China Can Beat the U.S. Air Force in a War

[UKBengali]

Experience in war even against weak opponents as was the case with the USA and its wars since the 1980s is still valid, because it is an easier way to test and validate TTPs, doctrines and strategies. The PLA has none of this, I am really impressed how the PLA does nothing to remain modern and acquire experience in conflicts using its military power even against weak opponents, there are several countries in Africa fighting against guerrillas being a cause of discord, A good way for the PLA to validate its concepts is to start projecting itself more abroad, even if it is creating a PMC.

There are several countries in Africa fighting against terrorism. I could name more than 10 countries. There is still Syria and Iraq. Anyway...

No, as what would count in a war between US and China is experience against a hi-tech enemy.

You can then refine your technology and tactics in a suitable way.

Having experience and confidence in say being able to jam 2 decades old radar is almost pointless in this case.

 

[LeGenD]

None of the adversaries listed were capable of executing modern warfare, leave alone be near peer....

Let's talk about Iraq first. Iraqi forces were able to occupy numerous Iranian lands in 1980 despite being a mediocre military force at the time. Iran is much larger than Iraq and not a pushover in its own lands. Not surprisingly, Iran was able to turn the tide of this war in 1982 and put Iraq on the defensive; Iranian navy also destroyed Iraqi navy during this time.

Iraq had no choice but to rebuild its military capability. The rebuilding process took time because there was much pressure on Iraq to fend off Iranian attacks from time-to-time and losses were mounting. Iraqi defense of Basra in the (December 1986 - April 1987) period was a noteworthy achievement in particular.

Iraq was able to put together a much better equipped force by 1988 and used it to defeat Iranian forces in a series of battles identified as Tawakalna ala Allah Operations.

Iraq had become a well equipped and battle-hardened side for a country of its size and even across the pan-Islamic bloc in 1991. When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, the entire GCC bloc was in panic mode and could not hope to liberate Kuwait on its own. Even countries like Egypt and Pakistan could not help liberate Kuwait at the time, not even together.

Iraqi Army had established an integrated Air Defense system, which set it apart from any other across the pan-Islamic bloc in 1990. This system is credited for downing dozens of aircraft of the US-led coalition in 1991. This was the case in spite of the fact that US-led coalition was using heliborne special forces, cruise missiles, and stealthy aircraft to degrade Iraq's Air Defense system in a remarkable combination of military technologies and tactics that had no peer around the world at the time.

Let's talk about Yugoslavia now. Yugoslavia had created a professional military force in the 1990s. Yugoslavian forces would have overcome Kosovo separatists in war but NATO supported the latter side.

It is easy to say that these countries could not fight because US-led coalition defeated them in war.

China is definitely creating a modern military force but China does not have operational exposure on the level of the US. There is much that China will find out in actual war, if it breaks out.

 

[FarhanSiddiqui]

China is underestimating the US strength while overestimating their strength. It is recipe for disaster.

 

[Nuffle]

No, as what would count in a war between US and China is experience against a hi-tech enemy.

You can then refine your technology and tactics in a suitable way.

Having experience and confidence in say being able to jam 2 decades old radar is almost pointless in this case.

It's not useless. You are not understanding. To validate concepts and TTPs, you do not necessarily need to fight against opponents of similar power, the experience found even against weak opponents is a great approach to validating the doctrine and consequently your own weapons. In this sense, the Americans have a large advantage against the PLA, which has no real experience since 1970 and would not even know how its entire combat system would react in a real war, because exercises do not validate this under any circumstances.

Even Russia, which today is certainly the country with the greatest experience in highly complex modern warfare, still does not even fall into the category of experience against opponents of similar power, because Ukraine is certainly not that state of similar power, but under no circumstances invalidates that Russian experience in the war against Ukraine is making the Russians the military force with the greatest amount of actual military experience on the planet.

When you say that in a war between the US and China, what would count would be experience against an enemy of equal power, I agree with you with only one part, because even a country acquiring experience against states of inferior power is still at an advantage against that one. which has no real combat experience, but the final result will depend on which state adapts best to this highly complex modern warfare environment.

 

[Nuffle]

China is definitely creating a modern military force but China does not have operational exposure on the level of the US. There is much that China will find out in actual war, if it breaks out.

The most interesting thing about this is knowing that the PLA military is using doctrines from manuals that American generals wrote, most notably the USMC manuals on amphibious campaigns.

 

[SolarWarden]

Chirese need to understand that these wars the US fight are halfway around the world just look at the mighty Russian army and what it can't do to its neighbor compared to US.

US and ALLIES (which is very important) benefit so much in combat exercise because they don't hold back they test each other's capabilities as in using their EM spectrum to their full potential. When Russia and chyna have combat exercises it's more for the cameras and do not use their radars in war mode for fear of giving out their EM secrets. They don't test each other like US and its allies.

US has a fleet of SU-Flankers they use to test their WVR combat skills and stealth fighter aggressor squadrons that mimic SU-57's and J-20's.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Let's talk about Iraq first. Iraqi forces were able to occupy numerous Iranian lands in 1980 despite being a mediocre military force at the time. Iran is much larger than Iraq and not a pushover in its own lands. Not surprisingly, Iran was able to turn the tide of this war in 1982 and put Iraq on the defensive; Iranian navy also destroyed Iraqi navy during this time.

you forget to consider one thing.
Iran systematically disbanded and purge its army after revolution till the start of the war.
so it was mobilized people who stop the advance of Iraqi force in Abadan , Susangerd And Dezful (well in case of dezful our aviation helped a lot in stopping Iraq armored column and made it possible for volunteer to stand their ground)
it was volunteer and a handful of special forces that delayed Iraqi force in khoramshahr

about rebuilding Iraqi force Saddam actually start modernizing its army in 1975 not in 1986 and during the 1980-1987 they actually rebuild their army twice thanks to France , USSR , and lots of western companies

 

[Hack-Hook]

Chirese need to understand that these wars the US fight are halfway around the world just look at the mighty Russian army and what it can't do to its neighbor compared to US.

US and ALLIES (which is very important) benefit so much in combat exercise because they don't hold back they test each other's capabilities as in using their EM spectrum to their full potential. When Russia and chyna have combat exercises it's more for the cameras and do not use their radars in war mode for fear of giving out their EM secrets. They don't test each other like US and its allies.

US has a fleet of SU-Flankers they use to test their WVR combat skills and stealth fighter aggressor squadrons that mimic SU-57's and J-20's.

USA fight half way over the world against rag tag militia , countries that are sanctioned for 10 years and in those 10 years their military is destroyed systematically .
Russia fight against a neighboring country that have been kept afloat with the military and economically might of EU and NATO

wonder how hard it is to understand the situation here

 

[LeGenD]

you forget to consider one thing.
Iran systematically disbanded and purge its army after revolution till the start of the war.
so it was mobilized people who stop the advance of Iraqi force in Abadan , Susangerd And Dezful (well in case of dezful our aviation helped a lot in stopping Iraq armored column and made it possible for volunteer to stand their ground)
it was volunteer and a handful of special forces that delayed Iraqi force in khoramshahr

about rebuilding Iraqi force Saddam actually start modernizing its army in 1975 not in 1986 and during the 1980-1987 they actually rebuild their army twice thanks to France , USSR , and lots of western companies

Fair points, but Iraq had put together a much better military force in 1988 in comparison to what it had in 1980. So US-led coalition was up against a new Iraqi military force to which the entire Middle East had no counter at the time as I have explained at length in previous post. Arabs looked at all options but decided that US is the only country that could stop Iraq in 1991.

 

[SolarWarden]

USA fight half way over the world against rag tag militia , countries that are sanctioned for 10 years and in those 10 years their military is destroyed systematically .
Russia fight against a neighboring country that have been kept afloat with the military and economically might of EU and NATO

wonder how hard it is to understand the situation here

Seems you have no idea what you are talking about. Ukraine was a sht hole military the only western weapons it had at start of war were javelins, stingers and Hummer-vehicles and that's it. Everything else in their military arsenal was Soviet era. Ukraine at the time was just as bad as Russia when it came to corruption.

Iraq military in 2003 was more capable than Ukraine Feb, of 2022. Iraq 1991 was not ragtag it was the 4th largest army and combat experience and Baghdad was second to Moscow in density of IADS which were built by the French.

 

[Foinikas]

USA fight half way over the world against rag tag militia , countries that are sanctioned for 10 years and in those 10 years their military is destroyed systematically .

That's not entirely correct. During the Vietnam War,there were fierce battles between the US forces and the NVA which was in pretty good shape and equipped with Soviet and Chinese weapons,apart from captured French and American equipment. Most of the time,the US forces were vastly outnumbered. Yet.they managed to prevail either because of heavy support from the Air Force or by their tactics and skill. The US didn't lose the war,they withdrew because of Carter.

Iraq wasn't a rag tag militia in 1991. It had entire divisions of regular army and Republican Guard. In 2003,yes they were not as strong as in 1991 and the biggest problem of the Americans were the guerillas and terror attacks afterwards.

The Americans didn't lose in Iraq,they left because it was time for the Iraqis to rule their country on their own. Could they do that effectively? No. The same thing happened in Afghanistan,but Afghanistan's government and army were so corrupt or incompetent in their majority (excluding some small units and individuals)and the country collapsed in a few months.

America has a habit of intervening in conflicts and changing the regime,fucking it all up and then leaving. But in the case of Afghanistan...it was the mentality of the people that was impossible to deal with. The Americans and other NATO countries stayed there for about 20 years and couldn't fix the society,they couldn't modernize them. These people were stuck in tribal wars and early 20th century life.

South Vietnam lasted for about 3 years. Iraq still endures.

 

[LeGenD]

@Foinikas

Allah Almighty (GOD) disclosed in the Holy Quran that he sent prophets to reform different societies around the world. Many of the prophets could not reform these societies. So Allah Almighty destroyed these societies for being corrupt and evil.

Imagine that.

People really think that somebody from another corner of the world will come and change virtually any society it wants to? Not possible. The only option is to absolutely destroy a stubborn society, something that the US has not considered yet.

For perspective. Afghanistan cannot be reformed, it has shown as much. However, Afghans could not defeat US-led forces in actual battles. This is obvious to anybody who has studied history and checked evidence. Nothing short of wiping out Afghanistan will do but this wasn't a need as Trump said to Imran Khan. The US eliminated perpetrators of 9/11 in the region and this was the goal. End of.

The US have managed to change political landscape of some countries such as Germany, Japan, Iraq, and South Korea which is very impressive to be honest. However, these were difficult struggles which is understandable.

 

[SolarWarden]

That's not entirely correct. During the Vietnam War,there were fierce battles between the US forces and the NVA which was in pretty good shape and equipped with Soviet and Chinese weapons,apart from captured French and American equipment. Most of the time,the US forces were vastly outnumbered. Yet.they managed to prevail either because of heavy support from the Air Force or by their tactics and skill. The US didn't lose the war,they withdrew because of Carter.

Iraq wasn't a rag tag militia in 1991. It had entire divisions of regular army and Republican Guard. In 2003,yes they were not as strong as in 1991 and the biggest problem of the Americans were the guerillas and terror attacks afterwards.

The Americans didn't lose in Iraq,they left because it was time for the Iraqis to rule their country on their own. Could they do that effectively? No. The same thing happened in Afghanistan,but Afghanistan's government and army were so corrupt or incompetent in their majority (excluding some small units and individuals)and the country collapsed in a few months.

America has a habit of intervening in conflicts and changing the regime,fucking it all up and then leaving. But in the case of Afghanistan...it was the mentality of the people that was impossible to deal with. The Americans and other NATO countries stayed there for about 20 years and couldn't fix the society,they couldn't modernize them. These people were stuck in tribal wars and early 20th century life.

South Vietnam lasted for about 3 years. Iraq still endures.

Chinese and just about everyone that brings up Vietnam as a loss forgets that Operation Linebacker 2 brought the North to its knees and to the negotiating table in which they agreed to a ceasefire which allowed the US to pull out all COMBAT troops from the South and allowed South Vietnam army, which was huge in size and well armed to defend their own country, but as soon as all US combat troops pulled out the north broke ceasefire and South Vietman army and people didn't want to fight... just like Afghanistan.

The US was going to bomb the North again worse than Linebacker 2 but US finally realized what's the point if the south doesn't want to defend their own country.

 

[LeGenD]

Chinese and just about everyone that brings up Vietnam as a loss forgets that Operation Linebacker 2 brought the North to its knees and to the negotiating table in which they agreed to a ceasefire which allowed the US to pull out all COMBAT troops from the South and allowed South Vietnam army, which was huge in size and well armed to defend their own country, but as soon as all US combat troops pulled out the north broke ceasefire and South Vietman army and people didn't want to fight... just like Afghanistan.

The US was going to bomb the North again worse than Linebacker 2 but US finally realized what's the point if the south doesn't want to defend their own country.

Operation Linebacker II in 1972 was so effective that it took Vietcong 3 years to recover from its blows and capture the South in 1975. However, Nixon had made the decision to withdraw American troops earlier in 1971 and did not change his stance on the issue. However, if the US had continued for like 2 more years, it would have won the war absolutely. This is admitted in American records. But this war did not appeal to American people for some reason.

 

[Foinikas]

Chinese and just about everyone that brings up Vietnam as a loss forgets that Operation Linebacker 2 brought the North to its knees and to the negotiating table in which they agreed to a ceasefire which allowed the US to pull out all COMBAT troops from the South and allowed South Vietnam army, which was huge in size and well armed to defend their own country, but as soon as all US combat troops pulled out the north broke ceasefire and South Vietman army and people didn't want to fight... just like Afghanistan.

The US was going to bomb the North again worse than Linebacker 2 but US finally realized what's the point if the south doesn't want to defend their own country.

Let's also not forget that McArthur insisted the US drop a few atomic bombs on China to keep them out of the conflict,but he was replaced.