Play Conflict of Nations for FREE on PC or Mobile: 💥con.onelink.me/kZW6/dfd0888c Receive an Amazing New Player Pack, only available for the next 30 days!
Bro!! Wishful thinking!! It would go nuclear ☢️ before this could happen. The reason it would go nuclear is because China would have nothing to close but to destroy the other countries that participate in the invasion of China. Japan and some parts of the United States would cease to exist. China has too many attack submarines and missiles to sit and let their country be taken over.
@@williamblazkowicz5587 The allies intentionally didn't take Hitler out because they were worried he'd be replaced with someone like Rommel I guess that tells you how they felt about Rommel as a military leader 😂 Respect.
@@alphacentauri1760 almost all stuff we use are made in china, think again, you hardly can find sth not made in china, we as world are dependent on china like we it or not. they also produce almost the half of medicine produced in the world. an embargo will be suicidal for all countries trying to fight china. we created the monster, now we deal with it.
@@tony001212 USA has been superpower for only 100 years. China had been superpower for thousands of years, so monster wasn't created by USA. Don't overestimate America.China recovers by her own hard work and intelligence.
Carson Rist , leader don’t study history will end up repeating history . If USA and China really go to war ! We all going to eat some big shit and say good bye to the life you have now. From my point of view China and USA are in the same boat . Try to build hate in the generations to come.
It would be to defeat china in a Tawain war. Invading China would be impossible unless it got support from India because indias boarder and military is pretty good
Invading china is impossible, the country is far too big, far too urbanized and dense and far too many people. It is literally impossible. Limited wars are the future. America and China fighting in Taiwan. India and Pakistan fighting in Kashmir. This is how big powers would fight, there is no point trying to invade each other directly because no one wins, it would be a stalemate.
popular joke in China: News reporter: Why do we send our army to Syria? The US: Because we suspect that they have weapon of mass destruction. News reporter: Why don't we start a war with China or Russia? The US: Because they really do have weapon of mass destruction.
What I've learned from watching a lot of Binkov videos is that most countries can't successfully invade other countries without taking massive losses unless they are many times more powerful. Defensive advantage in geography and logistics is often huge. Especially if the attacking country needs many millions of troops. In this war, the whole global economy would lose.
All I have to say is never, never under estimate your enemy and there are plenty of advantages and disadvantages on both sides, one thing for certain, we will all lose.
Everybody gangsta until someone starts to lose family members. It's all fun and games until hundreds or even thousands of nukes are deployed. Most Americans don't understand the cruelty of war because they never faced a full-on invasion.
thank you! I'm not American and I'm not Chinese, I don't care who wins this massive dick-measuring contest they're having. I'm just a guy who lives nowhere near the pacific, who would be exceedingly grateful to not have radioactive shit fall on his head and kill him as a result of a war he cares nothing about.
Nukes design and useage is quite a controlled war these days. 1 example the right size nuke detonated in high atmosphere is an EMP result. Fries silicon but doesn't kill biologicals. Nukes design and size can be incredibly small yes they can use giant ballistic units but that's not the way to win.
I was in the military 19D....any foreign military trying to invade another country right from the start said military is in a major disadvantage, the us Navy and Air Force would more than likely but not without taking large losses dismantle a majority of it's coastal defensive systems which would be great for our ground forces fighting a much larger army "number wise" in their backyard a location they know like the back of their hand not an impossible task to overcome but an extremely difficult task to overcome, the number of casualties would be massive.
Of you look only in technology it is impossible but china dont know they are on a suicide mission usa can hire hackers to immobalize china's pfffttt equipment... usa may use emp that may help to immobalize china. for usa and its allies to go in... Have you heard of ilove virus that immobalize the world by one person?
@@Nicolae_Mew I do agree they will most likely surrender without it coming to that. But if they try to make us do a land invasion I cant see any other options besides nukes. (since US would lose a land invasion)
Deadass they are all anti-america and don't understand how modern day works the past don't mean shit you can't compare modern day US to 80s US and 80s china to modern day china. Especially when 80s china was to busy killing each other 😂
@@Lostname53 *PLEASE get out of Okinawa and GO FIGHT IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY, USA. Don't destory Asia please. USA is bad enough, don't sabotage other countries 🙏.*
@@robertgittings8662 realistically, they cannot fight in their own country. no chinese military base is near US. I'm chinese and i think the US is pretty good
Just because we’re the strongest nation in the history of man does not mean that we can invade a country by ourself. Invading has always been more difficult than attacking, you people in the comments are not very bright and it shows.
Hi Binkov. One important factor that should go into your model is oil. As was shown in WW2, oil limitations severely crippled Nazi Germany's ability to maintain both wartime production and fuel for its fighting vehicles and planes. In peacetime, China's economy consumes 13 million barrels per day (B/D) of oil. Of this amount, 5 million is produced domestically (largely concentrated in Heilongjiang province); 1.8 million B/D is sent from Russia by pipeline, which totals 6.8 million B/D. That means that 6.2 million B/D...roughly 48%...is shipped in by sea route via the Malacca Strait, a serious choke-point. Within a month of the assembly of US Navy assets in that area (an area free from Chinese defense), the US could simply cut off half of China's oil supply.
Food is a much larger issue. If you'll read half the reason for genocide in ww2 was limited food stocks to continue the war. Farming then was more manpower intensive tho, and stalin had destroyed agriculture in Ukraine. Add in drafting all the farm help and out see this is a slippery slope. In 1944 corn was $7 a bushel. It's 3.50 today. But the point to make is I don't think China could survive a long drawn out action as their biggest asset (population) is actually their biggest weakness. Can they survive without protein imports? I don't know. But if they all cross the ocean to get there the american navy is in a stronger position to disrupt trade on deep water than china is to secure those routes outside of shallow water. Add in the british ex empire navies, nato, local navies etc, I just don't know where those soybeans will come from or how they can expect to get to china.
Unless Russia did that for the US I don't think that would happen and the US would not attack the Pipeline even on China side of the Pipeline. The processing plants yes. Pipeline doubtful.
@@Matt-mt2vi My figures assume Russia continuing their shipments unchanged; and they wouldn't be able to increase exports in wartime as the pipelines are already maxed out.
@@KrisWustrow my bag, I read as a need to disrupt the oil supply to choke off their supply of fuel. I am still not sure it would have a great effect, even max output prewar, the out put would then basically be all war drive only.. as it did with the US during WW2. all non essential fuel use would be basically cut off. Every thing not military related would be shut down or severely rationed. Plus with China operating in their own region they would not be a great increase consumption of fuel. One of many great failures of the German war effort was how far they operated outside of thier own country. ( Bigger area, bigger fuel use) Which greatly compounded when they failed to gain any of the oil feilds (Middle East or Soviets)
As a retired US Army Tank Platoon Sergeant, there is no way the American Army can successfully invade China… The same that China can never invade the US. An actual invasion would require the US to go onto a total war footing, which would include starting up the draft AND having at least United Kingdom, Australia and Japan to be 100% committed to the fight. I don’t think South Korea would jump in, but the US would immediately withdraw our combat units from South Korea AND verbally weaken our commitment in defending South Korean from a North Korean attack, which would place South Korea in a jam since she would have to basically go onto a war footing to protect her own borders. As for Canada, she currently doesn’t have enough combat power, Naval and Air power to really matter. France, Germany, and most of Europe would stay out, but we would pull our combat units out of Europe and telling them not to count on a 100% commitment or an immediate and massive American forces to be deployed to NATO to beat back a Russian attack. We would match French and German numbers that they commit to the fight. In a war, there is no need to invade China since the US can sink her Navy, mash her Air Force, destroy her coastal missile/radar defenses and cripple her harbors and ports. Plus, the US would attack her satellites as well. Yes, China would put up one hell of a fight and would cripple the US military in return. As for those Chinese manmade islands in the South China Sea, they would be attacked and cut off from Chinese reinforcements AND I would bet that Filipino Marines and Rangers, along with Vietnamese Naval Infantry will seize these islands that LEGALLY lay within areas under their control before being stolen by the Chinese. Both the Philippines and Vietnam would receive American Naval support, but they would not join in any other operations or attacks. The wild card is India, but doing the math, India would sit it out. Any fight between the United States and China would mainly be a Naval and Air fight. Both the US Army and Marines would play a minor role unless the mistake was made to invade.
sir, things changed, China currently has the most lethal missiles and better radars than USA I’m not bluffing but in fact Chinese military is extremely good when it’s doing a defense, it seems to believe that its missiles are future, so now we all know that it will lunch hundreds of hypersonic missiles from its mainland and they will destroy military bases in first island Chain and SK, Japan in minutes (actually they even have some naval based hypersonic missiles) and I believe that the US won’t take advantage in air combat either, the F/A 18s can not outcompete J16 (basically SU27+filled with Chinese techs and engines), and F35s also have problem: they can not arrive in the battlefield quickly enough before J20 wipe out the tankers and awacs(Chinese awacs are also more advanced now, why don’t you guys update weapons more often?????) But a brutal and costly damned war won’t happen if the US don’t intervene Taiwan affairs militarily… and for army: I REALLY WANT TO KNKW WHY THERE ARE STILL SOME PEOPLE THINK CN AND US CAN USE THEIR ARMY ACROOS AN ENTIRE PACIFIC)
last I recall the Pentagon said they were uncertain of winning a war in the Pacific let alone a conqueat of China but I'm so glad we have so many American war generals in the chat
War General Mike here ... ;) you like so many others seem to think it is US against China!? It is not! It is Taiwan, India, British, Japan, US and potentially others ...
The US cannot afford to let China take Taiwan, despite not having a defense treaty. The US/Quad alliance is the only country that can stand up against China. The CCP (Chinese Communist Party) is on the verge of global domination. If the US/Quad alliance dos nothing other countries will say the US ether could not or would not stop the CCP and so they cannot. They would have to aqueous to all the CCPs demands and eventually be controlled by the CCP. This used to be called the domino effect. In time the CCP would become so powerful the US would have to do so too. The CCP would spread its propaganda/censorship/surveillance state all over the world and no one would have freedom or democracy. Freedom of speech would disappear globally. Concentration camps would proliferate worldwide. > IT WOULD START LIKE THIS: The CCP assumes the US will help Taiwan. The PLA (People’s Liberation Army) attacks Taiwan, the US Navy, and US basses in and around the SCS (South China Sea) preemptively. The US/Quad alliance destroys china's navy, takes the artificial military islands, and lays sedge to mainland China with the hope of regime change or at least containment. The US maintains constant military and economic pressure on the CCPs” Military Industrial Complex” with standoff weapons. In time the CCP anti-aircraft capability might be degraded to the point where less expensive and more effective gravity bombs could be used. With their massive numerical advantage invading mainland China is not an option as it would result in massive casualties and if the CCP elite felt threatened risk a nuclear exchange. The CCP would welcome casualties to trim their population. This would only make them stronger as they already have more people than their land will support (1.4 billion, four times the US population and four times the number of mouths to feed with the same amount of land). China is not self-sufficient in oil, food, iron ore, rare earth ore and many other things. China would become another North Korea. A negotiated peace or even a cease fire would not work as the CCP would not honor any deal it made, rearm, and try again. The only thing that would stop the CCP is the inability to attack. To stay in power and preserve their luxurious lifestyle the CCP would become even more vicious and repressive then they already are. Hopefully, this would result in a revolt that brings down the CCP, vastly improving the quality of life of the Chinese people. The war might go cold in time all by itself without any type of agreement or declared end. There would be no exit strategy. Containment would be the order of the day or maybe the decade or even longer, leaving The Quad free to attack specific targets whenever necessary and close the Strait of Malacca to the CCP. With all deference to Binkov’s Battlegrounds the object of the exercise would be to protect Taiwan, stop CCP expansionism, keep the international sea lanes open, and eliminate the threat to and theft of resources from other countries, NOT the conquering of china. The CCP is watching the US military now free of INF Treaty restrictions reorganize, build capability and alliances in the SCS. Maybe this will be enough to deter them.
@@mikeriley7296 It would be hard to convince other countries to join in a coalition against china, especially with Japan and Korea, since they are very close and would be the first target. They are also economically tied to china, so they have a lot to lose and little to gain in such war. I'm sure Taiwan would join but since they are so close to the mainland, their effectiveness is going to be very limited. As for India, it might have some local advantage over Tibet, but effectively supplying over the the Tibetan plateau would be almost impossible.
@@vr-gv2ks it’s not that the us army is weak lol it’s that the us hasn’t adapted to fighting against Guerilla war. A big problem for the us is sure they got weapons that can shoot enemies with like pin point accuracy, but the issue is when they don’t know where the enemy is, cuz they hiding in the population. They don’t got uniforms or anything, they’re essentially civilians with weapons. A lot of times they aren’t sure if it’s the enemy or just a civilian and may hesitate. Also even with all this, the us still wins the majority of battles against them, but obviously in their home country people won’t want to give up and will fight til the last person, and eventually the us is gonna say hey stop sending people over we been doing this for years and we haven’t won so the army leave. I realize now I probably could’ve just said that last like 2 sentences there and that would be a sufficient answer, but whatever lol
@@ifardedandshidded5519 , sure... us army was not weak. But could not win ! 1.5M Vietnamese died. Almost the numbers of wirld wide Covid19 victims. For "what purpose" did American kill, bom with orange-agent, napalm bom, Vietnamese .. ?
You don't need to be a general to understand deliverable nuclear weapons. If the US wanted to take China at Any cost they could. But it would never be worth it
Yes, it is difficult to find any unbiased videos and opinions these days. It is amazing that this video remains neutral in the modern day, and I respect the creator a lot.
Even someone rejected at MEPS should be able to see that this sounds like Cold War era strategy. I enjoy these videos, and it is _despite_ the fact that this is not how the USA and China -are- would be fighting one another
Plot twist the Russian accent guy who made this video is actually part of the Russian government trying to stir up shit between the us and china to sit back and eat popcorn
I think russias best interest is to prevent this war from happening and just benefit from peking washington rivalry. However with chinese or american supremacy established in east asia there could be difficult times for Moscow. China grew arrogant, aggressive and hungry for resources (not unsimilar to US actually...) over years and russias far east might be the next dish on their menu.
15:51 I can imagine Vietnam shooting down those planes for starting a BS war. Then when they accuse VN, they will just claim it's just another American claim of the gulf of Tonkin incident that never happened.
I think a lot of people are missing the point of the video. He’s not making a likely scenario. He’s saying IF war broke out, this would be potential things that happened based on force counts and numbers.
@@beliveau4943 indeed if anything it would be even more insane. Every man and women would be on the battlefield, the production line, or in the field growing food.
Sir Dude Dude it’s gonna be like a video game first until all the missiles are used up gonna be the biggest scary thing anyone could ever imagine and it can happen as fast as it takes to spark ⚡️ a match
Gavin Visser the issue there is that current systems can’t really be created as rapidly as they were in WW2, there are just to many steps in the supply chain. Look how long it took the market to correct for a shortage of computer RAM, and that was without two major markets, and manufacturers, fighting a war
AWAKS my boyyyyyy. Also 250 hornets raptors and lightning going Mach 2 while tomahawks from destroyers and sub batteries destroy their defense infrastructure and THOUSANDS of decoy missiles overrun the system SAMs won't be as effective as they would be against another nation. It of course was an alliance offensive but just look at the air campaign that opened desert storm... the United States can outperform even that seemless victory by itself these days
@@TheoGottwald they are forced to. They currently do not have the capabilities to supply their troops and manage everything on their own. They needed the US logistics and now that they are gone they had to go aswell.
Allies NATO United Nation Western Powers & Axis CSTO Eastern Powers Defectors Plan To Invade China Battle of Hainan 16:38-17:31,18:09/18:41 20:52 Invading China From 7 Direction
Allies NATO United Nation Western Powers & Axis CSTO Eastern Powers Defectors Plan To Invade China Battle of Hainan 16:38-17:31,18:09/18:41 20:52 Invading China From 7 Direction
We would definite need either South Korea or India. There is no way we could invade the Chinese mainland. Even then other countries would get involved. It would be a shitshow .
No need for a mainland invasion or taking over any Chinese islands other than the ones in south China Sea. You see, China is heavily dependent on exports, all US and its allies has to do is cut China from the rest of the world and then play defensive and wait till China either tries to play aggressive, sue for peace or finds its economy devastated. Not a win for the US, but huge loss for China.
south korea isn't going to willingly join that war, doing so will reignite a new korea war(or rather, korean campaign of ww3) koreans will see heavy losses and devastation of their territory regardless of who won. only way it would do so if it was attacked. india would probably love to make a move on its borders but even if it won the combat there, thats about the extent of it, india has zero power projection capabilities and invading china proper would involve a supply route over the Himalayas, no way they get more than 100 km(probably close to 20km) into Tibet before they run out of supply and run into heavy chinese resistance.
@@mxn1948 India has some power projection capabilities, with 2 aircraft carriers and some supply ships. As for supply over the himalayas, it would only be truly difficult if China were to destroy the roads and bridges it has spent years painstakingly building up, and even then, replacement roads don't take too long to build, and tibet is quite flat. The biggest issue for India would be a two-front war as Pakistan would attack from the West, which would occupy 1/3 of the army in defence, or if India was to defeat Pakistan, then half of the army would be needed until Pakistan is conquered, meaning any serious progress over the himalayas would be impossible until then.
@Wuanslm yes, but they still have to get there. currently even american sea lift capabilities can only send ~50k well armed troops+support vehicles in one landing, who then have to fight 200k+ chinese. this is only possible if a large part of the world all fought china and over a couple of years, outproduced china then destroyed its navy then airforce then launched the largest sea born invasion in history making D-day look like a small skirmish. I highly doubt such a unified force would fight china, like why would europe go join this war or why would russia fight china for some reason. even then many millions will die, an actual occupation is going to be a nightmare. Well its all moot anyhow, things will go nuclear well before then.
The ROC would be a bigger help than either of them. Being able to call it a resumption of the Chinese civil war and merely assisting the nationalist allies could be devastating to the mainland's cohesion, maybe even break the party completely. Not to mention there's already effectively a beachhead in Hong Kong.
The fact is that China has done so well in economic, technological, political and military terms, and their standard of living has grown so dramatically over the last 45 years that China is not likely to derail their amazing achievements by going into a war that neither side would really be able to declare a victory. So, China is not the threat that the western media likes to portray. Secondly, the Chinese government could easily and quickly increase the amount of military spending, and they are investing many billions into advanced weapons like hypersonic glide missiles, anti carrier missiles, laser weapons, very long range SAM and AAM, anti satellite missiles, anti radar missiles, advanced sensors, Stealth aircraft, etc etc, so they are serious about not being in a weak position ever again. They have the money, industrial capabilities, technological skills, etc that allows China to design, develop, build, deploy and operate large numbers of very advanced weapons and equipment, if they feel the need to do so. Thirdly, the whole of China's military is concentrated in China, they have a massive and very modern coastguard (bigger than most navies), a very strong armed police force, a large border guard, civilian police force and various other paramilitary forces, they would be a very tough enemy by anyone's standards.
@@ibungothangjam524 given how shitty Russia performed in Ukraine when under dictatorship, it appears most likely China will go the same route. China barely have any allies. The US led operation in Iraq shows how sophisticated the US and it's allies are. Japan alone can take on chyna
@@dznuts123 I dunno man, the USA isn't the one who steals and encroaches on Indian and Bhutanese land, fights with basically every country in SE Asia and claims independent countries as being wholly it's, and support the People's Democratic Republic of Korea
If it happens it's likely France would have the support of most of Europe and America But it depends on who the aggressor is . If no nukes then France might be able to take some islands but Turkish mainland would be unharmed. If nukes are allowed then Turkey is a gonna get stomped .
@ChicagoMade Of course, but he poisoned so many of his opposition. So what is wrong with Russia, not enough candidates? Putin is an insult to Russian Democracy.
As an American, I can say that I admire the hard-working people of China. I have sat down and had lunch with some of my Chinese colleagues and I can say that we'd both rather sit down and eat a good meal together than to go to war with one another. They didn't forget our contributions to their freedom during WW2. They understand that I am not a fan of their leadership. Their response is the same for our leadership. Wealthy people, sending the poor to fight their wars. Not fair. I pray that peace always prevails. If it doesn't, The Chinese government will find out what a determined people we are.
I am not trying to be offensive, but in general, Single-ethnic countries tend to be more resolute in war, especially in East Asia. In world war two，As an agricultural country, under the leadership of a corrupt and inefficient national government, we have resisted the invasion of Japan for 12 years and suffered more than 20 million lives. To be honest, the knowledge I learned from the history of the war launched by the United States in the past three hundred years tells me that the United States cannot afford the same intensity of investment and loss.
@@howardlee7588 As far as the Korean war is concerned, the PLA pushed the UN forces just south of the 38th parallel. This is where UN forces learned how to fight the PLA, made adjustments and pushed them back just north of the 38th, fighting a numerically superior enemy to a stalemate. The US helped do this with an extended supply chain over 5000 miles long. PLA combat deaths = 180,000, US combat deaths = 33,739. Yeah I believe that takes determination.
As a poli sci major with a military science minor, I can tell you that this is nothing compared to the people who consider themselves experts on politics
I only know that when this war was over, everyone could play Fallout 5 in reality for free! Congrats! Hope my collection of bottle caps won't fail me then.
I think a more realistic scenario would be a reignited Korean civil war becoming a hot war with China, with Korea, Japan and the USA fighting up through the Korean China border
1950 China:Extremely poor, suffered from WWII and civil war,no industry,no navy,lack of food supply and clothes.Soviet Union provided some air support but not a big help. US:The strongest navy and air forces,well equipped army, leader of the Capitalism world,enjoy ice cream while Chinese soldiers eat their belt,and 17 allies(though most of them were useless). You know the result of that war. So,what makes you believe that USA can beat China in a total war nowadays？without nuclear weapon,this war will be the end of humanity.
We cant beat CHina without inciting revolution chinese high command will launch nukes and destroy the planet as soon as they start losing the communists dont give a fuck about this planet
Imperial Japan in World War 2 had difficulty maintaining their supply lines against a disunited Pre-Industrial China, with irregulars armed with bolt action rifles and great swords engaging in guerilla action. An American invasion of China today would be ridiculously costly. The PLA would easily replenish both equipment and manpower at a rate faster than Americans can draft and deploy her troops. A land invasion of a united China is absolutely impossible.
@@1mol831 Bold of you to assume that that is how modern warfare is done, it sounds like a view of a stupid gullible person during the cold war. That's not how modern warfare is fought, they would use that nukes to kill military bases and command centers, and kill high profile person's using drones. What does bombing civilians do to eliminate the threat? Bombing cities does nothing but invite terrorism on your own country.
It would be so bloody and costly that the war would never even happen to begin with, even when putting nukes aside. See, China's military doesn't *need* to be as strong as the US's; as long as it's strong *enough* to make costs unacceptable, it can deter a war in the first place, essentially winning without firing a single shot. The US has only gone to war with much weaker opponents who have no capabilities of striking the US mainland in return. And seeing how China fought the US to a standstill in Korea with inferior technology, the US has even worse odds of winning now.
You should really read the Korean war and about the Korean war, they bought us to standstill because they had four times many troops as we did, and he lost 10 times as much as troops as we did, no we didn't they didn't fight us to stand still, remember you had Truman in there he's the one who decommissioned almost all the Navy cuz he didn't think we needed it, he thought everything was hunky dory, but he didn't do it for mobile sensation of the United States to handle Korea, and they had major supply of MiG 15s from Russia, but they were hiding in China and Truman didn't want to give the authorization to attack those airports in China, you see we were never at war with China we were over North Korea but it's a true man didn't want to take out China and take out the airport's hiding in China we couldn't basically take control over the air, Truman stopped MacArthur from finishing them off
The more you dive into the comment section the more armchair generals making entire essays explaining how the US could destroy China with whipped cream you see
This is coming from an American. Going to go with China is bad idea. We spent $2.4 trillion dollars in The Afghanistan war, so a war with China would cost the text payers way higher than that. And if we destroy their economy it’s going to affect us as well since they’re our second biggest trade partners. We really don’t want to escalate things with Russia too. If countries like Japan can interfere then countries such as N.K (almost a puppy state of China) would definitely help them. Of course if there was ever a war I certainly volunteer, but I don’t want to invade into China crossing 5000 miles of mountains and jungles when we couldn’t even take the Vietnam.
Don't need to go to war. Just cut off trade. The US is the largest consumer of goods on earth. China is the largest producer. The US could easily produce back at home or even better rely on Mexico, Canada, and other South American countries to produce goods for us. This would destroy China economy. They would need to find a new consumer. Europe would be the next best thing but they are going through their own revolution of bringing back factories and jobs.
Tu Iochi Tu Iochi Well that would work, but if U.S has its base on S.K then they must have to cross N.K and the North has 7 million trained troops, the largest over all infantry in the world. Ofc North Korea equipment wouldn’t come even close to American/South Korean Equipment, so there will be a lot of massacres in N.K in order to get through. If S.K and U.S troops chooses to cross over the sea to China then N.K might use the opportunity and counter attack. I hate what the Chinese Government is doing but we have to be realistic here.
It will also depend heavily on US popular support for a war, especially a long-term one, as well as the impact to the modern globalized supply chains (both military and civilian)
The Vietnam war showed to the world that it is not all about technological advancement. It is about fighting in your own land. The USA lost to farmers at that time, even with a huge amount of well-trained soldiers, attack helicopters, napalm bombing fighter planes, etc. Vietnam was also a tiny country compared to China, and a hundred times fewer population. While China would mobilize most of its assets to defend the mainland, the USA could not move even half of its assets and leave unprotected spots all over the globe against the other many enemies around.
The reason the US lost was because Johnson was too pussy to bomb Hanoi. Hanoi remained a safe haven throughout the war. He was afraid of killing soviet commies. If the yanks put a cigar in and said 'f em' like Rambo, and blew the f out of them...they couldve won.
@@oisinmccool3019 Actually to pussy to smash the irrigation system that fed water to the rice paddies that generated such high yields of rice that feed the North vietnamese civs and the NVA and charlie cong. No irrigation, much less water, rice harvest collapse mass hunger.
I don’t wanna ruin the joke or anything but the difference here is that, the nukes from fallout 4 were pretty small compared to modern day nukes. You could survive the ones from fallout. You won’t with today’s nukes.
This reminds me an old joke about the Soviet invasion on China during the Cold War. It goes - 1st day China surrendered 10,000 men to Soviet; 2nd day China surrendered 100,000 men to Soviet; 3rd day China surrendered 1 million men to Soviet; 4th day China surrendered 10 million men to Soviet; 5th day Russia surrendered to China.
@@michaelzhang2995 Although it is a joke, I know there is some truth in it. Nobody will gain from an unstable China. The ramifications from an unstable Middle Kingdom will impact all countries around and beyond and be long term. The US is unfortunately too short-sighted to see it, just look at Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria.
@@michaelzhang2995 Besides thought, if the US couldn’t win a war to a country such as Vietnam what is the chance for the US to win over China. It will be a bloodbath for the US military or any invasion forces.
Am I the only one who said, "What?!?" when the A-10 was listed with the fighter planes?? I mean it's in the name: the "A" in A-10 means "Assault" as in "ground assault" (just like the "A" in F/A-18). A-10s are extremely capable low-altitude anti-tank, anti-materiel, close combat support, low-level bombers which were essentially built around their enormous (over 20 feet long) Vulcan Cannon. They are NOT, nor were EVER meant to take on other planes (although they would have done great against WW2 and even Korean War planes, had they existed back then). Just cause some people use them in a fighter role in some video games, does not mean that such things in anyway reflect actual military reality. I know you do a lot of research for these, but details like these really make one question things. Also, because of the extremely cautious nature of US combat, due to risk-averse popular support, there is no way we'd engage in any kind of aerial combat that would lead to losses of 12 fighters a day for even a few days, let alone long enough to whittle us down by thousands of planes. That simply is not believable for US combat. Not because we're invincible or so amazing, but because the US populace would never stand for it, unless there was truly no other choice, and even that would take a great deal of convincing, and an enormous deal of confidence in the convincer. You should take that into account in any follow up videos.
It can can 2 x Sidewinder missles but thats more self defense or to take out Helos in the area of the strike. Other that its no way ment to get into a dogfights
@@Matt-mt2vi Very true, but still it is in no way an actual fighter jet. There are bombers that carry AAMs, but no one considers those to be fighters either.
> the US populace would never stand for it, unless there was truly no other choice, Obviously. However, this would be a pretty boring channel if every video started with the premise that nobody wants to fight wars, and therefore no war gets fought. If you're posing the question, "could the US take Beijing" you have to assume that the US has some political reason to want to do such a thing, and that it has popular support, as unlikely as it would ever be to happen.
F Pena In the Korean War unfortunately we did not have A10 we only had fifty thousand troops that’s combined and the Chinese had up-to two million casualties, just think if we only had a few A10 that would have been ten mil easily.
@Finn Hansen I think you're taking the wrong lesson away from Vietnam and Korea. . Korea's lesson was over ambition and a general distaste in the possibility of triggering another world war. While MacArthur wanted all of Korea under the auspices of the west, many others were content with two Koreas. . Vietnam was an issue of no real mission or goal. No clear objective. "Kill the other side" has its uses is not the be all or end all. Especially when a lot of the people didn't want us there and saw us as just more colonizers. The US only got involved to help France and fight communism. . and the American people really didn't give a shit about that. Not in the long run.
@Finn Hansen they didn't stop there because they didn't want to go further, rather because it wasn't worth it. Both sides decided it was good enough, and completely accomplishing their goals wasn't worth the cost.
Well I don't say much angry comment in here. And also Most of my friends including me not angry at all. Why should we? China still need progressing that is true and in the video the US did cost a lot to invade china with high possiblity still not win. By the way just something I need to say, Chinese' first language is not English. So if you wanna point someone whose first language is not even yours and say they have grammatical mistake you better consider something at first: Do you even capable to understand other ones single word in their language? If you cannot even understand what others said it is quite ridiculous to laughing at others' grammatical mistake
@@yiyangqin4527 I'm aware that the majority of people watching Binkov are perfectly reasonable and are just here to enjoy the content. It's not a jab at you or anyone else personally, just a joke.
No US citizens should go fight in any foreign war tell the politician’s to learn how to use the weapons and take their families and do it themselves. Stay home and guard your homes and communities.
As a Chinese, I don't think this war is even possible at least in 50 years. First, China and US are mutually first trading partner even during ongoing trade war and global epidemic, and there's just no pragmatic incentive from both side to start a war. Secondly, don't underestimate the production capacity of either country as what Germany thought of Soviet and Japan thought of U.S during WW2. U.S is currently spending way more budget than China both in value and percentage to total GDP, but balance may change if countries shift focus to military equipment, and both countries know it. Lastly, both countries has nuclear weapons and long ranged missiles that can cover major cities of the opponents. A mutually destructive war is not in anyone's favor, and maybe the doom day of human civilization. The only possible "war" is that politicians, in attempts to divert public tension, vilify their theoretical rival country to gain support from the citizens.
@@luftwaffle4327 Most Chinese people want peace and do business with US, but the recent trade war has ignited nationalism. I have seen increased Chinese consumer decision based on patriotism rather than reasoning. (For example, people choose Huawei phones over Apple or other Android phones not because the Huawei phones are superior in quality or cost efficient but because Huawei's chip is designed in China).
I guess, Russia will take China side, and together they will humiliate USA navy fleet, after that they will have to wipe out all US, NATO bases in Europe. And USA will have to admit that it have just created USSR on a whole new level ) nukes are the last resort, everybody understand, that the moment the first nuke is launched, the game is over.
@@726f6f74 that is wishful thinking my friend... Russia wouldn't side with the Chinese for several reasons... they also believe that China is a threat... however let's take your input into consideration and say that they would side up... you think allied forces will just sit by? Lol...
History will show , through centuries western nations bully and impoverished countries worldwide. Till today, western media love to belittle and publish fake news against other countries under the pretext of democracy and human rights.
@@tofudofu2695 you know, when you live near China, it is better to be China's friend than China's enemy ) And the world completely ruled by NATO, is also far from best scenario for Russia (considering that NATO was created with Russia in mind) Of course EU part of NATO will take action, it is designed for that purpose after all, but everything may happen in this "fantastic" scenario. EU also lives near China. And China is enormously powerfull on ground, as well as Russia. So I would not expect that they will protect USA interests to death.
the answer is yes, very easily. this is only because there are 1.5 billion chinese people who are waiting for prime opportunity to overthrow the CCP. if a war does break out with a strong country like USA, there will be nationwide civil disobedience in china as well as tons of regional rebellion and armed revolution against local government. CCP central government in Beijing will struggle to hold on to power, and they will certainly not have the resources to continue fighting for long, due to large scale civil disobedience and nationwide revolt against their dictatorship. America will basically walk into an easy victory after minimal firefight, because oppressed chinese citizens will do most of the heavy lifting removing CCP.
@@云飞陆 prior to 2022 I would say foreign invader will likely unite chinese people to rally behind CCP, but recent events, long string of mismanagements, and poor policies had really fueled discontent and planted the seeds for revolution.
That’s funny that you think Chinese would hate CCP because they don’t agree to offer lands and trade compromise to your country. Only Chinese that hate CCP are Han nationalists and you know for what reason
source : trust me bro thats the same thing that putin was thenking when invading ukr that it will crumble the moment he knouck but we all know what happend after that.
This was an excellent video. General Douglas MacArthur on his deathbed begged President Lyndon Johnson not to get involved in Vietnam. He said "the US cannot win a land war in Asia. This video echoes that.
What a crock? MacArthur said nothing of the kind to Lyndon Johnson or any other president. When engaged in war on the Asian mainland and being attacked by 4 Chinese route armies he did ask for the use of nuclear weapons.
Now, you're talking about a great General, and it's a pity that lunatic drog abuser did not listen to him ... and he was not a nazi, what makes me like him even more ...
@@AE_AnarchistAlexcianEmpire69Bi No wonder that lunatic S.O.B. killed the Wehrmach Greatest Infantry General he could count on. Well, it's the value on the ground that wins war, but the brain moves the troops ... and Carporal Hitler was not smart enough to listen to Guderian, Rommel and Paulus ...
@@LayLowOfficial oh it’s good a normal life nobody really cares about u personal. And btw, I was born in the US and lived in China for 6 years and now back in the US
The Chinese Airforce now has 250 x J-20 stealth fighters, not the 40 that they had just a few years ago. Each year, the Chinese Airforce gets more new planes than most airforces have in total. The Chinese navy gets more new ships per year than the French, German or Spanish navy's each have in total. The video states that China has just 2 carriers, with the US having 11 x CV carriers and 10 x LHD/LHA. But in 2023, China has 3 x CV carriers and 3 x LSH medium carriers, plus more being built as we speak, yes a lot less than the 21 x USN CV and LHD/LHA but 6 CV/LSH with at least 2 more being built equals 8, many more than the 2 carriers back when this video was made. China has the technology, the industrial capabilities, the raw materials and the financial resources needed to build up their military quickly. Another example is the number of aircraft carriers that China had just 10 years ago, they had just one carrier, now they have 3 carriers and 3 medium helicopter carriers (which are bigger than the carriers of Italy, Spain, Australia, Japan, etc) plus more are being built. The number of DDG destroyers used to be less than 25 not so long ago, now they have 50+ modern destroyers, with at least 10 under construction at the moment, and another 50 modern FFG frigates with 20 more being built or ordered and 50 light ASW frigates, not to mention the hundred plus CCG coastguard destroyer and frigate sized vessels that are all modern. The PLA Navy and the CCG have around 250 large ships (300 to 600 feet long) that are classified as combat vessels, not including the literally hundreds of medium sized ocean going vessels and the hundreds of smaller ships, this combined fleet outnumbers every European navy combined (70-80 x submarines/150 x major surface vessels/6 carriers (CV and LSH)/40 large amphibious vessels/100+ missile attack craft/hundreds of PLA Navy support ships and 1,200 x CCG and 850 x MSA maritime safety agency vessels). The Chinese naval aviation has more advanced jet fighters than most countries airforces have!. And despite what some people like to believe, the ships, aircraft, tanks, missiles, etc that are built in China are far from being cheap and shoddy, they have the second biggest defence budget, nearly $300 billion last year alone. ($300,000,000,000 ).
50% of the comments: *ChINa SuCkS UsA StRoNK!* Other 50% of the comments: *ChInA StRoNk!* Me: *Scrollin through, enjoying my joint and some popcorn* 😂 🇨🇦
There is no way that the US, alone or even as part of a coalition, would want to undertake an invasion of the Chinese mainland. It would be madness. Back in the 1920s and 1930s, US wargames tried scenarios of an invasion of Japan following a successful advance across the Pacific (including defeating the Japanese navy). The results were always the same: the expeditionary force would be wiped out before it could be reinforced. Even "Operation Downfall," the planned invasion of Japan in late 1945, would have failed as planned. The navy had withdrawn its support for MacArthur's original design, because Japanese troop strength on Kyushu was twice what the plan anticipated, and no alternative had been agreed on when the A-bombs fortunately made an invasion unnecessary. It would be even worse attempting an invasion of China. Insanity. A US-China war would likely be a replay of what happened in World War II: choke off China from key resources it almost totally lacks and must import by sea, oil in particular, and food. Starve its economy and people until it collapses. But invasion? No way.
Allies NATO United Nation Western Powers & Axis CSTO Eastern Powers Defectors Plan To Invade China Battle Of China Battle Of Beijing Siege Of Shanghai 1:16, 1:21,1:22,1:32,1:35,1:36,1:38,1:44,1:46,1:53,1:58,1:59,2:02,2:03,2:05,2:12,2:14,2:15,2:17,2:25,2:27,2:30,2:32,2:35,2:36,2:38,2:39,2:50,2:55,2:59,3:00,3:01,3:03,3:09,3:15,3:18,3:26,3:31,3:36,3:42,3:48,3:49,3:56,4:02,4:10,4:23,4:28,4:33,4:41,4:46,4:52,5:08,5:14,5:18,5:27,5:34,5:35,5:44,5:45,5:56,6:02,6:10,6:13,6:18,6:27,6:32,6:42,6:46,6:50,6:54,7:04,7:09,7:14,7:20,7:21,7:29,7:34,7:40,7:44,7:50,7:54,7:55,8:04,8:07,8:09,8:16,8:26,8:27,8:37,8:45,8:52,8:56,8:57,9:01,9:07,9:09,9:15,9:22,9:27,9:29,9:38,9:43,9:44,9:52,9:57,9:58,9:59,10:01,10:07,10:10,10:16,10:18,10:22,10:29,10:37,10:41,10:48,10:50,10:53,11:01,11:07,11:12,11:16,11:30,11:35,11:40,11:45,11:46,11:50,11:58,12:00,12:11,12:19,12:20,12:26,12:27,12:29,12:35,12:36,12:37,12:43,12:45,12:46,12:47,12:52,12:56,12:59,13:01,13:02,13:08,13:13,13:16,13:24,13:27,13:28,13:33,13:41,13:42,13:46,13:49,13:56,13:57,14:03,14:09,14:13,14:14,14:19,14:22,14:24,14:30,14:35,14:40,14:42,14:46,14:53,14:55,14:58,15:05,15:09,15:15,15:20,15:24,15:26,15:27,15:32,15:36,15:37,15:41,15:45,15:46,15:47,15:51,15:55,15:58,16:01,16:10,16:16,16:22,16:26,16:30,16:34 16:38,16:40,16:46,16:50,16:56,16:59,17:04,17:10,17:17,17:21,17:24,17:26,17:30-17:31,17:33,17:37,17:48,17:55,18:03,18:09,18:12,18:24,18:27,18:29,18:33,18:38,18:41,18:48 ,18:52,19:04,19:09,19:15,19:16,19:17,19:24,19:25,19:35,19:41,19:42,19:47,19:55,19:57,19:58,19:59,20:03,20:07,20:14,20:19,20:28,20:31,20:35,20:37,20:38,20:39,20:43,20:44,20:53,20:52,20:56,21:00,21:04,21:06,21:12,21:17,21:20)
The Chinese understand that money talks, which is why they have so much invested all around the world, and have become the biggest trading partner to most of the whole. They know that wars are fought for economic reasons, and wars break out when the aggressor believes that the potential gains in economic, financial and industrial power, policy influence and international image and status are worth the possible losses and costs involved in fighting and winning. If the aggressor decides that the gains are would the costs and effort, then the likelihood of a victory that is viable and even possible, if the targets country is too large or likely to be hostile to occupation that is a major deciding factor, then the likelihood of victory and potential of defeat needs to be calculated. China is in the position of being too hard to defend on the battlefield, too big to be occupied and pacified by the invasion forces, and is too vital to the rest of the world economic for the aggressor to get much support from its allies, neutral countries as well as domestic and international business leaders etc. China is too hard to fight, almost impossible to occupy and too important to both the dimensions economy and the interior economy.
Alternatively the US could try to enter China via Afghanistan route and try to occupy Tibet/Xinjiang where the local population might welcome the Americans. Also Chinese military concentration is far lesser in this region. The people in this region loathe Chinese rule. With sufficient American help these places might eventually gain their independence from Mainland China. And they will provide a well established ground for future American efforts to capture Beijing.
You're probably right. Assuming the US is going for a ground invasion (probably wouldn't need to realistically) routes through xinjiang would be used (as special forces would probably very early in the conflict have assisted the locals in rising up against the PRC to divert attention away from the Pacific theater. The same would likely be done in Tibet, Inner Mongolia, and possibly Manchuria.
That's the issue with China; they have loads of different ethnic groups in their country that they refuse to acknowledge and respect, which makes China a million times easier to destabilize.
So you think is a good idea, going through Mt Everest? With tanks and heavy equipment. Go to the top of the world and down again, you have a brilliant idea
If you go in expecting that local population will welcome the USA then you are in for a big awakening lol. Watch less fake media reporting. Wrong intelligence like this is fatal.
@Аякс Нгуен Ян Nah mate China is Socialist. It is futile to try and convince me. Say what you will. All the insults. All your bullsgit opinions. I don't give two shits.
@Аякс Нгуен Ян indeed, Chinese econ mode is definitely capitalistic (but the market is not as free as countries like the U.S..) However, the political structure is indeed socialistic.) No country is purely on either side of the spectrum.
Difficult. SEA has too many races, religions and cultures to be conquered. It will be a very bloody guerilla warfare. Its like having Vietnam but then after you finish with one you get another Vietnam.
@@gamingthisera6339 Ah. Thats where you're wrong. They need civilians for their own intend such as slave labour. Whats the point of conquering a nation when the land is not useable via ala Nuke. Thats why the guerilla warfare will be very bloody and play a key part in the battle.
@@Raul_Menendez they just want land for strategic position, this is not medieval time, and china have more than enough labor for work, just look how they treat the tibetan people, theyre literally burning themself and china dont give a shit, instead the solution is bring more chinese in tibet, they want to outnumber the native
By themselves... maybe. But with the help of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, India, Australia, other Asian countries and possible European help...yes. But that would almost definitely spark a world war as North Korea, Pakistan and other nations might join the Chinese side.
and if for some reason Russia decides to join, the U.S would probably negotiate a peace treaty, cuz the last thing the U.S wants is Stalin rising from his grave with his red army comrades ready to push U.S troops all the way back to the white house... ...just like what happened in berlin
Gr33ny TheRevengemaster I think Russia would want to stay neutral. When the war is over, the damage to the worlds economy would be immeasurable. If Russia doesn’t participate, they can possibly become the number one world power no matter who wins the war. And, they might sell equipment to either side of the war, similar to the us before they joined both of the world wars. It would just be much more advantageous for the Russians if they stayed neutral.
4 роки тому
But will they appreciate that’s China become a puppet of America ? I doubt.
@ of course not, they'd probably join the US once it looks like we're winning and start slicing off chunks of china, i mean "traditional russian holdings" ;)
@jackylynn Mmm.. not entirely. At their core ancient view is that they are the "CENTER" of the world and for the lack of a better term, it's axis. Thus the world would revolve around IT. That is also why you will NEVER, EVER get China to accept a free and independent taiwan.
Lmao wtf kind of braincel shit are you on about? The 'conflict' is because the US keeps opressing China. Taiwan is nothing more than a western puppet, barely better than occupied Korea.
@@luangu "free and independent taiwan" is controlled by the ROC, the losing half of the Chinese Civil War. If the PRC invades, it would just be ending the civil war.
I think another point worth mentioning would be officer's experience. Because the chinese have virtually none, and their military progression is tied to blind obedience to the CCP, political apointments at their core, mostly disregarding technical proficiency, this could result in major lacks of leadership.
The Chinese military has been studying American military tactics for the past half-century, so you really can't predict what the Chinese military is capable of.
@@gr33nytherevengemaster26 I see your point, but every major army has always studied one another on a regular basis, hence such studies tend to neutralize one another on face value. Officer experience and overal capabilities is what determines how realistic those studies are, and how efficient their outcome is in actual practice.
@@BernasLL Oh and the Americans have experience? The only experience they have is fighting unwashed talibans with 40iq, how do you think that experience is going to serve them when they fight an army of tens of millions of trained soldiers and thousands of modern tanks and artillery along with airplanes.
@@BernasLL Absolutely, all I am saying is that you can't really underestimate China's military performance just because they haven't fought a real big war since Vietnam and Korea.
Pretty much agree with the videos conclusions that the US invading China just isn’t practical without other nations help. The manpower disparity, the distance to invade, and the amount of land to invade is just to much for the US to conquer from a nation not to far behind tech and equipment wise. I think if the US wanted to it could probably contain China to its borders on the ocean fairly easily which one of the many reasons I think Tawain remains separate at the moment. Basically there isn’t much of a chance of either nation ever succeeding in an invasion on the other but at the moment the US could probably hurt China pretty bad and possibly cause a coup or rebellion but the US as a democracy runs a similar risk of the war stalling out like Vietnam.
Binkov kinda already covered this, but A smarter US strategy instead of invasion would be this: Don't invade china, focus on interdicting China's trade and isolating it from the international community: Get India, Korea, and as many other nations as possible on your side and use your military to strangle China economically instead of wasting lives on a *very* tenuous land invasion. Even if India, Vietnam (if the CCP is willing to loose Russia's suppourt), or other nations were in a land war with china, a US invasion is asking for nuclear escalation. Instead, drag the war on for decades in a geopolitical siege until the CCP collapses under its own weight, since they now can only rely on themselves and a very small number of nations willing to brave international sanctions and a naval blockade for supporting them.
@@Dmitriy_D True. If you're fighting a war with a nuclear-armed power, you need to present terms right away that allow them to cut their losses without loosing too much, and even then you're playing a very dangerous game.
Play Conflict of Nations for FREE on PC or Mobile:
💥con.onelink.me/kZW6/dfd0888c
Receive an Amazing New Player Pack, only available for the next 30 days!
Meh prefer other games
if US is attacked, the Philippines is bound for MDT, basically US can use its airspace or bases.
I used it to always play that
Sorry for not supporting you. I already played when simple history got sponsored by it and i used his link.
Bro!! Wishful thinking!! It would go nuclear ☢️ before this could happen. The reason it would go nuclear is because China would have nothing to close but to destroy the other countries that participate in the invasion of China. Japan and some parts of the United States would cease to exist. China has too many attack submarines and missiles to sit and let their country be taken over.
Everyone in the comments section _definitely_ watched the whole video (including me)
23 minute long video, comment post 21 minutes ago.
2 minutes late but it's better than nothing I for my self actually watched the video but I skipped the sponsor.
Im waiting for the angry chinese commenter who will claim they can take down america no problem
I’m still in the initial ad lol
Don't need to watch it.
Already know the outcome.
How?
I'm a 5 Star General from the Kekistani Wars.
“Don’t fight a battle if you gain nothing from winning”
Erwin Rommel, WWII
Issue an embargo with all its allies and wait for a Chinese attack.
I wonder what A ww2 where Rommel was a us tank General like patton would be like.
@@williamblazkowicz5587 The allies intentionally didn't take Hitler out because they were worried he'd be replaced with someone like Rommel I guess that tells you how they felt about Rommel as a military leader 😂 Respect.
@@alphacentauri1760 almost all stuff we use are made in china, think again, you hardly can find sth not made in china, we as world are dependent on china like we it or not.
they also produce almost the half of medicine produced in the world.
an embargo will be suicidal for all countries trying to fight china.
we created the monster, now we deal with it.
@@tony001212 USA has been superpower for only 100 years. China had been superpower for thousands of years, so monster wasn't created by USA. Don't overestimate America.China recovers by her own hard work and intelligence.
The real war is always in the comments section.
Where the history illiterates fight it out
onggg
It's sad seeing how little some people truly know about history "those who don't understand history are doomed to repeat it"
Carson Rist , leader don’t study history will end up repeating history . If USA and China really go to war ! We all going to eat some big shit and say good bye to the life you have now. From my point of view China and USA are in the same boat . Try to build hate in the generations to come.
@@Craisont And the ones who actually studied history can only watch the ones who didn't study repeating the history
Even if it were feasible to defeat China, with a conventional land army, the human cost would be enormous. Nobody would be okay with that.
It would be to defeat china in a Tawain war. Invading China would be impossible unless it got support from India because indias boarder and military is pretty good
@@ssglbc1875 India is not able to fight against China at all!
Invading china is impossible, the country is far too big, far too urbanized and dense and far too many people. It is literally impossible.
Limited wars are the future. America and China fighting in Taiwan. India and Pakistan fighting in Kashmir. This is how big powers would fight, there is no point trying to invade each other directly because no one wins, it would be a stalemate.
There's no winner in this conflict. The world would be devastated.
You know you can like your own comment?
@@coconutperson1985 ?
The winner is me.
Which is why the US would win, nobody wants global destruction.
Most likely we'll fight them to the last Indian
It would be very Aug 1914
popular joke in China:
News reporter: Why do we send our army to Syria?
The US: Because we suspect that they have weapon of mass destruction.
News reporter: Why don't we start a war with China or Russia?
The US: Because they really do have weapon of mass destruction.
Just wait til the American government finds oil in China, bye bye CCP XD
@@GodDragonLich You do know the US exports far more oil than they import.
@@GodDragonLich there's plenty of oil in Manchuria region of China, and bunches of coal to liquidise
@@theicmn It’s called a joke.
@@trihermawan9553 Yes I know, it’s called a joke.
What I've learned from watching a lot of Binkov videos is that most countries can't successfully invade other countries without taking massive losses unless they are many times more powerful. Defensive advantage in geography and logistics is often huge. Especially if the attacking country needs many millions of troops. In this war, the whole global economy would lose.
That won't stop the CCP from taking everyone down with them. Olympic genocide in full swing... after murdering 100million fulong gong
The day The US masters the non nuclear point and field emp, game over. Disabling nuclear capabilities for even an hr would be the end for them both.
True. It’s hard to invade a country without taking massive losses. That’s why america didn’t invade Japan
All I have to say is never, never under estimate your enemy and there are plenty of advantages and disadvantages on both sides, one thing for certain, we will all lose.
Except the military industrial complex
@loadedwraps7630 No, you can't win if you're dead.
Let’s just hope both of these countries leaders actually think before they start something.
Yahweh has bought back their evil upon them, He will destroy them in their wickedness.
Seeing comments below this vid, I realized why people say Americans are crazy about wars and invasion.
Everybody gangsta until someone starts to lose family members. It's all fun and games until hundreds or even thousands of nukes are deployed. Most Americans don't understand the cruelty of war because they never faced a full-on invasion.
It’s practically our culture we’ve been at war for most of our countries existence
Zombieism. Lol.
@@americancountryball2077 yeah a "culture" spiraling down sooner than later.
If you study history every country starts wars somewhere sometime. If they bomb the bully china it feels totally justified.
Nukes: no one wins and everyone lose
thank you!
I'm not American and I'm not Chinese, I don't care who wins this massive dick-measuring contest they're having. I'm just a guy who lives nowhere near the pacific, who would be exceedingly grateful to not have radioactive shit fall on his head and kill him as a result of a war he cares nothing about.
there will be no one left to win or lose with nukes.
China and US nuking each other and ending horribly, war never changes ig
Nukes won't be used.
Nukes design and useage is quite a controlled war these days. 1 example the right size nuke detonated in high atmosphere is an EMP result. Fries silicon but doesn't kill biologicals. Nukes design and size can be incredibly small yes they can use giant ballistic units but that's not the way to win.
I was in the military 19D....any foreign military trying to invade another country right from the start said military is in a major disadvantage, the us Navy and Air Force would more than likely but not without taking large losses dismantle a majority of it's coastal defensive systems which would be great for our ground forces fighting a much larger army "number wise" in their backyard a location they know like the back of their hand not an impossible task to overcome but an extremely difficult task to overcome, the number of casualties would be massive.
I am here to watch basement military strategists argue with each other.
Ok, CCP dude.
They also are clueless on what "hypothetical" means and the whole point of Binkov's videos.
What a coincidence, that's my favorite passtime as well!
@@simpleman4215 thank you for introducing me to join ccp. It is cpc actually. But I guess I will pass.
@@MrBigCookieCrumble I hope those tough guys won't freak out when their wifi is down.
None of the big 3 can just invade each other and just win in this day and age.
Of you look only in technology it is impossible but china dont know they are on a suicide mission usa can hire hackers to immobalize china's pfffttt equipment... usa may use emp that may help to immobalize china. for usa and its allies to go in... Have you heard of ilove virus that immobalize the world by one person?
@@jayceecirelos7943 are you 13
@@abinmathew8983 haha he is😂
@@jayceecirelos7943 how smart u are！ now we know it.thank you😅
@@jayceecirelos7943 You should take that to Hollywood where it belongs
We can all agree that the comment section is more toxic than the mustard and chlorine gases used in WW1.
I always remember a quote from the Vietnam war.
"A bowl of rice and a AK47"
Guess we will be bringing in the Nukes again if they want to try and pull a Japan.
@@CreatingAlong I don't see a world where the USA invades let alone nukes China, it would turn the entire world against them.
@@Nicolae_Mew I do agree they will most likely surrender without it coming to that. But if they try to make us do a land invasion I cant see any other options besides nukes.
(since US would lose a land invasion)
I recommend USA resolve Traffic problem in California First.
Or the war against racism first
China lost to them too a while before we got involved and that was in the Vietcongs early stage when they actually were like farmers😂
Oh so China didn’t get their asses kicked when they leave but the Vietnam war ended in a stalemate and us leaving and we got our asses kicked😂
China’s way more racist then America
It’s funny cus that’s mainly due to Chinese drivers
“国虽大，好战必亡；天下虽安，忘战必危” The first part is for us, and the rest is for China.
right
其用战也胜，久则钝兵挫锐，攻城则力屈，久暴师则国用不足。夫钝兵挫锐，屈力殚货，则诸侯乘其弊而起，虽有智者不能善其后矣。故兵闻拙速，未睹巧之久也。夫兵久而国利者，未之有也。故不尽知用兵之害者，则不能尽知用兵之利也。孙子兵法说打战就是要冲着赢去的，打久了大家都累，攻坚战疲软，战争动员太久了国内空虚。没兵没钱没物资其他国家就趁势而起，就算有一百万智囊团也无力回天。所以打战都是一下子推过去，没听说过打得久能打好的。看看历史那场持久战有真正的获利方？所以不知道用兵的弊端，怎么知道用兵的意义呢？
today i realized that most your viewers are under age 10
Age racist
🤣
Deadass they are all anti-america and don't understand how modern day works the past don't mean shit you can't compare modern day US to 80s US and 80s china to modern day china. Especially when 80s china was to busy killing each other 😂
@@Lostname53 *PLEASE get out of Okinawa and GO FIGHT IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY, USA. Don't destory Asia please. USA is bad enough, don't sabotage other countries 🙏.*
@@robertgittings8662 realistically, they cannot fight in their own country. no chinese military base is near US. I'm chinese and i think the US is pretty good
Just because we’re the strongest nation in the history of man does not mean that we can invade a country by ourself. Invading has always been more difficult than attacking, you people in the comments are not very bright and it shows.
历史上最强大的国家是英国
Nooooo binkov you just set off a war in the comments between Chinese 50cent Simps , and American Keyboard warriors 😕
It's a rainy day on the U.S. east coast. We need something to do.
The signal fire has been lit
Already engaged.... Not really much off a fight. They are toast before they start...
I like the term keyboard warriors!!!
Simp has lost its meaning because of people like you throwing it around and using it in the wrong context.
Keep in mind that China is not Veitnam Afghanistan Iraq Syria or Pakistan..... Easier said than done
Why'd you mention pakistan it was never invaded
agreed, its no longer a proxy war or to invade a third world country and toppling it's govt, it would be horrifying
@@assgrabber5473 it was.
@@grathesus4114 when?
@@grathesus4114 invading a country with nukes would be suicide
Hi Binkov. One important factor that should go into your model is oil. As was shown in WW2, oil limitations severely crippled Nazi Germany's ability to maintain both wartime production and fuel for its fighting vehicles and planes. In peacetime, China's economy consumes 13 million barrels per day (B/D) of oil. Of this amount, 5 million is produced domestically (largely concentrated in Heilongjiang province); 1.8 million B/D is sent from Russia by pipeline, which totals 6.8 million B/D. That means that 6.2 million B/D...roughly 48%...is shipped in by sea route via the Malacca Strait, a serious choke-point. Within a month of the assembly of US Navy assets in that area (an area free from Chinese defense), the US could simply cut off half of China's oil supply.
Food is a much larger issue. If you'll read half the reason for genocide in ww2 was limited food stocks to continue the war. Farming then was more manpower intensive tho, and stalin had destroyed agriculture in Ukraine. Add in drafting all the farm help and out see this is a slippery slope. In 1944 corn was $7 a bushel. It's 3.50 today. But the point to make is I don't think China could survive a long drawn out action as their biggest asset (population) is actually their biggest weakness. Can they survive without protein imports? I don't know. But if they all cross the ocean to get there the american navy is in a stronger position to disrupt trade on deep water than china is to secure those routes outside of shallow water. Add in the british ex empire navies, nato, local navies etc, I just don't know where those soybeans will come from or how they can expect to get to china.
Unless Russia did that for the US I don't think that would happen and the US would not attack the Pipeline even on China side of the Pipeline. The processing plants yes. Pipeline doubtful.
@@Matt-mt2vi My figures assume Russia continuing their shipments unchanged; and they wouldn't be able to increase exports in wartime as the pipelines are already maxed out.
@@KrisWustrow my bag, I read as a need to disrupt the oil supply to choke off their supply of fuel. I am still not sure it would have a great effect, even max output prewar, the out put would then basically be all war drive only.. as it did with the US during WW2. all non essential fuel use would be basically cut off. Every thing not military related would be shut down or severely rationed. Plus with China operating in their own region they would not be a great increase consumption of fuel. One of many great failures of the German war effort was how far they operated outside of thier own country. ( Bigger area, bigger fuel use) Which greatly compounded when they failed to gain any of the oil feilds (Middle East or Soviets)
holy shit thats true, when mao zhendong was in charge of china everyone starved and it was NK lol, am chinese, can confirm
As a retired US Army Tank Platoon Sergeant, there is no way the American Army can successfully invade China… The same that China can never invade the US. An actual invasion would require the US to go onto a total war footing, which would include starting up the draft AND having at least United Kingdom, Australia and Japan to be 100% committed to the fight. I don’t think South Korea would jump in, but the US would immediately withdraw our combat units from South Korea AND verbally weaken our commitment in defending South Korean from a North Korean attack, which would place South Korea in a jam since she would have to basically go onto a war footing to protect her own borders. As for Canada, she currently doesn’t have enough combat power, Naval and Air power to really matter. France, Germany, and most of Europe would stay out, but we would pull our combat units out of Europe and telling them not to count on a 100% commitment or an immediate and massive American forces to be deployed to NATO to beat back a Russian attack. We would match French and German numbers that they commit to the fight. In a war, there is no need to invade China since the US can sink her Navy, mash her Air Force, destroy her coastal missile/radar defenses and cripple her harbors and ports. Plus, the US would attack her satellites as well. Yes, China would put up one hell of a fight and would cripple the US military in return. As for those Chinese manmade islands in the South China Sea, they would be attacked and cut off from Chinese reinforcements AND I would bet that Filipino Marines and Rangers, along with Vietnamese Naval Infantry will seize these islands that LEGALLY lay within areas under their control before being stolen by the Chinese. Both the Philippines and Vietnam would receive American Naval support, but they would not join in any other operations or attacks. The wild card is India, but doing the math, India would sit it out. Any fight between the United States and China would mainly be a Naval and Air fight. Both the US Army and Marines would play a minor role unless the mistake was made to invade.
sir, things changed, China currently has the most lethal missiles and better radars than USA
I’m not bluffing but in fact Chinese military is extremely good when it’s doing a defense, it seems to believe that its missiles are future, so now we all know that it will lunch hundreds of hypersonic missiles from its mainland and they will destroy military bases in first island Chain and SK, Japan in minutes
(actually they even have some naval based hypersonic missiles)
and I believe that the US won’t take advantage in air combat either, the F/A 18s can not outcompete J16 (basically SU27+filled with Chinese techs and engines), and F35s also have problem: they can not arrive in the battlefield quickly enough before J20 wipe out the tankers and awacs(Chinese awacs are also more advanced now, why don’t you guys update weapons more often?????)
But a brutal and costly damned war won’t happen if the US don’t intervene Taiwan affairs militarily…
and for army:
I REALLY WANT TO KNKW WHY THERE ARE STILL SOME PEOPLE THINK CN AND US CAN USE THEIR ARMY ACROOS AN ENTIRE PACIFIC)
Even with all that. The US could never land one soldier on Chinese soil.
last I recall the Pentagon said they were uncertain of winning a war in the Pacific let alone a conqueat of China but I'm so glad we have so many American war generals in the chat
War General Mike here ... ;)
you like so many others seem to think it is US against China!?
It is not! It is Taiwan, India, British, Japan, US and potentially others ...
The US cannot afford to let China take Taiwan, despite not having a defense treaty. The US/Quad alliance is the only country that can stand up against China. The CCP (Chinese Communist Party) is on the verge of global domination. If the US/Quad alliance dos nothing other countries will say the US ether could not or would not stop the CCP and so they cannot. They would have to aqueous to all the CCPs demands and eventually be controlled by the CCP. This used to be called the domino effect. In time the CCP would become so powerful the US would have to do so too. The CCP would spread its propaganda/censorship/surveillance state all over the world and no one would have freedom or democracy. Freedom of speech would disappear globally. Concentration camps would proliferate worldwide.
> IT WOULD START LIKE THIS: The CCP assumes the US will help Taiwan. The PLA (People’s Liberation Army) attacks Taiwan, the US Navy, and US basses in and around the SCS (South China Sea) preemptively. The US/Quad alliance destroys china's navy, takes the artificial military islands, and lays sedge to mainland China with the hope of regime change or at least containment. The US maintains constant military and economic pressure on the CCPs” Military Industrial Complex” with standoff weapons. In time the CCP anti-aircraft capability might be degraded to the point where less expensive and more effective gravity bombs could be used. With their massive numerical advantage invading mainland China is not an option as it would result in massive casualties and if the CCP elite felt threatened risk a nuclear exchange. The CCP would welcome casualties to trim their population. This would only make them stronger as they already have more people than their land will support (1.4 billion, four times the US population and four times the number of mouths to feed with the same amount of land). China is not self-sufficient in oil, food, iron ore, rare earth ore and many other things. China would become another North Korea. A negotiated peace or even a cease fire would not work as the CCP would not honor any deal it made, rearm, and try again. The only thing that would stop the CCP is the inability to attack. To stay in power and preserve their luxurious lifestyle the CCP would become even more vicious and repressive then they already are. Hopefully, this would result in a revolt that brings down the CCP, vastly improving the quality of life of the Chinese people. The war might go cold in time all by itself without any type of agreement or declared end. There would be no exit strategy. Containment would be the order of the day or maybe the decade or even longer, leaving The Quad free to attack specific targets whenever necessary and close the Strait of Malacca to the CCP. With all deference to Binkov’s Battlegrounds the object of the exercise would be to protect Taiwan, stop CCP expansionism, keep the international sea lanes open, and eliminate the threat to and theft of resources from other countries, NOT the conquering of china. The CCP is watching the US military now free of INF Treaty restrictions reorganize, build capability and alliances in the SCS. Maybe this will be enough to deter them.
@@mikeriley7296 the governments of korea and japan may side with the usa but the ppl are not, the new generation prefer china over the usa
@@davidfraley4286 You must be smoking weed when writing this crap!
@@mikeriley7296 It would be hard to convince other countries to join in a coalition against china, especially with Japan and Korea, since they are very close and would be the first target. They are also economically tied to china, so they have a lot to lose and little to gain in such war. I'm sure Taiwan would join but since they are so close to the mainland, their effectiveness is going to be very limited. As for India, it might have some local advantage over Tibet, but effectively supplying over the the Tibetan plateau would be almost impossible.
Man so many generals and defence experts in comment section tho.
Can US Army take Thaliban .. ?
Now it is negotiating to give up .....
Special Forces are beaten so badly in Somali... experts are overrated
@@vr-gv2ks it’s not that the us army is weak lol it’s that the us hasn’t adapted to fighting against Guerilla war. A big problem for the us is sure they got weapons that can shoot enemies with like pin point accuracy, but the issue is when they don’t know where the enemy is, cuz they hiding in the population. They don’t got uniforms or anything, they’re essentially civilians with weapons. A lot of times they aren’t sure if it’s the enemy or just a civilian and may hesitate. Also even with all this, the us still wins the majority of battles against them, but obviously in their home country people won’t want to give up and will fight til the last person, and eventually the us is gonna say hey stop sending people over we been doing this for years and we haven’t won so the army leave. I realize now I probably could’ve just said that last like 2 sentences there and that would be a sufficient answer, but whatever lol
@@ifardedandshidded5519 , sure... us army was not weak. But could not win !
1.5M Vietnamese died. Almost the numbers of wirld wide Covid19 victims.
For "what purpose" did American kill, bom with orange-agent, napalm bom, Vietnamese .. ?
You don't need to be a general to understand deliverable nuclear weapons. If the US wanted to take China at Any cost they could. But it would never be worth it
I love how this channel is neutral in every comparison and is not biased.
Yes, it is difficult to find any unbiased videos and opinions these days. It is amazing that this video remains neutral in the modern day, and I respect the creator a lot.
The irony is strong, with this one lol
True
The comments tho….
Anglo-Saxons always thought about how to invade other countries, but now they are ambitious enough to consider ways to invade a nuclear power.
Let the Americans never try to attack china, xi jinping has severally warned Biden not to pray with fire
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
US: Lands troops in China
China: You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders!
*cough* Japanese naval invasions succeeded
@@memer7987 The difference being that China at that point of time was still fighting a Civil War. And had a teenager ruling the country...
@@Raul_Menendez Even if China was unified at that time, Japan would win due to better tech
comments are filled with lots of Ex 4 star generals i see
Even someone rejected at MEPS should be able to see that this sounds like Cold War era strategy. I enjoy these videos, and it is _despite_ the fact that this is not how the USA and China -are- would be fighting one another
China doesn't have any Allies
@Haziq Rosli china and Russia are NOT allies. Guaranteed.
@@valiantstallion Yes, but this does not mean that Russia will not do anything
@@中流击水浪遏飞舟 Russia plays chess, not checkers.
Plot twist the Russian accent guy who made this video is actually part of the Russian government trying to stir up shit between the us and china to sit back and eat popcorn
I think russias best interest is to prevent this war from happening and just benefit from peking washington rivalry. However with chinese or american supremacy established in east asia there could be difficult times for Moscow. China grew arrogant, aggressive and hungry for resources (not unsimilar to US actually...) over years and russias far east might be the next dish on their menu.
Democrats: Better get the whole US government to look into that.
15:51 I can imagine Vietnam shooting down those planes for starting a BS war. Then when they accuse VN, they will just claim it's just another American claim of the gulf of Tonkin incident that never happened.
I think a lot of people are missing the point of the video. He’s not making a likely scenario. He’s saying IF war broke out, this would be potential things that happened based on force counts and numbers.
The only thing he can’t account for is the ramped-up production in a scenario like this. The US and China would be shitting out equipment by now
thats true although the us in ww2 vs us in this scenario prob wont be the same
@@beliveau4943 indeed if anything it would be even more insane. Every man and women would be on the battlefield, the production line, or in the field growing food.
Sir Dude Dude it’s gonna be like a video game first until all the missiles are used up gonna be the biggest scary thing anyone could ever imagine and it can happen as fast as it takes to spark ⚡️ a match
@@AaronDrake22 M.A.D. will be the death of us all. Its the only reason china is safe right now
Gavin Visser the issue there is that current systems can’t really be created as rapidly as they were in WW2, there are just to many steps in the supply chain. Look how long it took the market to correct for a shortage of computer RAM, and that was without two major markets, and manufacturers, fighting a war
Binkov: Most of those SAM's could be concentrated in a pretty small area.
Also Binkov: draws line on entire Chinese coastline.
AWAKS my boyyyyyy. Also 250 hornets raptors and lightning going Mach 2 while tomahawks from destroyers and sub batteries destroy their defense infrastructure and THOUSANDS of decoy missiles overrun the system SAMs won't be as effective as they would be against another nation.
It of course was an alliance offensive but just look at the air campaign that opened desert storm... the United States can outperform even that seemless victory by itself these days
The time when US take Beijing, Washington DC is already gone with the wind.
with the DongFeng
This is a good one
China could never take DC
Last I checked, the whole NATO coalition fighters left Afghanistan.
Of course they will do everything USA asks them to do. Its like the dog and his TAIL.
@@TheoGottwald they are forced to. They currently do not have the capabilities to supply their troops and manage everything on their own. They needed the US logistics and now that they are gone they had to go aswell.
Allies NATO United Nation Western Powers & Axis CSTO Eastern Powers Defectors Plan To Invade China Battle of Hainan 16:38-17:31,18:09/18:41 20:52 Invading China From 7 Direction
Allies NATO United Nation Western Powers & Axis CSTO Eastern Powers Defectors Plan To Invade China Battle of Hainan 16:38-17:31,18:09/18:41 20:52 Invading China From 7 Direction
Afghanistan has a cultural problem, not a governmental problem. There is no cure. They can't be helped.
We would definite need either South Korea or India. There is no way we could invade the Chinese mainland. Even then other countries would get involved. It would be a shitshow .
No need for a mainland invasion or taking over any Chinese islands other than the ones in south China Sea.
You see, China is heavily dependent on exports, all US and its allies has to do is cut China from the rest of the world and then play defensive and wait till China either tries to play aggressive, sue for peace or finds its economy devastated. Not a win for the US, but huge loss for China.
south korea isn't going to willingly join that war, doing so will reignite a new korea war(or rather, korean campaign of ww3) koreans will see heavy losses and devastation of their territory regardless of who won. only way it would do so if it was attacked. india would probably love to make a move on its borders but even if it won the combat there, thats about the extent of it, india has zero power projection capabilities and invading china proper would involve a supply route over the Himalayas, no way they get more than 100 km(probably close to 20km) into Tibet before they run out of supply and run into heavy chinese resistance.
@@mxn1948 India has some power projection capabilities, with 2 aircraft carriers and some supply ships. As for supply over the himalayas, it would only be truly difficult if China were to destroy the roads and bridges it has spent years painstakingly building up, and even then, replacement roads don't take too long to build, and tibet is quite flat. The biggest issue for India would be a two-front war as Pakistan would attack from the West, which would occupy 1/3 of the army in defence, or if India was to defeat Pakistan, then half of the army would be needed until Pakistan is conquered, meaning any serious progress over the himalayas would be impossible until then.
@Wuanslm yes, but they still have to get there. currently even american sea lift capabilities can only send ~50k well armed troops+support vehicles in one landing, who then have to fight 200k+ chinese. this is only possible if a large part of the world all fought china and over a couple of years, outproduced china then destroyed its navy then airforce then launched the largest sea born invasion in history making D-day look like a small skirmish. I highly doubt such a unified force would fight china, like why would europe go join this war or why would russia fight china for some reason. even then many millions will die, an actual occupation is going to be a nightmare.
Well its all moot anyhow, things will go nuclear well before then.
The ROC would be a bigger help than either of them. Being able to call it a resumption of the Chinese civil war and merely assisting the nationalist allies could be devastating to the mainland's cohesion, maybe even break the party completely. Not to mention there's already effectively a beachhead in Hong Kong.
The fact is that China has done so well in economic, technological, political and military terms, and their standard of living has grown so dramatically over the last 45 years that China is not likely to derail their amazing achievements by going into a war that neither side would really be able to declare a victory.
So, China is not the threat that the western media likes to portray.
Secondly, the Chinese government could easily and quickly increase the amount of military spending, and they are investing many billions into advanced weapons like hypersonic glide missiles, anti carrier missiles, laser weapons, very long range SAM and AAM, anti satellite missiles, anti radar missiles, advanced sensors, Stealth aircraft, etc etc, so they are serious about not being in a weak position ever again.
They have the money, industrial capabilities, technological skills, etc that allows China to design, develop, build, deploy and operate large numbers of very advanced weapons and equipment, if they feel the need to do so.
Thirdly, the whole of China's military is concentrated in China, they have a massive and very modern coastguard (bigger than most navies), a very strong armed police force, a large border guard, civilian police force and various other paramilitary forces, they would be a very tough enemy by anyone's standards.
China is a threat you bot
Never underestimate the illogical ambitions of a dictator for life like Xi.
brain washed victim
@@chrisnamaste3572 propaganda does not work here.
@@ibungothangjam524 given how shitty Russia performed in Ukraine when under dictatorship, it appears most likely China will go the same route. China barely have any allies. The US led operation in Iraq shows how sophisticated the US and it's allies are. Japan alone can take on chyna
This has to be the funniest prediction I've ever watched thanks for the laughs
Sometimes Binkov's analysis are so detailed it almost makes us think Binkov is from the KGB advising China and US to maintain peace and prosperity.
Binkov is really advising the US to maintain peace, the country that is actively provoking the other party.
@@dznuts123 I dunno man, the USA isn't the one who steals and encroaches on Indian and Bhutanese land, fights with basically every country in SE Asia and claims independent countries as being wholly it's, and support the People's Democratic Republic of Korea
Considering the current situation in the Med sea, France vs Turkey would be a fun one to watch.
Ft. Greece
If it happens it's likely France would have the support of most of Europe and America
But it depends on who the aggressor is .
If no nukes then France might be able to take some islands but Turkish mainland would be unharmed.
If nukes are allowed then Turkey is a gonna get stomped .
Yes it would be fun to watch people kill eachother. Imbecile. War is a “fun one to watch” Huh
@@hopperthemarxist8533 as a guy that will fight in this war (if it happens) i would love to the the vid.
@@hopperthemarxist8533 it is fun to watch hypothetical situations.
Not actual war
The only winner will be Russia or Germany assuming they stayed out of the war, the previous two world wars had showed us the results.
Wishful thinking for the Russians, because America has a score to settle with Putin.
Russia is Chinese military ally
@ChicagoMade Of course, but he poisoned so many of his opposition. So what is wrong with Russia, not enough candidates? Putin is an insult to Russian Democracy.
@@Jewel_Screaming_Chango8387 Wishful thinking.
Russia still holds Chinese Territories.
As an American, I can say that I admire the hard-working people of China. I have sat down and had lunch with some of my Chinese colleagues and I can say that we'd both rather sit down and eat a good meal together than to go to war with one another. They didn't forget our contributions to their freedom during WW2. They understand that I am not a fan of their leadership. Their response is the same for our leadership. Wealthy people, sending the poor to fight their wars. Not fair. I pray that peace always prevails. If it doesn't, The Chinese government will find out what a determined people we are.
We have found that you are not in Korean war.😂
I am not trying to be offensive, but in general, Single-ethnic countries tend to be more resolute in war, especially in East Asia.
In world war two，As an agricultural country, under the leadership of a corrupt and inefficient national government, we have resisted the invasion of Japan for 12 years and suffered more than 20 million lives. To be honest, the knowledge I learned from the history of the war launched by the United States in the past three hundred years tells me that the United States cannot afford the same intensity of investment and loss.
@@howardlee7588 As far as the Korean war is concerned, the PLA pushed the UN forces just south of the 38th parallel. This is where UN forces learned how to fight the PLA, made adjustments and pushed them back just north of the 38th, fighting a numerically superior enemy to a stalemate. The US helped do this with an extended supply chain over 5000 miles long. PLA combat deaths = 180,000, US combat deaths = 33,739. Yeah I believe that takes determination.
It's almost like the next world war will be a class war instead....
I love how everyone in the comment section are military experts.
As a poli sci major with a military science minor, I can tell you that this is nothing compared to the people who consider themselves experts on politics
@@hugejackedman7423 What does it have to do with anything?
@@ChadVulpes because in politic, we can't see who your buddy. If you didn't carefull, it's not your enemy kill you. But your friend
Khelsen Lei You’re not making much sense.
Your right bro, i got so much to argue with🙄🙄
I only know that when this war was over, everyone could play Fallout 5 in reality for free! Congrats! Hope my collection of bottle caps won't fail me then.
We have to wait until 2077
@@Afrancis16 nah that's the game our kids are going to play
@@jeopardized9293 The game would at least be complete by our kid's time. Unfortunately we only get the buggy demo version.
Nah sorry mate
We don’t need a nuke, a missile to their big ass dam and it will flood half of the country
I think a more realistic scenario would be a reignited Korean civil war becoming a hot war with China, with Korea, Japan and the USA fighting up through the Korean China border
Rok army is no joke. But the weakness is Japan and Korea will never play ball together.
Naw no one wants anything to do with North Korea, too many hungry mouths to feed.
@@ZZeeNiCey word. Preach. South Korea don't want to deal with that
@@SkinnerBeeMan exactly
1950
China:Extremely poor, suffered from WWII and civil war,no industry,no navy,lack of food supply and clothes.Soviet Union provided some air support but not a big help.
US:The strongest navy and air forces,well equipped army, leader of the Capitalism world,enjoy ice cream while Chinese soldiers eat their belt,and 17 allies(though most of them were useless).
You know the result of that war.
So,what makes you believe that USA can beat China in a total war nowadays？without nuclear weapon,this war will be the end of humanity.
🤣
We cant beat CHina without inciting revolution chinese high command will launch nukes and destroy the planet as soon as they start losing the communists dont give a fuck about this planet
@@众星弧光 hahaha how are those tanks in the street due to the bank failures doing stopping the riots?
Imperial Japan in World War 2 had difficulty maintaining their supply lines against a disunited Pre-Industrial China, with irregulars armed with bolt action rifles and great swords engaging in guerilla action.
An American invasion of China today would be ridiculously costly. The PLA would easily replenish both equipment and manpower at a rate faster than Americans can draft and deploy her troops.
A land invasion of a united China is absolutely impossible.
Maybe USA uses nukes to destroy all Chinese cities and it might be feasible
@@1mol831 That might works, but all the big cites of USS will be destroyed as well.
@@peiyuzou7754 Well who cares, its a hypothetical scenario.
Nothing is impossible if an independent country would like to survive.
@@1mol831
Bold of you to assume that that is how modern warfare is done, it sounds like a view of a stupid gullible person during the cold war.
That's not how modern warfare is fought, they would use that nukes to kill military bases and command centers, and kill high profile person's using drones. What does bombing civilians do to eliminate the threat?
Bombing cities does nothing but invite terrorism on your own country.
It would be so bloody and costly that the war would never even happen to begin with, even when putting nukes aside. See, China's military doesn't *need* to be as strong as the US's; as long as it's strong *enough* to make costs unacceptable, it can deter a war in the first place, essentially winning without firing a single shot. The US has only gone to war with much weaker opponents who have no capabilities of striking the US mainland in return. And seeing how China fought the US to a standstill in Korea with inferior technology, the US has even worse odds of winning now.
You should really read the Korean war and about the Korean war, they bought us to standstill because they had four times many troops as we did, and he lost 10 times as much as troops as we did, no we didn't they didn't fight us to stand still, remember you had Truman in there he's the one who decommissioned almost all the Navy cuz he didn't think we needed it, he thought everything was hunky dory, but he didn't do it for mobile sensation of the United States to handle Korea, and they had major supply of MiG 15s from Russia, but they were hiding in China and Truman didn't want to give the authorization to attack those airports in China, you see we were never at war with China we were over North Korea but it's a true man didn't want to take out China and take out the airport's hiding in China we couldn't basically take control over the air, Truman stopped MacArthur from finishing them off
@@chrisloucks3958 this comment couldn't be more right. You've read up on it, and haven't been eating the Commie gobbledygook.
@@chrisloucks3958 你们美国人是高傲的，从来不把盟友当人，南朝鲜的士兵伤亡100多万，你们怎么得出十倍伤亡的结论？（please translate by yourself）
@@chrisloucks3958 So? China had inferior weaponry. They had to make up for that through numbers. Be realistic, mate. You are just salty.
big 3 never fight among themselves they just bully other weak country around them its always like that
The more you dive into the comment section the more armchair generals making entire essays explaining how the US could destroy China with whipped cream you see
and also the other people who somehow think China would easily win or such
@@sword6381 well, not easily, but the advantage clearly lays on the defenders side
@David Lee ok wumao(chinese people paid 50cents for every post/comment glorifying the CCP or china)
@David Lee haha on point
@@v8vince761 you have made some pretty cringeworthy comments
Hope the world can truly change for the better with more harmonious cooperation and coexistence.
This is coming from an American. Going to go with China is bad idea. We spent $2.4 trillion dollars in The Afghanistan war, so a war with China would cost the text payers way higher than that. And if we destroy their economy it’s going to affect us as well since they’re our second biggest trade partners. We really don’t want to escalate things with Russia too. If countries like Japan can interfere then countries such as N.K (almost a puppy state of China) would definitely help them. Of course if there was ever a war I certainly volunteer, but I don’t want to invade into China crossing 5000 miles of mountains and jungles when we couldn’t even take the Vietnam.
Except 80% of china lives on the east of the country
Don't need to go to war. Just cut off trade. The US is the largest consumer of goods on earth. China is the largest producer. The US could easily produce back at home or even better rely on Mexico, Canada, and other South American countries to produce goods for us. This would destroy China economy. They would need to find a new consumer. Europe would be the next best thing but they are going through their own revolution of bringing back factories and jobs.
Tu Iochi Tu Iochi Well that would work, but if U.S has its base on S.K then they must have to cross N.K and the North has 7 million trained troops, the largest over all infantry in the world. Ofc North Korea equipment wouldn’t come even close to American/South Korean Equipment, so there will be a lot of massacres in N.K in order to get through. If S.K and U.S troops chooses to cross over the sea to China then N.K might use the opportunity and counter attack. I hate what the Chinese Government is doing but we have to be realistic here.
It will also depend heavily on US popular support for a war, especially a long-term one, as well as the impact to the modern globalized supply chains (both military and civilian)
With information that will be coming out in the upcoming weeks and months everyone will be calling for china's head on a platter.
@夜 LMAO...Watch and see paper dragon.
@夜 I'm sorry what was that...your mother was slurpping the Star Spangled Flagpole.
Emerica is the main bully n agressor not china
@@michaelslack4937
China did not send any military to any country emerica m ENDia did
The Vietnam war showed to the world that it is not all about technological advancement. It is about fighting in your own land. The USA lost to farmers at that time, even with a huge amount of well-trained soldiers, attack helicopters, napalm bombing fighter planes, etc. Vietnam was also a tiny country compared to China, and a hundred times fewer population. While China would mobilize most of its assets to defend the mainland, the USA could not move even half of its assets and leave unprotected spots all over the globe against the other many enemies around.
USA has lost to OWN farmers and public as well as few delusion about conducting war.
Gorrilla fighting gets every large military force, just ask all great generals throughout time, the more things change the more they stay the same
The reason the US lost was because Johnson was too pussy to bomb Hanoi. Hanoi remained a safe haven throughout the war. He was afraid of killing soviet commies. If the yanks put a cigar in and said 'f em' like Rambo, and blew the f out of them...they couldve won.
...and as for those mfers coming down over the border?
General Douglas McArthur, take the mic
@@oisinmccool3019 Actually to pussy to smash the irrigation system that fed water to the rice paddies that generated such high yields of rice that feed the North vietnamese civs and the NVA and charlie cong. No irrigation, much less water, rice harvest collapse mass hunger.
Pretty sure the carrier's will eat the hypersonic missiles first....
Why fight a war there when we can fight a war in the comment section?
May all wars be fought there.
I do not want to play Fallout in reality.
Neither does the rest of the world. Don't feel lonely it terrifies me too.
@@MICKEYISLOWD But we can collect caps together! And we can try mutating sometime~
@@zeflute4586 We will also be able to mod it, make the reality look like a jungle in no time
You do not understand fallout.
I don’t wanna ruin the joke or anything but the difference here is that, the nukes from fallout 4 were pretty small compared to modern day nukes. You could survive the ones from fallout. You won’t with today’s nukes.
This reminds me an old joke about the Soviet invasion on China during the Cold War. It goes - 1st day China surrendered 10,000 men to Soviet; 2nd day China surrendered 100,000 men to Soviet; 3rd day China surrendered 1 million men to Soviet; 4th day China surrendered 10 million men to Soviet; 5th day Russia surrendered to China.
That’s actually one of the Mao ZeDong’s plan for preparing that once Soviet Union invading China when the relation was very bad
@@michaelzhang2995 Although it is a joke, I know there is some truth in it. Nobody will gain from an unstable China. The ramifications from an unstable Middle Kingdom will impact all countries around and beyond and be long term. The US is unfortunately too short-sighted to see it, just look at Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria.
@@michaelzhang2995 Besides thought, if the US couldn’t win a war to a country such as Vietnam what is the chance for the US to win over China. It will be a bloodbath for the US military or any invasion forces.
@@davenobody407 that's right
@@davenobody407 I don't get it.
They couldn't even conquer Korea with help of 50+ countries. Heck they couldn't even conquer Afghanistan.
we did "conquer" Afghanistan..we held it for 20 years then we left
@@hs_fi8857It began falling before you left
@@finmacleod8383 yet we held onto it for 20 years? the country fell apart on our horrible leave
@@hs_fi8857 It took 20 years and spent $2t to replace the Taliban with......the Taliban.
@@finmacleod8383 Americans always Dominate the body count in every conflict!! 🇺🇲
One thing I like about this channel is its straight unbiased opinion.Well presented.
Dafuq are you talking about 😂
Am I the only one who said, "What?!?" when the A-10 was listed with the fighter planes?? I mean it's in the name: the "A" in A-10 means "Assault" as in "ground assault" (just like the "A" in F/A-18). A-10s are extremely capable low-altitude anti-tank, anti-materiel, close combat support, low-level bombers which were essentially built around their enormous (over 20 feet long) Vulcan Cannon. They are NOT, nor were EVER meant to take on other planes (although they would have done great against WW2 and even Korean War planes, had they existed back then). Just cause some people use them in a fighter role in some video games, does not mean that such things in anyway reflect actual military reality.
I know you do a lot of research for these, but details like these really make one question things.
Also, because of the extremely cautious nature of US combat, due to risk-averse popular support, there is no way we'd engage in any kind of aerial combat that would lead to losses of 12 fighters a day for even a few days, let alone long enough to whittle us down by thousands of planes. That simply is not believable for US combat. Not because we're invincible or so amazing, but because the US populace would never stand for it, unless there was truly no other choice, and even that would take a great deal of convincing, and an enormous deal of confidence in the convincer.
You should take that into account in any follow up videos.
Gta would like to disagree 😂
It can can 2 x Sidewinder missles but thats more self defense or to take out Helos in the area of the strike. Other that its no way ment to get into a dogfights
@@Matt-mt2vi Very true, but still it is in no way an actual fighter jet. There are bombers that carry AAMs, but no one considers those to be fighters either.
> the US populace would never stand for it, unless there was truly no other choice,
Obviously. However, this would be a pretty boring channel if every video started with the premise that nobody wants to fight wars, and therefore no war gets fought.
If you're posing the question, "could the US take Beijing" you have to assume that the US has some political reason to want to do such a thing, and that it has popular support, as unlikely as it would ever be to happen.
F Pena In the Korean War unfortunately we did not have A10 we only had fifty thousand troops that’s combined and the Chinese had up-to two million casualties, just think if we only had a few A10 that would have been ten mil easily.
This war hasn't t started yet but everybody is already at a stalemate. Nobody wins!
F-22's (300) shoot down all of Chinas Airforce in first three weeks, and B-2's crater the runways.
Only HUMANITY looses.😥😢
They had a very hard time fighting the ill equipped Chinese Infantry during the Korean war; imagine now.
video complete jokeeee
Moral of the story: never get involved with a land war in Asia.
A lesson the Japanese army learned the hard way
@Finn Hansen I think you're taking the wrong lesson away from Vietnam and Korea.
.
Korea's lesson was over ambition and a general distaste in the possibility of triggering another world war. While MacArthur wanted all of Korea under the auspices of the west, many others were content with two Koreas.
.
Vietnam was an issue of no real mission or goal. No clear objective. "Kill the other side" has its uses is not the be all or end all. Especially when a lot of the people didn't want us there and saw us as just more colonizers. The US only got involved to help France and fight communism. . and the American people really didn't give a shit about that. Not in the long run.
@Finn Hansen didn't lose. Neither side won, or there would be 1 Korea.
@Finn Hansen they didn't stop there because they didn't want to go further, rather because it wasn't worth it. Both sides decided it was good enough, and completely accomplishing their goals wasn't worth the cost.
@Todd Raine I was actually quoting from The Princess Bride, but yes, that is also true
Binkov's Battlegrounds - can US defeat China on its own?
Also BB - so this is Japan's missile defense capabilities
Negative, just take an example,like middle age time 1950s, when China has no nukes and fought with guns made in 1920.Now time changed.
@@worldpeaceworks4436 /whoosh
Not a chance
China can afford 10 to gain 1
Ah yes, the angry comments in broken English. A staple of any Binkov video
Well I don't say much angry comment in here. And also Most of my friends including me not angry at all. Why should we? China still need progressing that is true and in the video the US did cost a lot to invade china with high possiblity still not win. By the way just something I need to say, Chinese' first language is not English. So if you wanna point someone whose first language is not even yours and say they have grammatical mistake you better consider something at first: Do you even capable to understand other ones single word in their language? If you cannot even understand what others said it is quite ridiculous to laughing at others' grammatical mistake
@@yiyangqin4527 I'm aware that the majority of people watching Binkov are perfectly reasonable and are just here to enjoy the content. It's not a jab at you or anyone else personally, just a joke.
No US citizens should go fight in any foreign war tell the politician’s to learn how to use the weapons and take their families and do it themselves. Stay home and guard your homes and communities.
As a Chinese, I don't think this war is even possible at least in 50 years. First, China and US are mutually first trading partner even during ongoing trade war and global epidemic, and there's just no pragmatic incentive from both side to start a war. Secondly, don't underestimate the production capacity of either country as what Germany thought of Soviet and Japan thought of U.S during WW2. U.S is currently spending way more budget than China both in value and percentage to total GDP, but balance may change if countries shift focus to military equipment, and both countries know it. Lastly, both countries has nuclear weapons and long ranged missiles that can cover major cities of the opponents. A mutually destructive war is not in anyone's favor, and maybe the doom day of human civilization.
The only possible "war" is that politicians, in attempts to divert public tension, vilify their theoretical rival country to gain support from the citizens.
Wow your the first Chinese I found in this comment section that actually has reasoning behind their statement, and makes sense.
@@luftwaffle4327 Most Chinese people want peace and do business with US, but the recent trade war has ignited nationalism. I have seen increased Chinese consumer decision based on patriotism rather than reasoning. (For example, people choose Huawei phones over Apple or other Android phones not because the Huawei phones are superior in quality or cost efficient but because Huawei's chip is designed in China).
The wisest and most accurate assessment yet.
China watching this video like
“Write that down write that down”
Salim
That’s up to the people to decide
Hernando Malinche
My parents told me the same thing when I said I was going to college
You aren't funny
I hope we never have to try. The casualties would be immense, both for our military and likely the civilian population. I fear it would go nuclear.
It would.. it would be a zero sum game
I guess, Russia will take China side, and together they will humiliate USA navy fleet, after that they will have to wipe out all US, NATO bases in Europe. And USA will have to admit that it have just created USSR on a whole new level ) nukes are the last resort, everybody understand, that the moment the first nuke is launched, the game is over.
@@726f6f74 that is wishful thinking my friend... Russia wouldn't side with the Chinese for several reasons... they also believe that China is a threat... however let's take your input into consideration and say that they would side up... you think allied forces will just sit by? Lol...
History will show , through centuries western nations bully and impoverished countries worldwide. Till today, western media love to belittle and publish fake news against other countries under the pretext of democracy and human rights.
@@tofudofu2695 you know, when you live near China, it is better to be China's friend than China's enemy ) And the world completely ruled by NATO, is also far from best scenario for Russia (considering that NATO was created with Russia in mind)
Of course EU part of NATO will take action, it is designed for that purpose after all, but everything may happen in this "fantastic" scenario. EU also lives near China. And China is enormously powerfull on ground, as well as Russia. So I would not expect that they will protect USA interests to death.
the answer is yes, very easily. this is only because there are 1.5 billion chinese people who are waiting for prime opportunity to overthrow the CCP. if a war does break out with a strong country like USA, there will be nationwide civil disobedience in china as well as tons of regional rebellion and armed revolution against local government. CCP central government in Beijing will struggle to hold on to power, and they will certainly not have the resources to continue fighting for long, due to large scale civil disobedience and nationwide revolt against their dictatorship. America will basically walk into an easy victory after minimal firefight, because oppressed chinese citizens will do most of the heavy lifting removing CCP.
Possibly, or the extreme nationalism will ignite and the exact opposite will happen
@@云飞陆 prior to 2022 I would say foreign invader will likely unite chinese people to rally behind CCP, but recent events, long string of mismanagements, and poor policies had really fueled discontent and planted the seeds for revolution.
That’s funny that you think Chinese would hate CCP because they don’t agree to offer lands and trade compromise to your country.
Only Chinese that hate CCP are Han nationalists and you know for what reason
source : trust me bro
thats the same thing that putin was thenking when invading ukr that it will crumble the moment he knouck but we all know what happend after that.
@@OperationNonsense we shall see
This was an excellent video. General Douglas MacArthur on his deathbed begged President Lyndon Johnson not to get involved in Vietnam. He said "the US cannot win a land war in Asia. This video echoes that.
What a crock? MacArthur said nothing of the kind to Lyndon Johnson or any other president. When engaged in war on the Asian mainland and being attacked by 4 Chinese route armies he did ask for the use of nuclear weapons.
@@tomdolan9761
That’s basically realizing that you can’t win a land war. Lol
@@MelaninMagdalene if you nuke them and they stop fighting you, you won.
@@docwhiskey996 : Unless they nuke you back.......which China would certainly do.
@@paganphil100 oh well. Fuck the west coast.
“Stop saying quotes I never mentioned”-Albert Einstein
It's not 1939. Everybody is Rommel until the nukes start hitting.
Nobody uses nukes anymore. That’s old technology. Outdated and cooks the chickens too much. 😁
Now, you're talking about a great General, and it's a pity that lunatic drog abuser did not listen to him ... and he was not a nazi, what makes me like him even more ...
@Rodfel Deuxmilleun
Rommel Had Similar Views To Nazis, Similar Backstory To Hitler As Well.
@@AE_AnarchistAlexcianEmpire69Bi No wonder that lunatic S.O.B. killed the Wehrmach Greatest Infantry General he could count on. Well, it's the value on the ground that wins war, but the brain moves the troops ... and Carporal Hitler was not smart enough to listen to Guderian, Rommel and Paulus ...
No way would this conflict not turn into a global nuclear war. Thus no one can truly win.
Ok, I’m Chinese but in the US and all I can say is, people are playing too much Call of Duty games 😂
Legit question: what is life like in China, under the CCP( your perspective,of course)?
@@LayLowOfficial oh it’s good a normal life nobody really cares about u personal. And btw, I was born in the US and lived in China for 6 years and now back in the US
@@skullity3896 interesting...so which is a better place to live,in your view?
@@LayLowOfficial China because it’s fun for vacation centers and in the US, I work for a living
@@iconquer1672 😂
Vizzini: “you've fallen for one of the two classic blunders! The first being never get involved in a land war in Asia!”
but only slightly less well-known is this: Never go in against a Sicilian when DEATH is on the line. LMAO!
Yeah china did so good vs japan
Yes , Drag them out to sea and drown them . Lol
@夜 Japan didn't conquer china cause USA stepped in. To be fair China just got done with a civil war and was weak.
@夜 And if trump had the most votes he would be President but he lost so whats your point. China never beat Japan.
4:04 - US 7th Air Force in South Korea: "Am I a joke to you?"
Joke ? Na how bout gluten free parking lot
The Chinese Airforce now has 250 x J-20 stealth fighters, not the 40 that they had just a few years ago. Each year, the Chinese Airforce gets more new planes than most airforces have in total. The Chinese navy gets more new ships per year than the French, German or Spanish navy's each have in total.
The video states that China has just 2 carriers, with the US having 11 x CV carriers and 10 x LHD/LHA.
But in 2023, China has 3 x CV carriers and 3 x LSH medium carriers, plus more being built as we speak, yes a lot less than the 21 x USN CV and LHD/LHA but 6 CV/LSH with at least 2 more being built equals 8, many more than the 2 carriers back when this video was made.
China has the technology, the industrial capabilities, the raw materials and the financial resources needed to build up their military quickly.
Another example is the number of aircraft carriers that China had just 10 years ago, they had just one carrier, now they have 3 carriers and 3 medium helicopter carriers (which are bigger than the carriers of Italy, Spain, Australia, Japan, etc) plus more are being built.
The number of DDG destroyers used to be less than 25 not so long ago, now they have 50+ modern destroyers, with at least 10 under construction at the moment, and another 50 modern FFG frigates with 20 more being built or ordered and 50 light ASW frigates, not to mention the hundred plus CCG coastguard destroyer and frigate sized vessels that are all modern.
The PLA Navy and the CCG have around 250 large ships (300 to 600 feet long) that are classified as combat vessels, not including the literally hundreds of medium sized ocean going vessels and the hundreds of smaller ships, this combined fleet outnumbers every European navy combined (70-80 x submarines/150 x major surface vessels/6 carriers (CV and LSH)/40 large amphibious vessels/100+ missile attack craft/hundreds of PLA Navy support ships and 1,200 x CCG and 850 x MSA maritime safety agency vessels).
The Chinese naval aviation has more advanced jet fighters than most countries airforces have!. And despite what some people like to believe, the ships, aircraft, tanks, missiles, etc that are built in China are far from being cheap and shoddy, they have the second biggest defence budget, nearly $300 billion last year alone. ($300,000,000,000 ).
50% of the comments: *ChINa SuCkS UsA StRoNK!*
Other 50% of the comments: *ChInA StRoNk!*
Me: *Scrollin through, enjoying my joint and some popcorn* 😂 🇨🇦
The real war
It's funny, but I'm also losing braincells.
95% of China really includes only the eastern 1/3 of China.
There is no way that the US, alone or even as part of a coalition, would want to undertake an invasion of the Chinese mainland. It would be madness.
Back in the 1920s and 1930s, US wargames tried scenarios of an invasion of Japan following a successful advance across the Pacific (including defeating the Japanese navy). The results were always the same: the expeditionary force would be wiped out before it could be reinforced.
Even "Operation Downfall," the planned invasion of Japan in late 1945, would have failed as planned. The navy had withdrawn its support for MacArthur's original design, because Japanese troop strength on Kyushu was twice what the plan anticipated, and no alternative had been agreed on when the A-bombs fortunately made an invasion unnecessary.
It would be even worse attempting an invasion of China. Insanity.
A US-China war would likely be a replay of what happened in World War II: choke off China from key resources it almost totally lacks and must import by sea, oil in particular, and food. Starve its economy and people until it collapses.
But invasion? No way.
@Yuo Tuo and then Russia and China nukes the usa
Allies NATO United Nation Western Powers & Axis CSTO Eastern Powers Defectors Plan To Invade China Battle Of China Battle Of Beijing Siege Of Shanghai
1:16, 1:21,1:22,1:32,1:35,1:36,1:38,1:44,1:46,1:53,1:58,1:59,2:02,2:03,2:05,2:12,2:14,2:15,2:17,2:25,2:27,2:30,2:32,2:35,2:36,2:38,2:39,2:50,2:55,2:59,3:00,3:01,3:03,3:09,3:15,3:18,3:26,3:31,3:36,3:42,3:48,3:49,3:56,4:02,4:10,4:23,4:28,4:33,4:41,4:46,4:52,5:08,5:14,5:18,5:27,5:34,5:35,5:44,5:45,5:56,6:02,6:10,6:13,6:18,6:27,6:32,6:42,6:46,6:50,6:54,7:04,7:09,7:14,7:20,7:21,7:29,7:34,7:40,7:44,7:50,7:54,7:55,8:04,8:07,8:09,8:16,8:26,8:27,8:37,8:45,8:52,8:56,8:57,9:01,9:07,9:09,9:15,9:22,9:27,9:29,9:38,9:43,9:44,9:52,9:57,9:58,9:59,10:01,10:07,10:10,10:16,10:18,10:22,10:29,10:37,10:41,10:48,10:50,10:53,11:01,11:07,11:12,11:16,11:30,11:35,11:40,11:45,11:46,11:50,11:58,12:00,12:11,12:19,12:20,12:26,12:27,12:29,12:35,12:36,12:37,12:43,12:45,12:46,12:47,12:52,12:56,12:59,13:01,13:02,13:08,13:13,13:16,13:24,13:27,13:28,13:33,13:41,13:42,13:46,13:49,13:56,13:57,14:03,14:09,14:13,14:14,14:19,14:22,14:24,14:30,14:35,14:40,14:42,14:46,14:53,14:55,14:58,15:05,15:09,15:15,15:20,15:24,15:26,15:27,15:32,15:36,15:37,15:41,15:45,15:46,15:47,15:51,15:55,15:58,16:01,16:10,16:16,16:22,16:26,16:30,16:34 16:38,16:40,16:46,16:50,16:56,16:59,17:04,17:10,17:17,17:21,17:24,17:26,17:30-17:31,17:33,17:37,17:48,17:55,18:03,18:09,18:12,18:24,18:27,18:29,18:33,18:38,18:41,18:48 ,18:52,19:04,19:09,19:15,19:16,19:17,19:24,19:25,19:35,19:41,19:42,19:47,19:55,19:57,19:58,19:59,20:03,20:07,20:14,20:19,20:28,20:31,20:35,20:37,20:38,20:39,20:43,20:44,20:53,20:52,20:56,21:00,21:04,21:06,21:12,21:17,21:20)
@Yuo Tuo They will in return sent to US 300+ nukes + Russian 7000+ nukes and that will be the end of the US. Total wipe out.
@@justincappellini994 🤣🤣
The Chinese understand that money talks, which is why they have so much invested all around the world, and have become the biggest trading partner to most of the whole. They know that wars are fought for economic reasons, and wars break out when the aggressor believes that the potential gains in economic, financial and industrial power, policy influence and international image and status are worth the possible losses and costs involved in fighting and winning.
If the aggressor decides that the gains are would the costs and effort, then the likelihood of a victory that is viable and even possible, if the targets country is too large or likely to be hostile to occupation that is a major deciding factor, then the likelihood of victory and potential of defeat needs to be calculated.
China is in the position of being too hard to defend on the battlefield, too big to be occupied and pacified by the invasion forces, and is too vital to the rest of the world economic for the aggressor to get much support from its allies, neutral countries as well as domestic and international business leaders etc.
China is too hard to fight, almost impossible to occupy and too important to both the dimensions economy and the interior economy.
Alternatively the US could try to enter China via Afghanistan route and try to occupy Tibet/Xinjiang where the local population might welcome the Americans. Also Chinese military concentration is far lesser in this region. The people in this region loathe Chinese rule. With sufficient American help these places might eventually gain their independence from Mainland China. And they will provide a well established ground for future American efforts to capture Beijing.
You're probably right. Assuming the US is going for a ground invasion (probably wouldn't need to realistically) routes through xinjiang would be used (as special forces would probably very early in the conflict have assisted the locals in rising up against the PRC to divert attention away from the Pacific theater. The same would likely be done in Tibet, Inner Mongolia, and possibly Manchuria.
That's the issue with China; they have loads of different ethnic groups in their country that they refuse to acknowledge and respect, which makes China a million times easier to destabilize.
So you think is a good idea, going through Mt Everest? With tanks and heavy equipment. Go to the top of the world and down again, you have a brilliant idea
If you go in expecting that local population will welcome the USA then you are in for a big awakening lol. Watch less fake media reporting. Wrong intelligence like this is fatal.
@@mr.youtube1653 China is 92% Han Chinese. The next biggest ethnicity only makes up 1.2%
We live in a world where there are a lot of competing geopolitical objectives. There are gonna be allies on both sides
It won't matter the side you on.no one can win
Another genius analysis on how to wipe humans off the earth.
@Derek Zhou China socialist?! hahahahaha
@@seifhossam1791 Yes. Socalist.
@Аякс Нгуен Ян Nah mate China is Socialist. It is futile to try and convince me. Say what you will. All the insults. All your bullsgit opinions. I don't give two shits.
@Аякс Нгуен Ян indeed, Chinese econ mode is definitely capitalistic (but the market is not as free as countries like the U.S..) However, the political structure is indeed socialistic.) No country is purely on either side of the spectrum.
@Аякс Нгуен Ян Nah mate it's Socialist.
I have no idea about that because US couldn't even take on north Vietnam
Neither could China 🤨
@@who7129Why did Vietnam withdraw from Cambodia
Is China military strong enough to conquer east asia and south east asia on its own, that would be an interesting video, no US intervention
Difficult.
SEA has too many races, religions and cultures to be conquered.
It will be a very bloody guerilla warfare.
Its like having Vietnam but then after you finish with one you get another Vietnam.
@@Raul_Menendez I dont think china would care about the civilians
@@gamingthisera6339 Ah. Thats where you're wrong.
They need civilians for their own intend such as slave labour.
Whats the point of conquering a nation when the land is not useable via ala Nuke.
Thats why the guerilla warfare will be very bloody and play a key part in the battle.
@@Raul_Menendez they just want land for strategic position, this is not medieval time, and china have more than enough labor for work, just look how they treat the tibetan people, theyre literally burning themself and china dont give a shit, instead the solution is bring more chinese in tibet, they want to outnumber the native
It’s funny how everyone in the comments think they are an expert military strategist
Wonderful handle you have my friend.
Coming from someone slower than my crush's text
I've beaten Command and Conquer Generals max difficulty level... So yes I'm an expert, I'm a modern Rommel
By themselves... maybe. But with the help of Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, India, Australia, other Asian countries and possible European help...yes. But that would almost definitely spark a world war as North Korea, Pakistan and other nations might join the Chinese side.
you forget pakistan is a non nato ally of the usa and only likes china because china hates india.
and if for some reason Russia decides to join, the U.S would probably negotiate a peace treaty, cuz the last thing the U.S wants is Stalin rising from his grave with his red army comrades ready to push U.S troops all the way back to the white house...
...just like what happened in berlin
Gr33ny TheRevengemaster I think Russia would want to stay neutral. When the war is over, the damage to the worlds economy would be immeasurable. If Russia doesn’t participate, they can possibly become the number one world power no matter who wins the war. And, they might sell equipment to either side of the war, similar to the us before they joined both of the world wars. It would just be much more advantageous for the Russians if they stayed neutral.
But will they appreciate that’s China become a puppet of America ? I doubt.
@ of course not, they'd probably join the US once it looks like we're winning and start slicing off chunks of china, i mean "traditional russian holdings"
;)
No. I know and have read much Chinese history. We would not “conquer” China. Force them to capitulate? Yes. Then it’s back to making money.
@jackylynn Mmm.. not entirely. At their core ancient view is that they are the "CENTER" of the world and for the lack of a better term, it's axis. Thus the world would revolve around IT. That is also why you will NEVER, EVER get China to accept a free and independent taiwan.
Lmao wtf kind of braincel shit are you on about? The 'conflict' is because the US keeps opressing China. Taiwan is nothing more than a western puppet, barely better than occupied Korea.
@jackylynn Nope. They believe in a "WE" and we believe in a "I". Fundamental incompatibility.
@@luangu "free and independent taiwan" is controlled by the ROC, the losing half of the Chinese Civil War. If the PRC invades, it would just be ending the civil war.
Wrong question;
Conquer? No. Defeat their military? Yes.
I think another point worth mentioning would be officer's experience. Because the chinese have virtually none, and their military progression is tied to blind obedience to the CCP, political apointments at their core, mostly disregarding technical proficiency, this could result in major lacks of leadership.
The Chinese military has been studying American military tactics for the past half-century, so you really can't predict what the Chinese military is capable of.
@@gr33nytherevengemaster26 I see your point, but every major army has always studied one another on a regular basis, hence such studies tend to neutralize one another on face value.
Officer experience and overal capabilities is what determines how realistic those studies are, and how efficient their outcome is in actual practice.
@@BernasLL Oh and the Americans have experience? The only experience they have is fighting unwashed talibans with 40iq, how do you think that experience is going to serve them when they fight an army of tens of millions of trained soldiers and thousands of modern tanks and artillery along with airplanes.
@@BernasLL Absolutely, all I am saying is that you can't really underestimate China's military performance just because they haven't fought a real big war since Vietnam and Korea.
@@KitchenFSink That's just ignorant.
Pretty much agree with the videos conclusions that the US invading China just isn’t practical without other nations help. The manpower disparity, the distance to invade, and the amount of land to invade is just to much for the US to conquer from a nation not to far behind tech and equipment wise. I think if the US wanted to it could probably contain China to its borders on the ocean fairly easily which one of the many reasons I think Tawain remains separate at the moment. Basically there isn’t much of a chance of either nation ever succeeding in an invasion on the other but at the moment the US could probably hurt China pretty bad and possibly cause a coup or rebellion but the US as a democracy runs a similar risk of the war stalling out like Vietnam.
Your question is absurd. The US Army is a shell of what it was before Obama.
The real battleground is in the comments.
Meanwhile in chinese version of youtube : how to take washington in 3 days
How do you know that?
😁😁😁
Binkov kinda already covered this, but A smarter US strategy instead of invasion would be this: Don't invade china, focus on interdicting China's trade and isolating it from the international community: Get India, Korea, and as many other nations as possible on your side and use your military to strangle China economically instead of wasting lives on a *very* tenuous land invasion. Even if India, Vietnam (if the CCP is willing to loose Russia's suppourt), or other nations were in a land war with china, a US invasion is asking for nuclear escalation. Instead, drag the war on for decades in a geopolitical siege until the CCP collapses under its own weight, since they now can only rely on themselves and a very small number of nations willing to brave international sanctions and a naval blockade for supporting them.
Even what you suggesting will bring out a nuclear war since China will have nothing to lose.
@@Dmitriy_D True. If you're fighting a war with a nuclear-armed power, you need to present terms right away that allow them to cut their losses without loosing too much, and even then you're playing a very dangerous game.
It's not like that's gonna happen though, right?
It's not like we're seeing dozens of countries cutting all ties with China, right?
North korea would support them though