Poll: What do you think a real war between the East and the West would be like?

[Jacco]

I'm writing a paper on this for a theory class of mine and I'd like to get some feedback from my fellow gamers!

There have been a lot of games and movies coming out over the last year or so that depict the Russians or Chinese as the military opponents of western militaries.

Call of Duty, as we all know, has the Russians as the "bad guys" in pretty much every game. But I have a hard time believing that modern day Russia could really stand up and put up a serious fight against the Western powers (US, UK, France, Canadam etc) as is shown in MW2 & 3.

The Chinese as well are shown as such. In the Mercenaries games, the Chinese are depicted on a military level with West. It is my understanding that though the Chinese have a HUGE military, it is not nearly as advanced or equipped as anything in the West.

So, do you think these games have it right in their depictions? Or would you say that the Russians and Chinese could not stand up to Western military power at this point in time?

I'm interested in hearing from people in Europe as they are on the "front lines" as it were and aren't quite as self centered as us Americans. lol

 

[capper42]

While numbers don't win wars, they certainly help, giving the East an advantage. On top of this, what makes you think the Chinese military is not as advanced or as equipped as the US military (note that I am not saying it is, I've done no research, I'm just wondering if you're basing it on anything solid. I think that, excluding WMDs, which wouldn't even be a war, they would just lead to an apocalypse, both sides would be fairly evenly matched. The US army has a tendency to overestimate itself (i.e. Vietnam), however with most of Western Europe behind it would probably stand a fighting chance.

 

[enzilewulf]

I think it would either result in Nuclear warfare or there would be a special operation to assassinate one of the leaders and make it come to a swift end. I can't see there being many ground skirmishes.

If it did amount to ground warfare and in some bizarre way nukes were not used, the West would win. Advanced tech always beats numbers, but i'm not the best to ask about Chinese or Russian tech, I only know that Ak's are their current weapon system, and that's inferior to current M16 and SCAR's.

 

[Axyun]

I think China and Russia can put up a hell of a fight. Russia's got more technology than we give her credit for and massive amounts of resources as well. China's an economic world power that specializes in manufacturing. They might not out-tech the west, but they can certainly out-produce it.

Not to mention the U.S. is not at all prepared for an inland attack. Not in technology, logistics or manpower.

 

[HeatproofShAdOw]

It would be a bloodbath, that's for sure.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Lot's of bombs and air domination, probably not as much infantry fighting as people make out.

But based on that, Russia still is a very powerful country. They've got some of the best infantry in the world (even though, like I said, not really relevant nowadays)

 

[Bravo 21]

Well, i think that there is a very real possibilty that this would end in a large scale global thermonuclear war, and in that case, as we all know,"the only winning move is not to play"

 

[JaceArveduin]

Yes, because we'd try to win as we tried to help them rebuild.

 

[Al-Bundy-da-G]

While numbers don't win wars, they certainly help, giving the East an advantage. On top of this, what makes you think the Chinese military is not as advanced or as equipped as the US military (note that I am not saying it is, I've done no research, I'm just wondering if you're basing it on anything solid. I think that, excluding WMDs, which wouldn't even be a war, they would just lead to an apocalypse, both sides would be fairly evenly matched. The US army has a tendency to overestimate itself (i.e. Vietnam), however with most of Western Europe behind it would probably stand a fighting chance.

The US was actually winning the Vietnam Conflict. We only withdrew due to public disapproval of the conflict.

WMD's aren't a factor. Neither side will launch for fear of a counter attack. But Russia would give us more trouble than China would. Their just as well equipped as the US, while China is decades behind both Russia and the US

 

[Littlejib]

You would have to llok at their ability to project power, and to move there troops. China would win a ground war is they were next to the US. But their ability to move and mantian their troops means that they pose less threat in a offencive movment

 

[emeraldrafael]

Wouldnt happen. China cant afford a war with the US, and the US certainly cant afford a war with China. Russia is swiftly sinking o a third world country status, while the EU crumbles around its pitiful self brick by pathetic brick. More than half of Africa has been a shit hole for some years now and lack any real organizational skills on the whole, and what organization there is would side with the "west" and only bolster the number of people.

besides, Russia has been more west since the wall fell and it became Russia, so if anything, they'd sit this one out or proclaim neutrality the same way china did in the Korean War.

And anyways, the US navy is almost quite literally everywhere at any moment specifically so they can put down any idiot who gets it in their thick skull to try this little maneuver *cough*North Korea*cough* with rather superior and oppressive fire power that would make Operation Rolling Thunder blush in its comparison.

...

really the world is far to integrated today to be "east vs west" and if you think its still possible to do this without serious signs of it happening that could be corrected you need to just save people time and staple your pants to your head so we can all see the level of your mentality and make things simple for you.

 

[Ryan McGrath]

I really dont know about attacking any Asian or Eastern Providences, but thinking about everything wouldnt it be a ***** to invade America from any front. From terrain Point of View, on the Western Coast we have an Entire Mountain Range and Desert, so even if we lose California we could easily put up a defense in the plains. Not to mention the hell it would be to assault a semi defended beach head along lets say the LA coast where we have mazes upon mazes of Suburbs. If you didnt know where you were going Armored collums would be useless and even if the enemy established a beach head we could easily establish a close FoB or Forward operations base without worry of the enemy getting close to soon. Same on the East Coast, barring the Swamp lands and forest the remaining territory is a nightmarish area of twisted metal in a battle scenario. LOL another thing that would be a real pain is that more than half of the American populace owns a gun, now im not saying "WOLVERINES" style groups would be roaming around, but when you have random people, like in what happened in Vietnam and Iraq/Afgan and cant determine targets assuming the attackers are willing to confirm targets are not civs it would be a huge pain in the ass attaining any semblance of peace in the local populace. Well thats America at least dont know how an Invasion of the EU would go though, would prob be easier maybe?

 

[Maclennan]

While numbers don't win wars, they certainly help, giving the East an advantage. On top of this, what makes you think the Chinese military is not as advanced or as equipped as the US military (note that I am not saying it is, I've done no research, I'm just wondering if you're basing it on anything solid. I think that, excluding WMDs, which wouldn't even be a war, they would just lead to an apocalypse, both sides would be fairly evenly matched. The US army has a tendency to overestimate itself (i.e. Vietnam), however with most of Western Europe behind it would probably stand a fighting chance.

China has been pushing in advancing their military technologically, though they could theoretically build relatively comparable equipment by function they don't have the infrastructure to produce the composite armour and really hi-tech equipment in war ready qunatities. The vast majority of their current Armor and Naval divisions are contemporary with the technology the U.S. used in Vietnam with only a small fraction being modern pieces. Their first aircraft carrier is still being refitted to go to sea, its being built around the hull of a mothballed aircraft carrier from somewhere in Europe, i want to say Italy but am unsure. China built a joint fighter with Russia, which could out maneuver the joint strike fighter developed by NATO ( Personally I think the Joint Strike Fighter was a waste since its more bomber then fighter) but would still fall behind specialized US fighters in computer control systems.

Nearly all if not all Chinese infantry divisions receive extensive training on how to hijack and operate western military equipment as a contingency plan for war with the west. I kid you not, their plan is effectively to field a massive infantry equipped with guns developed around the end of world war two and steal modern equipment to bolster their armored division if they go to war with the west. I know most armies do basic training in foreign equipment, but its hard to express just how in depth this training goes, it even includes field maintenance for some vehicles.

I'd say the west would win a defensive war decisively due to naval superiority but because of the press, and the terrible logistics of invading a densely populated country could not win an aggressive war. The most likely scenario would be that western forces become stuck in another Vietman

 

[SciMal]

Depends what type of "War" you mean.

All China would have to do is pull their trade with the United States and half our citizenship wouldn't be able to afford anything. We'd be economically screwed for a while, trying to recover - leaving a huge window of opportunity.

They could also just change the world currency like they tried to do in 2008/2009 and watch the United States writhe in economic agony as purchasing power of the dollar drops.

For sheer military might, the United States might be able to win a straight-out war. We have better tech and better training; they have absolute numbers (4:1 is pretty harsh if we're just talking China).

Involving Russia AND China, where Russia has tech and China has military might... I'm not so sure. The USA would have to find strong allies, because we couldn't take them combined.

 

[Kolby Jack]

The US has been preparing for war with the East since WW2. EVERYTHING we've done since then aside from the current War on Terror has been to curb the rise of power in both China and the Soviet Union. The result? The USSR collapsed completely and most of it's military technology has dilapidated to the extent that barely any of it holds up to anything the US has today. China is struggling to catch up, but they've only just now succeeded in acquiring a half-built aircraft carrier, whereas the US has an equal number of aircraft carriers to the ENTIRE REST OF THE WORLD (11). And we're BUILDING BETTER ONES. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Gerald_R._Ford_%28CVN-78%29] And as many very smart men have said over the course of history, controlling the seas is the most crucial aspect of any major war, and it doesn't hurt to control the air as well (which we would).

Keep in mind that the US has the second largest military in the world, and it's all volunteers too, so numbers aren't as big of a threat as they used to be, especially when you've got the best tech on the planet backing you up. And I'm not even factoring in the support from our Allies in Europe, Japan, South Korea, and Australia. We would literally kick the shit out of China and Russia's armed forces if such a war occurred.

Would it be a long fight? Sure. Would we suffer some heavy losses? No doubt. But as I've said before, the US military when assessing possible threat-countries does not factor in how they can defeat us, we only consider how much damage they can do to us before we fucking destroy them. The US is like the Captain Kirk of the real world: we hate to lose, we don't believe in the no-win scenario, and we fuck a lot of people along the way.

Brush this off as bravado and hoo-ha if you want, but I've yet to meet anyone who doesn't think this is the case.

 

[Jacco]

Wouldnt happen. China cant afford a war with the US, and the US certainly cant afford a war with China. Russia is swiftly sinking o a third world country status, while the EU crumbles around its pitiful self brick by pathetic brick. More than half of Africa has been a shit hole for some years now and lack any real organizational skills on the whole, and what organization there is would side with the "west" and only bolster the number of people.

besides, Russia has been more west since the wall fell and it became Russia, so if anything, they'd sit this one out or proclaim neutrality the same way china did in the Korean War.

And anyways, the US navy is almost quite literally everywhere at any moment specifically so they can put down any idiot who gets it in their thick skull to try this little maneuver *cough*North Korea*cough* with rather superior and oppressive fire power that would make Operation Rolling Thunder blush in its comparison.

...

really the world is far to integrated today to be "east vs west" and if you think its still possible to do this without serious signs of it happening that could be corrected you need to just save people time and staple your pants to your head so we can all see the level of your mentality and make things simple for you.

That was a little mean.

I wasn't asking if it COULD happen. I was asking what it would be like if it did.

Two very different questions.

 

[Aur0ra145]

Ever read Red Storm Rising? It's fiction I know, but a very interesting take on how a Soviet v. NATO engagement could possibly go down. The best laid tactical plans don't survive the first round being fired.

 

[emeraldrafael]

snip

That was a little mean.

I wasn't asking if it COULD happen. I was asking what it would be like if it did.

Two very different questions.

You asked what a real war would be like between. thats what it would be. remember, much of the labor china gets is outsourcing and if shit goes tits up those factories will be gone. And if turn those into weapons factories would take far to long without a country (especially one as close as russia or china, which would be western players) noticing and immediately saying "hey, wat are you doing there now".

While China isnt a solo eastern power, more countries will side with the west, because thats where trade is, which means thats where money is.

And really, if china broke away, you'd see how weak the dragon is. China's domestic policy is god awful, and a war like this would be taking many years if not even decades. that means the young go to fight, and the old will be stuck to work. the old are just that, old and weak, and productino will come to an almost full stop as the young are dying in the front lines and the old arent able to keep up.

 

[Jacco]

And we're BUILDING BETTER ONES. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Gerald_R._Ford_%28CVN-78%29]

$13.5 BILLION dollars. Jesus. And what is this about directed energy weapons?

 

[Maclennan]

besides, Russia has been more west since the wall fell and it became Russia, so if anything, they'd sit this one out or proclaim neutrality the same way china did in the Korean War.

China did fight in the Korean war, they fought as reinforcement of the north in several battles against the Allied forces in the last months of the war. China also committed 850, 000 troops that never made it to the front lines before they reached a cease fire agreement.
Their joining the war was the main reason that an armistice was reached and they were key, as important if not more then the Soviet Union, in determining the current border and demilitarized zone. North Korea was seen as a key buffer state by China against American diplomatic intrusion.

Oddly this happened so quickly where no one really wanted it to devolve any further and start another long and bloody war* so soon after the WWII that they never actually declared peace, just a cease fire.

edit: spelling mistake