope to gain and maintain physical control, the only absolute way to determine win or lose.

Answer 7

No matter what the numbers, you have to take technology into account. Even without nukes, using conventional warfare, we have air superiority and sea superiority. From there we would just blast the hell out of them until they surrendered. Do you really think AK-47s, outdated AA guns, and MIG's from the 70's could stop our technology? We could place a missile at their doorstep with a push of a button, so why would we even bother with a ground war?

Answer 8

In general - China would be defeated by US air and naval power without the necessity of placing 'boots on the ground.'

We would not need to use nukes in order to win, while China would have to get their handful of ICBMs past our missile defenses - and then face extermination in our counterstrike.

IMO - a likely US strategy in such a war would be a naval blockade supplemented by air strikes on their electricity infrastructure and railroad bridges.

Their economy would collapse due to the lack of import/export markets, and the loss of imported oil. The destruction of the electrical generation and railroad bridges will cause the country to disintegrate.

Answer 9

US wouldn't lose. 3 things why, 1) Air superiority, 2) Naval superiority 3) They couldn't even get to our continent. China can be crippled severely just by air strikes & naval bombardment & blockade. Now if they want to go nuclear, then we would also & we have far better technology to stop their missiles long before they get to us, & we have nuke subs that could launch from there coast to make sure they cant stop theirs. The US would not lose.

Answer 10

May the 2008 Beijing Olympics determine the fate of the countries.