Marshall
Member
Arm South Korea with 5,000,000 Noisy Crickets.
Last edited:
What Firearms For the Cold War with China?
- Thread starter Cosmoline
- Start date
- Status
you mean cricketts
seriously, there are going to be lots of conflicts with china, but mostly economic. (sanctions, currency actions, etc)
Much like the "cold war" with USSR, there was plenty of shooting going on, but it happened mostly in other locations. We supplied freedom-fighters, i mean terrorists, in afghanistan fighting against the soviets, while they backed our opponents in all the altercations we had during the carter/reagan years.
as long as we're china's sugar-daddy, i don't expect many bullets to fly.
as usual, i agree with standing wolf about china dropping communism. but i'll extend that prediction by saying that while many countries in that region of the world are developing rapidly, many are not at all. those places are where we're going to have trouble. 50 years from now, china will have a HUGE middle-class. unlike previous generations, they'll all speak English.
seriously, there are going to be lots of conflicts with china, but mostly economic. (sanctions, currency actions, etc)
Much like the "cold war" with USSR, there was plenty of shooting going on, but it happened mostly in other locations. We supplied freedom-fighters, i mean terrorists, in afghanistan fighting against the soviets, while they backed our opponents in all the altercations we had during the carter/reagan years.
as long as we're china's sugar-daddy, i don't expect many bullets to fly.
as usual, i agree with standing wolf about china dropping communism. but i'll extend that prediction by saying that while many countries in that region of the world are developing rapidly, many are not at all. those places are where we're going to have trouble. 50 years from now, china will have a HUGE middle-class. unlike previous generations, they'll all speak English.
bjbarron
Member
I was sort of half-joking...but only half.
What would be wrong with using the AR platform with 7.62 uppers? Or the Robarm XCR...this thing can swap out barrels in 2 minutes flat to three calibers now, and probably more later. Hell, it's already compatable with Chinese ammo.
I've got nothing against the AR design, but I don't hear much praise coming from friends and students in Asscrakistan about the 5.5 (or the 9mm, for that matter).
I was in the service so long ago we trained with .22s and 03-A3s, and were issued shotguns and M14s. When they gave my unit a choice to upgrade to ARs I kept my Winchester Model 12.
richyoung
Member
I must respectfuly disagree. While the Korean part of your scenario has merit, the only way China is going to be able to cross tot Taiwan is if both the U.S. and Taiwan air force and nave are neutralized, either politically or in fact. A handful of deisel-electric attack subs could pretty much deny any attack fleet access, and Taiwan has had a "research" reactor since the seventies - if big bad Red China pounces on itty-bitty Taiwan, its gonna get a mess of plutonium and uranium fissioning in its face...
richyoung
Member
To give the devil his due..
Korean War - M4E8 Sherman, F-51 Mustang, F4U Corsair, B-29 Superfortress, B-26 Marauder, M-1 Garand, 1911 pistol, C-47
Vietnam - T-28 Trojan, B-26 Marauder, A1 Skyraider, 1911 pistol, C-47
Everything since Vietnam: improved M109 howitzer, B-52, M-16, C-130, KC-135
gwalchmai
Member
First, none of these were "brought back". They were just still in service.
Second, the Martin B-26 Marauder was retired after WWII. I think you are referring to the Douglas B-26 Invader.
jobu07
Contributing Member
I think China already morphed into that long ago. Wasn't it Ding Xioping or some other chairman of the party over there that said:
Waitone
Member
If we mix it up with China, small arms will something like a 155mm deck gun. Rest of the inventory will be aircraft carriers, surface ships, and subs . . .lots of subs. If we go nose to nose it will be in the Panama Canal zone and Bermuda via special operations. They get to choose as they see fit.
I can easily see North Korea doing something really stoopid at China's behest while China gets stoopid over Taiwan. Taiwan's big troubles start after the 2008 Olympics in China. Until then China will be on its best behavior.
Then again, why should China fire a shot at use. All they gotta do is stop buying Freddie Mack and Fannie Mae securities and Bush's housing bubble will pop.
I can easily see North Korea doing something really stoopid at China's behest while China gets stoopid over Taiwan. Taiwan's big troubles start after the 2008 Olympics in China. Until then China will be on its best behavior.
Then again, why should China fire a shot at use. All they gotta do is stop buying Freddie Mack and Fannie Mae securities and Bush's housing bubble will pop.
richyoung
Member
You are quite correct on the second point. The first I would argue is a matter of semantics - does the fact that some honor guards use M1 Garands or '03 springers mean that if the army started using them, they wouldn't be "brought back"?
odysseus
Member
...
As someone here just said, that is China today. China is a morph; actually having really never been truly communist anyway, and only being close to it during Mao's agrarian version of so long ago. Yes, Deng Xio Ping is credited with opening the public discussion and movement of this capatalism (never really went away anyway...).
IMO, really it has always been a one-party beaurocratic fascist state of elitests who through decades of physical, economical, and social control have kept power over the 80% of very poor people. In the vast areas out of the mega-cities, China remains much like it has for the last 40 years - all be it with cell phones and more TV's.
I tend to agree things are going to change their first, China has been on a steriodal growth curve for several decades now running an economically subsidized model whereby much of the debt there is pretty much worse than what we could consider really bad junk bonds. How this will sustain itself, or re-invent itself remains to be seen. I think that outside of old hardliners, much of the controlling party knows there time is coming and they have been slowly giving away industries and companies to their families and friends.
Again, the issue is what we have to do when whatever change occur happens. One thing is for sure now, China doesn't want to engage with the US. Their economy depends on us. What they do well at, like they just did to Japan, is move their hordes of brain-washed people to protest something to create tension while they are on the inside talking highlevel agreements on trades/economy with you.
BTW - IF it ever happened, it will certainly be a large naval\air war. We will avoid infantry engagements at most costs. Not sure about ICBM missles with nukes right away. There is no way the US could contain a country like China, without China herself wanting to change from the inside.
As someone here just said, that is China today. China is a morph; actually having really never been truly communist anyway, and only being close to it during Mao's agrarian version of so long ago. Yes, Deng Xio Ping is credited with opening the public discussion and movement of this capatalism (never really went away anyway...).
IMO, really it has always been a one-party beaurocratic fascist state of elitests who through decades of physical, economical, and social control have kept power over the 80% of very poor people. In the vast areas out of the mega-cities, China remains much like it has for the last 40 years - all be it with cell phones and more TV's.
I tend to agree things are going to change their first, China has been on a steriodal growth curve for several decades now running an economically subsidized model whereby much of the debt there is pretty much worse than what we could consider really bad junk bonds. How this will sustain itself, or re-invent itself remains to be seen. I think that outside of old hardliners, much of the controlling party knows there time is coming and they have been slowly giving away industries and companies to their families and friends.
Again, the issue is what we have to do when whatever change occur happens. One thing is for sure now, China doesn't want to engage with the US. Their economy depends on us. What they do well at, like they just did to Japan, is move their hordes of brain-washed people to protest something to create tension while they are on the inside talking highlevel agreements on trades/economy with you.
BTW - IF it ever happened, it will certainly be a large naval\air war. We will avoid infantry engagements at most costs. Not sure about ICBM missles with nukes right away. There is no way the US could contain a country like China, without China herself wanting to change from the inside.
gwalchmai
Member
The M1 Garand was not just the main battle rifle of ALL US services in 1950 - it was the only battle rifle. All the other Korean War examples were active service, too. Same for the VietNam examples, with the possible exception of the C-47 not being a front line cargo plane. No, I really don't think this is a matter of semantics at all.
So how about you providing some support for these examples not being in common use during these conflicts.
Stevie-Ray
Member
And I think you are referring to the A-26. The Invader was an attack plane.
As to the question of the thread:
Next 25 years? Personal rail guns and Tin Man battle armor. Read Dale Brown.
The Grand Inquisitor
Member
There is just too much mis-information here to refute all at once, so I'm not even going to bother, but I will make two points: first, there is NO possibility of a war between the United States and China in the forseeable future without some catastrophic and history altering event occuring. Not only does the entire Western world depend on cheap Chinese slave labor, the Chinese depend on imports (like technology and professionals) coming in from the West to continue to develop the mainland and bring China to super-power status (if it isn't there already). Secondly, I don't think there is any chance of Communism collapsing in China in the forseeable future like it did in the Soviet Union and its protectorates. Things are going well in China: reforms are being made (something that was anathema up until the middle 80's), corruption is going down, people are being fed, people are becoming wealthier all the time and getting all sorts of new "stuff" (technology ect...), and now the Olympics are coming to Beijing - things are looking up for the PRC and there is no reason to believe millions of people would be willing to mobilize against the government in a time of prosperity.
On the other hand, the PRC is still human rights abuser who is only rivaled by its main trading partner (you all can guess which country...you're probably there...) who has brutally put down the Falun Gong movement recently, thrown Muslims in prison (a VERY, VERY small section of NW China has some Muslim villages) , and routinely executes prisoners whenever they need organs for donation.
Perhaps things aren't so rosey in the PRC, and I'm sure they're not, but still, I have little doubt that the PRC will continue to be the worlds bastion of proto-Capitalism basking under the shadow Communism.
On the other hand, the PRC is still human rights abuser who is only rivaled by its main trading partner (you all can guess which country...you're probably there...) who has brutally put down the Falun Gong movement recently, thrown Muslims in prison (a VERY, VERY small section of NW China has some Muslim villages) , and routinely executes prisoners whenever they need organs for donation.
Perhaps things aren't so rosey in the PRC, and I'm sure they're not, but still, I have little doubt that the PRC will continue to be the worlds bastion of proto-Capitalism basking under the shadow Communism.
gwalchmai
Member
I'm pretty sure it's the same plane.
The Douglas A-26 Invader was redesignated B-26 in 1948 when the (newly independent) AF retired the "A for Attack" designation and switched to "B for Bomber" exclusively (almost - see Sandy). AFAIK, this is the only case of two completely different airplanes having the name designation. Or not, since the Martin Marauder's B-26 designation was AAF and not AF.
- Status
