Thread 518871198

Who would win?

>>518871198 (OP)
Currently, China. We would be too busy trying to solve our nigger and liberal problem to deal with a war with China.

>>518871198 (OP)
China has a chance? Place your bet now /pol/

>>518871198 (OP)
Whoever attacks first loses.

>>518871198 (OP)
Neither side could ever conquer the other. An expeditionary force crossing the pacific and conquering another country with hundreds of millions of people + shitloads of money is never going to work. It's too big.
One side would only win just by the other side giving up on their goals

>>518875055
Pretty much. Because they're the one who loses the battle for international support.
China doesn't have too many allies who could act outside of North Korea, the US strategy relies heavily on partners who would join in a *defensive* action.

Anyone working on remote retardation weapons? You just point a beam in a certain direction and everyone there wakes with 59 IQ the next morning. This would be a game changer as compared to straight man's kinetic projectiles.

>>518871198 (OP)
simple

>>518871198 (OP)
Americans will go in full dellusional just like against the Vietnamese times 10 and will result in a 500k plus crying moms in the motherland

>>518871198 (OP)
Chinks would kill more, I think. Would they win a war that's meant to cull the population of the world, except for jeets and feudal techlords? No.

>>518871198 (OP)
China would win.
They would just lace several hundreds of thousands of batches of weed they sell all over the USA, and the uS tweaker population would be decimated.
Matter of fact, they probably already started this a few years back, but in a very gentle manner.

>>518871198 (OP)
there will never be one, because china makes all the computers and robots to enslave the stupid niggers... and the fentanyl too

>>518875641
>the uS tweaker population would be decimated.
Sonunds like a decisive US victory to me.

>>518871198 (OP)
not going to happen, but chinks will annihilate jeets in my lifetime

>>518875055
>>518875209
Lol no, the entire world would like to see China being stoped (even if that means destroyed), they are too dangerous economicaly.

>>518876090
Not gonna happen. What's likely is a giant cosmic ultra power called Hinduchina.

>>518871198 (OP)
>U.S. manufacturing base decimated after 20 years of outsourcing
>Armed forces in decay
>Navy in need of maintenance and repairs their shipyards can't handle
>Can't replenish weapons stockpiles efficiently
>Spending $1 trillion on military which disappears into bureaucracy and inertia

>>518871198 (OP)
The US military is brown, female and gay.
It’s made of mercenaries not patriots.
Nobody cares about this country anymore except a few boomers who haven’t realized we live in an economic zone.
China would beat the ever loving shit out of America, which could not even defeat the Houthis. The US Navy is undermanned and the ships are poorly maintained. The only way to “win” is nukes.

>>518871198 (OP)
It depends. Whoever is on defense is most likely to win it at this point, I feel.

>>518871198 (OP)
China is never going to attack when america is strong.
They will wait until there is a great calamity here before doing whatever it is they want to do. I'm assuming take taiwan.
The USA would probably have to descend into civil war for china to act.

>>518877002
China wins by default in the long term. America has to attack first if it wants a war.

>>518876266
lol, they'll be as welcomed as the plague

>>518871198 (OP)
Neither. We can't conquer China, but they can't conquer us either.

That's actually why we won't fight. No matter what, I don't expect war between China and the US, not a "hot" war, anyway. Maybe just more economic sabotage and infowar and cultural subversion, and petty sabotage.

It'll just be that for another few decades, I believe. More of the same. Both sides "turtling."

We could just wait until china dies from lead and mercury poisoning due to thinking sourcing all refining pollution to themselves is a win

>>518877325
>implying China hasn't been using Opium War tactics against US population for over a decade now

>>518871198 (OP)
its like one really fat kid vs many super skinny kids.

both cant fight and everyone will laugh.

>>518876096
china is making the world better, they will push all the scientific advances in next decades, why would I want to see them stopped?

>>518871198 (OP)
>Who would win?
me because i'd watch zogbots AND chinks die en masse in 4k

>>518879135
Let's hope your social credit is good enough to benefit from these "scientific advances"..

>>518878573
>china blames others for their own retarded backwardness.

hong kong was owned by whites for hundreds of years and was a thriving metropolis.

>>518878553
we're getting some of that pollution ourselves if they don't give us rare earths to make military equipment and hardware.

been reading actually chinks figured out how to reduce 80% of the pollution but we'll be starting from scratch.

It's kind of a toss-up and IMO depends completely if the US and its allies can penetrate Chinese defense and land a crippling blow on their manufacturing capability and shake the Chinese people's confidence in the CCP enough to destabilize their war effort.

China pros:
>massive manufacturing base to sustain war
>massive pool to draw soldiers from
>cheap munitions
>absolute state control over all resources to mobilize easily in a war effort
China cons:
>lacks blue water navy and capability to project force
>almost all strategic targets on its east coast exposed to US and allies
>zero strategic positions and few allies in the western hemisphere
>very few modern conflicts to develop/iterate operational capabilities

US pros:
>entire operational plan throughout the 21st century is projecting force
>strategic positions and allies all over pacific ocean and asia
>operational capabilities developed and iterated through actual conflict
>advanced weapons
>only strategic targets on west coast exposed to china, inland and east coast very difficult to reach
US cons:
>lacks manufacturing to sustain war
>lacks manpower and disciplined fighting force
>expensive munitions
>would need to piss a lot of people off (pesky rights and such) for control over resources to sustain a war effort at scale

China is exposed to strikes from the US and its allies, and would need to put up a very strong defense from nearly every angle against some pretty deadly battle tested weapons. Critics of the US like to point out failures in Vietnam, Iraq, etc. but the objective in those theaters was occupation and installation of democratic government, war with China would just hinge on destruction of the assets and legitimacy of the CCP. China would have a very tough time striking back at the US, but if the US fails to land a crippling blow on their war engine early, they could scale up and deplete US and allies' resources much faster.

>>518881491
Of course this is assuming no nukes.

rebuttal to this chinkess?

>>518871198 (OP)
China has put so much effort into making their marches look good like oh wow we have a heckin' unified march of men
Meanwhile trannies are just piloting joysticks and droning entire legions while getting reamed by the bull
Does China really think they'll win??

>>518871198 (OP)
Low IQ proposition because war is not like a sports meet where athletes compare their records. War is highly specific.
>how much do parties commit?
>under which narrative?
>where do they fight?
>which legal or moral constraints are initially in place?
>what's at stake?
>are there plans in motion or do they have to come up with logistics on the fly?
>how long does the conflict play out and how much do the plans change?
...

This is not about two champions inside a boxing ring. It's actually the exact opposite.

>>518882342
Scenario 3 is just fantasies, it implies USA will just sit and watch their carriers get destroyed.

>>518883067
>This is not about two champions inside a boxing ring. It's actually the exact opposite.
Two boxing rings inside a champion ?

>>518883961
>two boxing rings inside a champion ?
yes, two boxing rings inside a champion.
In the sodomite opposite world your mind dwells in, this does make total sense.

>>518871198 (OP)
> How would war between America and China go?
Bad
>who would win?
Israel

>>518871198 (OP)
Better start learning Chinese.

>>518875055
This anon gets it. Historically, the nation that strikes first has ultimately gone on to lose the war more often than they win.

>>518885884
How can you be sure?
America is israel's no.1 golem.
Let's say America and China do some phoney war shit. China's problems would vanish overnight.
>production output
>common goal & patriotism
>youth employment
would skyrocket overnight whereas the US, who is unable to take real casualties, produce even basic shells and has no more patriotic energy left would absolutely get humbled.

It could easily break the system and cause israel to fall apart in the end.

>>518871198 (OP)
Never happen. One is scared and the other is glad.

>>518881491
>if the US and its allies can penetrate Chinese defense and land a crippling blow on their manufacturing capability
They don't need to, China is dependent on naval resource import and USA/NATO have clear hold on naval routes, so as for today, USA could use their blue water navy to kill China without ever getting in range of their weapons.
Of course I doubt it would happen as such conflict would be catastrophic to both sides.

If I was drafted into a war with China I would immediately call the surrender hotline and turn myself in. I would rather be a prisoner of war for the Chinese than a zogbot for the united states of Israel.

>>518887411
they'd blow up all the fabs in TSMC immediately wouldn't they?

>>518871198 (OP)
>US declares war on China
>China embargoes America
>SnP drops 10% per day until the war ends
>US economy collapses, 60% unemployment rate within 6 months