Look at what china pple sae abt our new 155mm gun!!
-
Just because they're a rising power does not mean they have the priviliege to look down on others.
-
Very true.Originally posted by Obersturmfuhrer:Just because they're a rising power does not mean they have the priviliege to look down on others. -
ItÂ’s free world, donÂ’t like this 1, always can find some other u like
China is a vast country, there are just many different style military forums around.
Some military boards like sina.comÂ’s or China.comÂ’s are for the mass.
However, there do have some quality technically based military discussion forums :
Like this one (Military Aviation discussion in Chinese)
http://aerofield.bbs.xilu.com/
Or this 1 ,general discussion:
http://www.war-sky.com/forum/index.html
And this forum is very good all the discussions are in English! You guys supposed to go there instead of Sina.com( But have to register to view the threads inside the sub-forums)
http://www.china-defense.com/forum/index.php? -
Well, from what I gather from u guys... if these chinese forumers are still considering just fire-power and manueverability, then I think they will be in big trouble. They are still stuck to a 2-dimensional doctrine, like a chess game.
What a air-portable 155mm gives us is a gun that is capable of deploying to provide fire support rapidly. Where a traditional SPG or FH would have to trudge through, the Chinook can simply carry it there. That is our third-dimension. Its really interesting to observe Singapore's air land battle doctrine take up shape. -
they should also remember that their PLA lost a few battles to taiwanese army.
In fact, they lost an entire invasion force simply because they forgot to take into account tides when doing amphibious assault. resulting many assault crafts beached and vulnerable to ARTY fire. -
Any more details?Originally posted by Ponders:they should also remember that their PLA lost a few battles to taiwanese army.
In fact, they lost an entire invasion force simply because they forgot to take into account tides when doing amphibious assault. resulting many assault crafts beached and vulnerable to ARTY fire. -
For your information.. in the past china and india did go to war.. regarding some border issue.. the india suffer a great defeat and..some land of their went to china.. this happen about 30 yr ago..Originally posted by dragg:you compare thailand and vietnam with china?
ask china to try india.
Detail are here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Indian_War -
Please enlighten us.Originally posted by Ponders:they should also remember that their PLA lost a few battles to taiwanese army.
In fact, they lost an entire invasion force simply because they forgot to take into account tides when doing amphibious assault. resulting many assault crafts beached and vulnerable to ARTY fire. -
The communists insurgents lost many battles with the ROC army during the civil wars in China, but they won the war. They lost the amphibious assault on Taiwan and therefore ROC remains in Taiwan today.Originally posted by Ponders:they should also remember that their PLA lost a few battles to taiwanese army.
In fact, they lost an entire invasion force simply because they forgot to take into account tides when doing amphibious assault. resulting many assault crafts beached and vulnerable to ARTY fire.
PLA came into existance only after 1947 and there were no land battles between between the PLA and the army of ROC, (there is no taiwanese army), only artilery duels, air battles and exchanges of balloons.
PLA is still basically a land forces, its airforce, navy and its ability to launch amphibious assault were never proven. -
The reasons that Taiwan remains its present status are:
1) US 7th fleet entered Taiwan Strait soon after ROC withdrew to Taiwan
2) US launched Korean war that opened another front to engage PRC forces therefore diversified the pressure facing Taiwan -
In theory, PLA achieved all or part of their objectives in the:
Korean War (1950's)
Sino-Indian War (1960's)
Sino-Vietnam War (1970's)
........................................................................................................
In Korea, the PLA were at first victorious against the US/Allied forces. Then it started losing but still managed to keep North Korea from being overrun. Though it suffered massive casualties, it was a victory as a poorly-armed but well-motivated peasant army was able to hold back mighty western armies.
But its weakness and inability to defeat a western power was also evident.
The end of the Korean War was the start of PLA's 1st modernization.
........................................................................................................
In the Sino-Indian War, Nehru provoked the PLA into action by instigating border clashes and making verbal threats of using military force to invade China - against the advice of his of the Indian army generals.
Therefore, when the PLA duly invaded, the Indian Army was unprepared (or so it was claimed) and suffered humiliating defeat.
Right from the start China stated that its objectives were the "teach India a lesson" and not to gain any territory. On its own accord, the PLA withdrew.
IMO, it was a shrewd move as China emerged a victor that was also gracious enough to return all territory and POWs. Had they prolonged the war or invaded deeper, the PLA may have a difficult time extracting itself.
........................................................................................................
In the Sino-Vietnam War again China stated right from the start that its objectives were to "teach Vietnam a lesson" and not to hold any territory.
But the PLA ended up suffering twice the casualties than the Vietnamese.
The PLA certainly did not win this war but the PLA wasn't overrun or chased out of Vietnam. It was just to costly in terms of casualty to invade any further. They also realised it pointless as the Vietnamese weren't scared of war. Civilian Vietnamese women and children were sacrificing themselves to deliver bombs to the PLA just as they did against the Americans a decade ago.
Resistance was intense and determined.
Only "lesson" learnt was that the PLA needed to be revamped (and never touch Vietnam again).
The end of the Sino-Vietnam War was the start of PLA 2nd modernization.
........................................................................................................
The PLA never attempted an invasion of the mainland ROC, period.
There were artillery duels in the late forties. The KMT held a couple of islands that are VERY NEAR China but VERY FAR from Taiwan. So the PLA were shelling those islands. The US Pacific fleet was nearby to ensure Taiwan's safety. -
china has billions population. THey work on the basis of using manpowr.
When they attack vietnam, they used hundreds of cattles and horses to destroy land mines.
They have many more numbers of weapons and many soldiers.
When they attack they go in thrice the size of enemy.
their firepower is big in numbers. so when they open their mouth, its about big in numbers. When they send out pros, they fill the red light areas with numbers and very pretty all over the world There are many more where these come from.
So, once they clean the toilet act, the world will run out of toilet paper as they will be the biggest consumption of toilet papers, not to mention faeces and urine. enough to flatten and flood singapore.
So who is the brain who makes singapore stop at two in the 1970s in fear of overpopulations. -
Ahem, the last line is taken out of context.Care to tell me how the hell we can support an extremely large population?Originally posted by AF2005:china has billions population. THey work on the basis of using manpowr.
When they attack vietnam, they used hundreds of cattles and horses to destroy land mines.
They have many more numbers of weapons and many soldiers.
When they attack they go in thrice the size of enemy.
their firepower is big in numbers. so when they open their mouth, its about big in numbers. When they send out pros, they fill the red light areas with numbers and very pretty all over the world There are many more where these come from.
So, once they clean the toilet act, the world will run out of toilet paper as they will be the biggest consumption of toilet papers, not to mention faeces and urine. enough to flatten and flood singapore.
So who is the stupid idiot who makes singapore stop at two in the 1970s.
The 3-1 ratio sounds familiar though -
At that time, there was a policy implemented to stop at two. Many were told to tie the birth thing. We may not be able to support an extreme large populations, but it sure does not make sense to ask citizens to stop at two and not three or four. We can support a bigger population, its just what is going on in the head of the policy maker, to make us think we cannot.Originally posted by LazerLordz:Ahem, the last line is taken out of context.Care to tell me how the hell we can support an extremely large population?
The 3-1 ratio sounds familiar though
Our land too small?
Now we are asking for more and very urgently and even importing.
i pretty lost much of what happen those days as too young to understand. Maybe those older can elaborate. -
our land is too small to support whatever the Govt wants.We are already top three in living density in the world..what matters is quality not quantity.How many real foreign talents have you seen?Originally posted by AF2005:At that time, there was a policy implemented to stop at two. Many were told to tie the birth thing. We may not be able to support an extreme large populations, but it sure does not make sense to ask citizens to stop at two and not three or four. We can support a bigger population, its just what is going on in the head of the policy maker, to make us think we cannot.
Our land too small?
Now we are asking for more and very urgently and even importing.
i pretty lost much of what happen those days as too young to understand. Maybe those older can elaborate. -
very tiny few. Well because of all the foreigner talent big talk by gov, it seems like a must have regardless have talent or no talent.Originally posted by LazerLordz:our land is too small to support whatever the Govt wants.We are already top three in living density in the world..what matters is quality not quantity.How many real foreign talents have you seen?
A recruitment done here is tough like cannot find any talent and no choice have to seek talent elsewhere. , but when go to another country alot of talent from IT to wafers to so many but in real sense after importing, really no talent , just bullshit. Who are the ones pushing issues and chairing meetings, locals , most foreigners jst lay backa and finished 3 years and immigrate to canada.
Part of the gov promotion, talent search overseas. -
According to Wikipedia, "the United States initially showed no interest in supporting Chiang's government in its final stand. Things changed radically with the North Korean invasion of South Korea on June 25,1950, thus triggering the Korean War. At this point, allowing a total Communist victory over Chiang became politically impossible in the United States, and President Harry S. Truman ordered the U.S. 7th Fleet into the Taiwan straits, ending any possibility for a successful Communist invasion."Originally posted by coolant:The reasons that Taiwan remains its present status are:
1) US 7th fleet entered Taiwan Strait soon after ROC withdrew to Taiwan
2) US launched Korean war that opened another front to engage PRC forces therefore diversified the pressure facing Taiwan
Two things are clear,
1) US was not interested in depending ROC in Taiwan, not until south korea was attacked. 7th fleet was ordered into taiwan straits for political reason in US and it so happened a communist victory in china was against the US interests.
2) Korean war was started by the communists in north korea. US did not launched the korean war. US is a peace loving country, they never start any war with anybody until their own interests is at stake. -
make love, not war.
-
US peace loving????. The role they play in iraq and iran war is no peace loving. They play the most dangerous game with countries around the world to make them submit to them politically or economically and weapons sales. Although i agree they play a stability game in this region.
The intel on iraq war was a big cock up, and to think some countries believe it. Time will shed more when these intel become declassified. -
Agree!Originally posted by AF2005:US peace loving????. The role they play in iraq and iran war is no peace loving. They play the most dangerous game with countries around the world to make them submit to them politically or economically and weapons sales. Although i agree they play a stability game in this region.
The intel on iraq war was a big cock up, and to think some countries believe it. Time will shed more when these intel become declassified. -
The intel on the 2nd Iraq war had always been doubtful. The original purpose of the 2nd Iraq war was to bring Saddam down. US thus came up with whatever necessary to try to get the UN to pass a resolution allowing a coalition effort to bring about a regime change.
Was there ever an unholy alliance between Saddam n bin Laden. I don't believe so. Could there have been one... possibly, but not likely.
I dare say that I do support the US invasion of Iraq, and the capture of Saddam. Besides occasional suicide bombings in Israel, the middle east has been a lot quieter and tamer, cos the big boys are in the neighbourhood. -
Big country= difficult to controlOriginally posted by dragg:not all are bad though. some are actually impressed that we can come up with something like that.
the most obvious thing is they tend to look down on us because we are small. they are a very very big country afterall.
Small county=Easier to control
-
Once the intel become declassified, Powell will get the blame. Invasion of iraq and occupation brings US involvement and deaths, now they cannot get out for many years. They have to feed iraq for many years. The battle sunnis and shilites will go on with support from iran and others. Live in iraq is like, not knowing who is going to get blown up sooner or later. one explosion can kill hundreds. scary man. but sympathy goes to those innocents having to lose families and homes since US invaded. If not their live still goes on with their love ones under saddam. which do they prefer?
-
Yes, but the American interests are everywhere and they are always at some kind of stake. That's why they're busily invading everyone in the name of protecting their interests.Originally posted by sgdiehard:2) Korean war was started by the communists in north korea. US did not launched the korean war. US is a peace loving country, they never start any war with anybody until their own interests is at stake.
The Korean War is a war to determine who rules Korea. China, US, Soviet etc should have all stayed out of that war, but that's impossible to expect.
So if another Korea War erupts, all the big powers should just stay the hell out and let them slog it out and settle the matter themselves. One country cannot artificially stay divided forever, so they'll have to resolve it sooner or later. -
Bush might have lied and cheated, but the unpredicatability of having America in the ME has already seen some fruits in Syria moving out of Lebanon and Palestine being slowly stabilised.Originally posted by Shotgun:The intel on the 2nd Iraq war had always been doubtful. The original purpose of the 2nd Iraq war was to bring Saddam down. US thus came up with whatever necessary to try to get the UN to pass a resolution allowing a coalition effort to bring about a regime change.
Was there ever an unholy alliance between Saddam n bin Laden. I don't believe so. Could there have been one... possibly, but not likely.
I dare say that I do support the US invasion of Iraq, and the capture of Saddam. Besides occasional suicide bombings in Israel, the middle east has been a lot quieter and tamer, cos the big boys are in the neighbourhood.
In the first place, the presence of Syrian troops in Lebanon was just simply illegal and a front to support those Hizbullah militants.