who would have won World War III?

[m112880]

USSR would have the advantage of not having to move troops a great distance while the US whould have to ship troops across the Alantic Ocean. But the US has a better deep strike ablity to attack Russia with. And Russia would not be ably to attack america.

Nato would win but it would be bleedy for both sides.

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

What's this doing here?

[Admiral Drason]

If its a conventional war then NATO wins. IF it goes Nuclear then we all die.

[HemlockGrey]

I don't die. I shoot down the nuke with my pistol. Again.

[Sea Skimmer]

I don't die. I shoot down the nuke with my pistol. Again.

After which the blast doors are thrown open and phase II of the cleansing begins with as my ground forces mop up the undesirables. Don't worry though, your young enough that reprogramming is still possible to make you a loyal slave warrior for your new God Emperor, me.

[The Dark]

If it didn't go nuclear, it'd be rough but NATO would win. If you count tac nukes, we still win, but Germany no longer exists and most of France and Poland are gone, as is London.

The Chinese are pathetic. Their training is crap, only their numbers are worth a thing. Their ships are tin cans built by the Russians over a decade ago. I believe by last estimates the Chinese have fewer then ten warheads that could get to the U.S., and that's if it went nuclear and if Geroge's little pet project NMD hasn't gone operational and actually half works. But shit, if we thought they'd nuke us we'd mobilize the B2 force and try and knock out most of the sites from nearby bases with B61-11 surface-piercing tactical nuclear bombs.

An America fully mobilized for total war would fuck China up and make her like it.

Yeah, but that is now. They will get better, unless we attack them first, which won't happen.

The only really good thing they've developed is the Silkworm. Their aircraft are crap and their pilots are worse (as evidenced by the Orion being hit by a fighter pilot who was hot-dogging). The Jianghu-class ship is decent, but it's not able to stand up to modern ships. An Arlegih Burke-class destroyer could take one of those frigates, and if we build the DDX the advantage will be larger. The Chinese are still using developments of the MiG-19, most notably the Q-5 Fantan, which would be similar to us still using developments of the F-100 Super Sabre. Their fighters are at least two, possibly three generations behind ours, their navy is a generation behind ours, and the size of their conventional army is not important unless we are forced to invade. For the purposes of defending Taiwan (the most likely anti-China scenario), a pair of carrier groups plus some redeployment of assets to the island would allow the US to most likely hold off Chinese aggression. Unless their R&D is doing something way above ours (which I doubt), they will be behind for at least the next couple decades, if not longer.

[Pu-239]

Well would'nt the nuke fall on you anyways and release plutonium and stuff everywhere? Besides the detonation charge might kill you too.

[Stuart Mackey]

If it didn't go nuclear, it'd be rough but NATO would win. If you count tac nukes, we still win, but Germany no longer exists and most of France and Poland are gone, as is London.

The Chinese are pathetic. Their training is crap, only their numbers are worth a thing. Their ships are tin cans built by the Russians over a decade ago. I believe by last estimates the Chinese have fewer then ten warheads that could get to the U.S., and that's if it went nuclear and if Geroge's little pet project NMD hasn't gone operational and actually half works. But shit, if we thought they'd nuke us we'd mobilize the B2 force and try and knock out most of the sites from nearby bases with B61-11 surface-piercing tactical nuclear bombs.

An America fully mobilized for total war would fuck China up and make her like it.

Yeah, but that is now. They will get better, unless we attack them first, which won't happen.

The only really good thing they've developed is the Silkworm. Their aircraft are crap and their pilots are worse (as evidenced by the Orion being hit by a fighter pilot who was hot-dogging). The Jianghu-class ship is decent, but it's not able to stand up to modern ships. An Arlegih Burke-class destroyer could take one of those frigates, and if we build the DDX the advantage will be larger. The Chinese are still using developments of the MiG-19, most notably the Q-5 Fantan, which would be similar to us still using developments of the F-100 Super Sabre. Their fighters are at least two, possibly three generations behind ours, their navy is a generation behind ours, and the size of their conventional army is not important unless we are forced to invade. For the purposes of defending Taiwan (the most likely anti-China scenario), a pair of carrier groups plus some redeployment of assets to the island would allow the US to most likely hold off Chinese aggression. Unless their R&D is doing something way above ours (which I doubt), they will be behind for at least the next couple decades, if not longer.

For China to catch up would require at least 40 years, and probably more, and a economy that is equel to America's. One thing is certain, at the moment they cannot project much more than a brigade, they are not a serious strategic risk.

[Sea Skimmer]

The only really good thing they've developed is the Silkworm.

Which is actually a direct copy of a late model P-15. You of course ignore the C803, which was good enough to get several orders for Kh-35's canceled.

Their aircraft are crap and their pilots are worse (as evidenced by the Orion being hit by a fighter pilot who was hot-dogging).

Planes are getting better rapidly, as for collisions, the Chinese are no worse then any other air force.

The Jianghu -class ship is decent, but it's not able to stand up to modern ships. An Arlegih Burke -class destroyer could take one of those frigates, and if we build the DDX the advantage will be larger.

Not surprising that a ship with twice the tonnage is better. The fact that a Luhai, Luda or Chinese operated Sovremenny would blow a Perry out of the water juts as easily if not more so seems to have escaped your calculations.


The Chinese are still using developments of the MiG-19, most notably the Q-5 Fantan, which would be similar to us still using developments of the F-100 Super Sabre. It gets the job done against the nations China would face in a realistic conflict today, and quite a few actually have very good navigation and attack systems. The replacement JH-7 is easily the equal of Tornado GR.4 BTW.

Their fighters are at least two, possibly three generations behind ours, their navy is a generation behind ours, and the size of their conventional army is not important unless we are forced to invade.

Or if we simply have to fought them anywhere. The PLA can through the eqalivent of about 12,500 T-72M's at a US force. Fact is those massive numbers combine with a stiffing of first class equipment make the PLA the only army in the world which could sustain a long term ground war with the United States and inflict considerable losses. There air force will have a thousand first class fighters, most better then the F-15C in service within a decade along with a similar number of modern attack and interdiction aircraft. That force on its own would be a bitch to deal with, factor in 2000 MiG-21's with modern AAM's that can be thrown into the fight and things don't look real good for most scenarios. If the USAF doesn’t get a big buy of F-22's we could end up simply being swamped in an air war.


For the purposes of defending Taiwan (the most likely anti-China scenario), a pair of carrier groups plus some redeployment of assets to the island would allow the US to most likely hold off Chinese aggression. Unless their R&D is doing something way above ours (which I doubt), they will be behind for at least the next couple decades, if not longer.

China has been smart about this, there essentially skipping a generation of weapons and buying up technology rather then wasting more money on developing the same thing. For new two carriers can hold the straights. In 15 years I'd want five with 300 USAF aircraft flying along side em and a dozen PAC batteries to protect there bases. Where looking at China acquiring technological parity within that timeframe, and with there superior numbers they don't need the latest 2015 weapons to win, a PLA with late 90's armament would be near impossible to stop. And that’s where they're heading.

China looks and is fairly weak now, though not so much as you attempt to paint it. However war is not going to happen now. The PLA knows it and the Chinese government knows it. Thus there going for technology and building up a domestic production base, rather then wasting money on lots of examples of weapons that will be opposite before the whole f the PLA is ready. When the whole of he PLA is ready, I'd give them a 15 years max to d that, war with them is going to be a very protracted affair, and one whose outcome will be very much in doubt.

[Sea Skimmer]

Yeah, but that is now. They will get better, unless we attack them first, which won't happen.

The only really good thing they've developed is the Silkworm. Their aircraft are crap and their pilots are worse (as evidenced by the Orion being hit by a fighter pilot who was hot-dogging). The Jianghu-class ship is decent, but it's not able to stand up to modern ships. An Arlegih Burke-class destroyer could take one of those frigates, and if we build the DDX the advantage will be larger. The Chinese are still using developments of the MiG-19, most notably the Q-5 Fantan, which would be similar to us still using developments of the F-100 Super Sabre. Their fighters are at least two, possibly three generations behind ours, their navy is a generation behind ours, and the size of their conventional army is not important unless we are forced to invade. For the purposes of defending Taiwan (the most likely anti-China scenario), a pair of carrier groups plus some redeployment of assets to the island would allow the US to most likely hold off Chinese aggression. Unless their R&D is doing something way above ours (which I doubt), they will be behind for at least the next couple decades, if not longer.

For China to catch up would require at least 40 years, and probably more, and a economy that is equel to America's. One thing is certain, at the moment they cannot project much more than a brigade, they are not a serious strategic risk.

Well to get there own F-22's and B-2 fleet, mabey, but they dont need that level of technogly to win.

As for power projection, its about a division assault landed over 1250 miles actually, coming directly from Chinese bases.

The Whole of the USN's gator fleet fully mobilized can't land any more troops then that, though they can do it over the whole world. There military airlift can haul about a division as well over a similar distance.

[Stuart Mackey]

snip

Well to get there own F-22's and B-2 fleet, mabey, but they dont need that level of technogly to win.

As for power projection, its about a division assault landed over 1250 miles actually, coming directly from Chinese bases.

The Whole of the USN's gator fleet fully mobilized can't land any more troops then that, though they can do it over the whole world. There military airlift can haul about a division as well over a similar distance.

Their millitary sealift is 5- 10 000 it seems, but that can be supplemented by civvie ships. But in a war with the US, they suffer from the one major fault that screws them and thats ovrall projection capabilities. Sure they may have numbers, and from what I have heard a lot of it is not well trained by western standards, but they lack the ability, bar nukes, to cripple US industry, wheras the US can hobble China redily.

[Sea Skimmer]

snip

Well to get there own F-22's and B-2 fleet, mabey, but they dont need that level of technogly to win.

As for power projection, its about a division assault landed over 1250 miles actually, coming directly from Chinese bases.

The Whole of the USN's gator fleet fully mobilized can't land any more troops then that, though they can do it over the whole world. There military airlift can haul about a division as well over a similar distance.

Their millitary sealift is 5- 10 000 it seems, but that can be supplemented by civvie ships. But in a war with the US, they suffer from the one major fault that screws them and thats ovrall projection capabilities. Sure they may have numbers, and from what I have heard a lot of it is not well trained by western standards, but they lack the ability, bar nukes, to cripple US industry, wheras the US can hobble China redily.

You'd be amazed at what one Chinese merchant ship, 300 narrow band acoustical/magnetic mines and a map could do the US economy.

I most often seen Chiense ocean going sealift placed as 8000, a small division, more like 12,000 if you count there LCM's which could likely cross over to Taiwan all right but not any further.

However at least for a Taiwan invasion China could build a corps worth of sealift within two years. Really they dont need anything more complex then a bunch of Ropucha's, hell a bunch of Polnochny's and Alligators would work. Just bolt on a modern CIWS mount and your ready to go.

[TrailerParkJawa]

You'd be amazed at what one Chinese merchant ship, 300 narrow band acoustical/magnetic mines and a map could do the US economy.

I whole heartedly concur with this statement.

I most often seen Chiense ocean going sealift placed as 8000, a small division, more like 12,000 if you count there LCM's which could likely cross over to Taiwan all right but not any further.

However at least for a Taiwan invasion China could build a corps worth of sealift within two years. Really they dont need anything more complex then a bunch of Ropucha's, hell a bunch of Polnochny's and Alligators would work. Just bolt on a modern CIWS mount and your ready to go.
_________________

Sometimes simple is best. When faced with an overwhelming technological gap, fill it with overwhelming numbers.

[Sea Skimmer]

You'd be amazed at what one Chinese merchant ship, 300 narrow band acoustical/magnetic mines and a map could do the US economy.

I whole heartedly concur with this statement.

I most often seen Chiense ocean going sealift placed as 8000, a small division, more like 12,000 if you count there LCM's which could likely cross over to Taiwan all right but not any further.

However at least for a Taiwan invasion China could build a corps worth of sealift within two years. Really they dont need anything more complex then a bunch of Ropucha's, hell a bunch of Polnochny's and Alligators would work. Just bolt on a modern CIWS mount and your ready to go.
_________________

Sometimes simple is best. When faced with an overwhelming technological gap, fill it with overwhelming numbers.

In this case high technogly would not be any more effective, unless you built a massive hovercraft fleet.

[Vympel]

I think we've totally ignored the realism of a war like this. A Pershing strike on Moscow to eliminate the leadership is absurd- with a war started the leadership will be safe- either in their Soviet 'kneecap' aircraft equivalent or in bunkers. There's no feasible way you could stop a Soviet retaliatory strike unless it's a NATO immediate surprise attack with no Soviet provocation.

[Stuart Mackey]

snip

Well to get there own F-22's and B-2 fleet, mabey, but they dont need that level of technogly to win.

As for power projection, its about a division assault landed over 1250 miles actually, coming directly from Chinese bases.

The Whole of the USN's gator fleet fully mobilized can't land any more troops then that, though they can do it over the whole world. There military airlift can haul about a division as well over a similar distance.

Their millitary sealift is 5- 10 000 it seems, but that can be supplemented by civvie ships. But in a war with the US, they suffer from the one major fault that screws them and thats ovrall projection capabilities. Sure they may have numbers, and from what I have heard a lot of it is not well trained by western standards, but they lack the ability, bar nukes, to cripple US industry, wheras the US can hobble China redily.

You'd be amazed at what one Chinese merchant ship, 300 narrow band acoustical/magnetic mines and a map could do the US economy.

Sure, but they cannot actually damage the infrastructure or seriously disrupt your workforce, which is what counts.

I most often seen Chiense ocean going sealift placed as 8000, a small division, more like 12,000 if you count there LCM's which could likely cross over to Taiwan all right but not any further.

However at least for a Taiwan invasion China could build a corps worth of sealift within two years. Really they dont need anything more complex then a bunch of Ropucha's, hell a bunch of Polnochny's and Alligators would work. Just bolt on a modern CIWS mount and your ready to go.

All that building might be noticed, and if they did attempt it a war is not something that the chinese economy can stand for long, esp if you main enemy is destroying your factorys. Presuming the US would fight for Taiwan.

[Sea Skimmer]

I think we've totally ignored the realism of a war like this. A Pershing strike on Moscow to eliminate the leadership is absurd- with a war started the leadership will be safe- either in their Soviet 'kneecap' aircraft equivalent or in bunkers. There's no feasible way you could stop a Soviet retaliatory strike unless it's a NATO immediate surprise attack with no Soviet provocation.

I said if NATO strikes first. I guess I should have been clear, meant NATO attacks not only first but also out of garrison, bolt from the blue. And its not a matter of stopping a Sviet counter strikes, it a matter of deley the launch order 25 minutes, long enough to nail the SSBN's in port and a good chunk of the Soviet land based ICBM and Bomber force.

[David]

I didn't bother to read all the replies, but in response to the original question~


It entirely depends upon the time period. If we are talking about the height of the Cold War, U.S.S.R. takes it hands down. US and NATO intelligence knew that the Russians could raise a reserve army of over 20 million in just a few months. The Russian standing army already out numbered the entire US army + reserves + all NATO armies combined. The only important theatres of war would be the US, Europe, and Asia. Using the Chinese as allies, South Central Asia and the Middle East would be an easy grab. The Russians could do the same thing the Americans did to the Japanese as far as the Pacific goes, hop around any hardened defense points and destroy the air bases. With the US Pacific fleet busy with the Russians, the islands would be cut off from support and reinforcements. Europe would likewise be a cake walk. Britian might pose a slight problem, but cut off from the rest of the world, it would starve to death if the Russians and the Warsaw Pact didn't simply overwelm them. The US might take Cuba at first, but cut off and alone, it would suffer the same fate Germany did in both World Wars.





What peeves me is the fact that people seem to think that the US only built nuclear weapons to respond to a Soviet nuclear attack. The US would have used its nukes if Russia never even touched theirs! The US realized post WWII that they could never defeat the various Communist states throughout Europe, Asia, and Africa by conventional means. The US and allies simply did not have the manpower, material, money, or means to raise a conventional army of equivelent size and transport it to the battlefield. Their first response to a conventional attack by the Soviets and their allies would be to annialate their armies in the Warsaw Pact with the hundreds of tactical nukes they had in border nations, and launch every ICBM they could get off the ground at Russian bases throughout Asia and Europe. While this most certainly would have resulted in the deaths of hundreds of millions, if not billions, it was their one slim hope of actually beating the U.S.S.R. in a war.

[Sea Skimmer]

Sure, but they cannot actually damage the infrastructure or seriously disrupt your workforce, which is what counts.

Shipping and seaports are a rather vital parts of the US economic infrastructure. And with the world releying on fewer and fewer ships, sinking even two or three would have a major impact. However it would not be hard to nail twenty or thirty with a realtivly small investment in mines and freighters.

I most often seen Chiense ocean going sealift placed as 8000, a small division, more like 12,000 if you count there LCM's which could likely cross over to Taiwan all right but not any further.

However at least for a Taiwan invasion China could build a corps worth of sealift within two years. Really they dont need anything more complex then a bunch of Ropucha's, hell a bunch of Polnochny's and Alligators would work. Just bolt on a modern CIWS mount and your ready to go.

All that building might be noticed, and if they did attempt it a war is not something that the chinese economy can stand for long, esp if you main enemy is destroying your factorys. Presuming the US would fight for Taiwan.[/quote]

The US economy can't take war on this scale for long either, not without signficant mobilzation anyway. I dont think the populace would go for that over Taiwan.

Anyway, the loss of Taiwans huge computer chip indsutry for even a few months would be very bad for the world as a whole. I belive somthing like 90% of the worlds graphics cards come from that country.

[Crown]

Okay jumping in half way through-always a bad idea-but if *anyone* wre to use Nukes 'tac' or otherwise, it would be over for all of us. Yes *maybe* a first strike would get rid of the bulk of USSR's infrastructure, but are we all forgetting early warning systems? Takes 30min for a ICBM to transverse USA to USSR. And 8min for tacks. In that time, should their own ICBM's not be launched in response, I am sure that they have *some* kind of system to keep in contact with their sub fleet. Think about this, these missiles are shit house. Their targetting is poor, and their launcher is always vunerlable away from home. What do you think their targets are gonna be?

Yep, URBAN POPULATION CENTRES. So let's keep this whole tactical Nuclear stuff out of the equation shall we? Since the 70's the USSR's attitude always was, you strike at us with Nukes, we strike back. That simple.

Oh and I have no idea, I would say NATO, but if anyone remembers to two recent engagements it had (Bosnia and Kosovo), they didn't exactly perform admirably. So lets just leave it up in the air shall we?

[Dargos]

OK... looking back, if combat stuck strictly to conventional weapons, the Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact would roll thru the Nato forces, with heavier than expected losses. The Soviets would have extended their "Iron Curtain" to France. Most likely the Military/political alliance of NATO would fall apart as soon as Germany fell. France would have withdrawn immeadiatly declareing neutrality, Greece and Turkey would have to work together to stave off a attack from the Soviets,which is something they would never do because they hate each other, so they fall to the Soviet Advance. The other countrys belonging to NATO have either no military(Iceland) or are simply too small to but up an effective fight. England would fought on the US side but would have faced something simular to the"Blitz"of WW2 fame but on a much more destructive scale. America and Canada would end up in the same boat together, isolated and alone and faced with the "Fortress America" syndrome.

In reality, NATO relied heavly on the nuclear deterrent to counterbalance the Soviets massive conventional advantage, Hell, severial Luftwaffen Stuzpunkte had nuclear weapons for their pilots to drop on the Soviets(controled of course by US Airforce personel stationed on the German Airbase to load the planes and store and maintain control of the weapons) It was a well known stratagy/threat that NATO would go nuclear to halt a Soviet invasion.

BTW the Soviets had all of the pre-positioned storage faculties in Western Europe targeted with chemical/biological/nuclear warheads to destroy or render useless the equipment stored therein.

For those who think the NATO would take the strictly conventional fight, I only say that technology can only go so far when faceing overwhelming superior numbers.

[Dargos]

Sorry...forgot to mention that a large percentage of the American Forces officers and NCOs would abandon their posts in the event of a suprise attack in panic as they try to get their wives and childern to safety. Having your family with you on deployments is a great moral booster...but not in a potential war zone...

[Thunderfire]

Nuclear: None wins.
Conventional: Warsaw Pact wins. Nato Forces sucked in the
early eighties.

[Vympel]

Greece and Turkey would have to work together to stave off a attack from the Soviets,which is something they would never do because they hate each other, so they fall to the Soviet Advance.

Greece and Turkey wouldn't be included in the Soviet advance. Small fry back then and small fry now- not worth wasting time over- they couldn't mount an offensive= no threat.

In reality, NATO relied heavly on the nuclear deterrent to counterbalance the Soviets massive conventional advantage, Hell, severial Luftwaffen Stuzpunkte had nuclear weapons for their pilots to drop on the Soviets(controled of course by US Airforce personel stationed on the German Airbase to load the planes and store and maintain control of the weapons) It was a well known stratagy/threat that NATO would go nuclear to halt a Soviet invasion.

I agree. That nuclear weapons would be required is an out and out fact.

[Dargos]

Nuclear: None wins.
Conventional: Warsaw Pact wins. Nato Forces sucked in the
early eighties.

Actually...Nato Forces in the eighties did not suck.. They were heavly armored and well trained(Oh how do I remember the monthly drills on Spangdalum Air Force Base) They had the advantage of training on the very lands in which they were expected to defend, therefore knowing the best places to hide and to defend/attack from...the Soviets had to invade thru unfamiller territory. Still there were not enough NATO forces to stop the Russians without going Nuclear. Though the Russians would have to pay a steep price in blood.