Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="dicknixon72" data-source="post: 1438532" data-attributes="member: 7739">Both side realize from experience and reality that the best way to win a war is not to engage in one, a hot one at least. US forces will inflict heavy damage while suffering losses unacceptable to an American public that hasn't had a 'total war' mindset since 1945.My armchair general observations see the Chinese lacking in...*Jet turbine technology - the Soviet plugged away hard for 60+ years and still are behind the West*Aircraft carriers - its one thing to refit something the Soviets built to 75% completion, another to make a facsimile of it, another to make your own, and another still to be able to operate it effectively and efficiently as part of a CBG, something the US can do with relative ease, Coordinating high-tempo air ops on a carrier is challenging to say the least and the Chinese simply have no experience doing this.*True combat experience - my casual reading has told me - and please correct me if I am mistaken - that the relative few Chinese engagements in recent times have been met with failure on part of Chinese forces.However, if China takes a Soviet-style approach towards having a strong defense posture (thick integrated AAA/SAM umbrella, early warning systems, ABM system, shore batteries, stealth/LO/hypersonic anti-ship missiles) combined with a focus on regional security and orbital security, that is a form of parity in itself.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="dicknixon72, post: 1438532, member: 7739"] Both side realize from experience and reality that the best way to win a war is not to engage in one, a hot one at least. US forces will inflict heavy damage while suffering losses unacceptable to an American public that hasn't had a 'total war' mindset since 1945. My armchair general observations see the Chinese lacking in... [B]*Jet turbine technology[/B] - the Soviet plugged away hard for 60+ years and still are behind the West [B]*Aircraft carriers[/B] - its one thing to refit something the Soviets built to 75% completion, another to make a facsimile of it, another to make your own, and another still to be able to operate it effectively and efficiently as part of a CBG, something the US can do with relative ease, Coordinating high-tempo air ops on a carrier is challenging to say the least and the Chinese simply have no experience doing this. [B]*True combat experience[/B] - my casual reading has told me - and please correct me if I am mistaken - that the relative few Chinese engagements in recent times have been met with failure on part of Chinese forces. However, if China takes a Soviet-style approach towards having a strong defense posture (thick integrated AAA/SAM umbrella, early warning systems, ABM system, shore batteries, stealth/LO/hypersonic anti-ship missiles) combined with a focus on regional security and orbital security, that is a form of parity in itself. [/QUOTE]

Verification