Discussion in 'International Politics' started by Rowdy, Jul 17, 2015.
Check out this massive Graphic
click to enlarge
@Sakal Gharelu Ustad @pmaitra @Mad Indian @blueblood
Big graphic, little information!!!!!
A very rudimentary and very unfavourable comparison between US and China. Something good enough for MSM not for a defence forum.
Liaoning is at best 1/3 or maybe less when compared to a Nimitz class.
A single Abrams is worth what like 20-30 Type 59s on battlefield.
How many J-7s will you count as KIA against a single F-16?
Aaahh...the chinese number game.
Not much substantial info.
What is the source of this graphics?
Those who call China a superpower must be in delibrium.
Just at a glance of the graphs.
miliatry powers is always based on economy power....
CHina's real economy is much larger than USA's now...
Thus, even though USA miliatary is much stronger than CHina's, its miliatary power will be not sustained due to daily weankened miliatry and R&D expenditure,if it can not restore its eocnomy edge on CHina.
so, as a whole, CHina now is on a much easy situation than USA..
because USA has to maintain a much more expensive military force with a actually smaller economy .
Furthermore,USA still doesn't assure if CHina will be a friend, rival or enemy..
In the eyes of USA, CHina today is somelike USA in the eyes of British empire before NAZI emerged in 1930....
at that time ,UK was the world leader and maintained a much stronger military force with s smaller economy than USA...
Once upon a time, UK indeed looked on USA as main rival after WWI ended,but it had to hand its hegemony peacefully to USA,after NAZI emerged...
Maybe someday such a history will repeat ,and USA will have to hand its hegemony peacefully to CHIna,after a new threaten to USA,such as RUssia,rise.
Europe looks really small from this angle....
such a compasion is meaningless.
Europe is stil one of major powers on the earth,because it has one of strongest industry capacity and most advanced R&D on the earth
nowdays,power still comes from industry capacity and decent R&D .
as long as Europe has its powerful industry capacity and decent R&D,it would just takes dozens of months for EUrope to store one of greatest miliatry force on the earth.
PLS ,don't forget that USA's military force was much smaller than Poland in 1939.but nobody thought that Poland was stronger than USA that time,because all knew that USA could store one much stronger armforce than poland soon,if necessory....
in a word, if necessary,
only 4 guys ,that is USA, Russia, China and EU ,can independently arm themselves and stand a long-term total war.
other countries, including india,can stand a 6-month war at most,because 6 months after wars they would find their weapon and ammunication stock wear out and their weapon plant can not provide enough resupply at all.
Yeah, and luckily all the roadsigns in Europe are in western alphabet. Not the easiest continent to occupy by someone who is only fluent in oriental type of writing....
Do not forget North Korea and Cuba.
North Korea? without the support from CHina or RUssia, its aummunication and oil stock would wear out 1 weak after the war break out.
Cuba? can its tank fleet work?
Indians are mostly good in english
this i agree with 100% ........................................................
neither china can invade US nor US can invade china.practically its impossible. wat atmost they can do is to make ppl suffer in each others country
whats the distance from USA to PRC ...
Not entirely. India is a larger economy than Russia, does not mean we will compare to them militarily anytime soon. China could be double US in GDP and will not likely match militarily. Its not just money, its technology that you have either develop yourself or procure.
I don't think anyone can US and maybe EU can sustain long-term conflict, though it obviously depends on who you are fighting.
Russia is now very weak economically and will likely deteriorate in the near future.
China against US for example will not be a long war before China has no option but to go nuclear. They can park their CBG and destroy your factories that produce weapons. How many do you guys have to reciprocate? You would also lack many key cutting edge technologies that you get from the Russia. Merely numbers are not enough. When it does nuclear, your 500 or so against 20K or more is no contest.
This is why all out wars between countries above a certain threshold of power are exceedingly unlikely.
Anyway, no other country including India has much chance of fighting even months of all out war.
1. China's 100 A-bome or USA's 1000 A-bome does not make much difference ,because either 100 a_bomb or 1000 A-bome means the destroy of one country.
So,unless USA , Russia,CHina and EU want to a sucide,none will nuke each other.
2. since industrilazation revolutions, conventional wars always has been won by the guys who can produce more steel,electricity,concrete,food,oil ,manpowers and weapons.
3. Steel\electricity/concrete/food/oil/weapons are always produced by factories and farmland. SO ,USually, those owns most factories are the winner of conventional war since industrialzation .
4. more GDP does not means more factories and farmlands.
For example, Japan has much more GDP than Russia,
But if comparing the output of industry products, you will find that RUssia in fact produce more electricity,oil,food and other resource that is decisve to wars than Japan.
Besides, USA had more GDP than CHina,but CHina produce much more than USA....
that means CHina/Russia can produce much more real resource that is decisive to war than USA/Japan during wartime.
Agreed. ............................. Lets Only EU/US/Chian can string it out
Separate names with a comma.