China vs the U.S.

[chaisejret]

you still shouldn't underestimate them. they have thousands of years of war experience, no matter the status of there currant army. when war comes, they'll find a way to fight for victory.



~Zeke~

Are you kidding back one hundred years ago when kyoto was the capital and america went to tokyo thay had no experience with westeners and the outside. In 150 years japan came together like a puddle of mecury. Japan doesn't have millitary experience I disagree but your on the right track I bet- more happily doped and playing stupid these guys are vastly superior when rear end arranging goes down.

[HairyMehoff]

they only grew so quickly with their technology because by restricting their milatary forces, the allies had to make sure they stayed protecteed, therefore they had no need of a military growth at all. japan lacks the population and the resources to be of any military consequence. that's why they had to start taking crap over when they tried to expand b4 wwII. because they couldnt sustain themselves without US sending them oil and other resources... japan is too isolated to have a strong enough economy for a war of the magnitude that worl war III would be

[chaisejret]

What?

[~Zekk~]

you still shouldn't underestimate them. they have thousands of years of war experience, no matter the status of there currant army. when war comes, they'll find a way to fight for victory.



~Zeke~

Are you kidding back one hundred years ago when kyoto was the capital and america went to tokyo thay had no experience with westeners and the outside. In 150 years japan came together like a puddle of mecury. Japan doesn't have millitary experience I disagree but your on the right track I bet- more happily doped and playing stupid these guys are vastly superior when rear end arranging goes down.

for thousands of years japan was one big war zone, with every man with half a brain for leadership trying to rule any part of the country he could.

war experience doesnt mean outside experience, it means they know how to fight and are proud to do so to the death.

and again, your breaking one of the first rules of warfare--your underestimating. just because japan is small and isolated doesnt mean they're weak.



~Zeke~

[HairyMehoff]

no, but because they dont have the capacity for a large scale war does mean they're weak. compared to others who would be fighting in WWIII.

also, they ran around with swords and poisoned each other. not exactly modern warfare

[~Zekk~]

in modern or ancient warfare, in war period, what matters most is ones individual resolve. the resolve to live, the resolve to fight, the resolve to kill the enemy. the weapons may change with time, so may the battlefields; but war is still war.



~Zeke~

[HairyMehoff]

perhaps.. and they would most likely be much better trained than the chinese, who would be their main adversary

[facepie]

meh.. as long as the chinese are dying and we aren't.

hey, unless your jokin, i find that to be quite insulting (My background is chinese)

[~Zekk~]

in war prejudice means nothing, so he didnt mean it like that. either the enemy dies or you die, and hairy wants to live. so its obvious he'll want the enemy to die first. it doesnt matter what race country culture there from.



~Zeke~

[facepie]

true, but this is all hypothetical and its about wether who would win in a war bewteen china and US... i don't think that relates to it

[~Zekk~]

of course it relates to it. just as your chinese, hairy is american. if you had made a similer comment it would have been almost exactly the same, with only one difference--which side your on.

so hypothetical or not, war is still war. you either kill the enemy or be killed, tis the way it works.



~Zeke~

[Solus]

of course it relates to it. just as your chinese, hairy is american. if you had made a similer comment it would have been almost exactly the same, with only one difference--which side your on.

so hypothetical or not, war is still war. you either kill the enemy or be killed, tis the way it works.



~Zeke~

however you dont have to kill if you can force surrender or something else... it doesnt always come down to fighting, theres the psychological aspect, and of course in this day and age, the proper use of information can lead to minimum if any casualties.

sadly tho it does mostly come down to fighting...

[~Zekk~]

because war is about fighting, its our nature and war without combat is just pointless and annoying.



~Zeke~

[Solus]

hmmm... still... i cant remember the name of the squad... or where the battle took place, but psychological warfare has its advantages...

there was a squad of 100 british troops who basically are the most skilled bloodthirsty troops you can find. the enemy forces heard about their arrival, and literally thousands of enemy soldiers surrendered. (ill add the info when i get it again, my 'resource' is in bed. lol)

[~Zekk~]

yep. the only thing you can do is make sure most of the casualties belong to the enemy.



~Zeke~