5 ms·

With the current armament of the US it really isn't a concern to me. Would a war between major powers now last long enough to have the supply chain make a large

With the current armament of the US it really isn't a concern to me. Would a war between major powers now last long enough to have the supply chain make a large difference?

swalsh 8y ago
I'm just an armchair general, so take this for what it's worth. I view US vs China in the same way I view Japan vs US in WW2. At the start of the war, we're going to start with the maximum amount of resources. We have more "Kinetic" energy. But I personally think China has more "Potential" energy. Unless we win in the first volleys of the war, I think China could very reasonably extend the length of the war, and ultimately win.
- JumpCrisscross 8y ago
  > China has more "Potential" energy America mines its own minerals and pumps its own oil. China cannot. This was the same weakness Japan had. In an American-Chinese conventional or proxy war, among the first Chinese targets would be its ports, pipelines and oil tankers.
  - tivert 8y ago
    > America mines its own minerals and pumps its own oil. China cannot. This was the same weakness Japan had. In an American-Chinese conventional or proxy war, among the first Chinese targets would be its ports, pipelines and oil tankers. Russia also pumps oil for export and shares a land border with China. It's also relatively friendly to China and relatively antagonistic to the US.
- tossaccount123 8y ago
  China has no blue water Navy and can't feed it's own population without importing billions in food. US would blockade Brazil and stop exports of soy and corn to China. China would starve within months if not weeks China has zero force projection ability
RhodesianHunter 8y ago
Between super powers? Unless someone resorted to nukes then yes. We're still in Iraq and Afghanistan to some extent all these years later and those countries had armies weaker than some states' national guard
- adrianN 8y ago
  Winning against an army is quite different from keeping peace in an occupied country.
  - foldr 8y ago
    But in a way that's the point. If the US can't occupy China, how can it really win a war?
    - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
      >If the US can't occupy China, how can it really win a war? Lay waste to everything of value until the enemy surrenders on terms you can accept then leave. Sure there will be resentment but traditionally this is how wars were "won" prior to 1945. The rebuilding of Europe and Japan after WW2 was the first big break from the status quo. Obviously this assumes a conventional war without nukes. Nuclear powers don't get in shooting wars with other nuclear powers (see Cuban missile crisis) so it doesn't really matter.
      - foldr 8y ago
        China's huge. Even the US doesn't have sufficient military power to lay waste to "everything of value" without using nukes or occupying the country.
    - thefounder 8y ago
      If nukes are used the loosing party would need another 100 years to get back on its feets. I'm pretty sure the loosing party would get some restrictions as well(i.e no army). I doubt they would start blowing themselves up like in the middle east either.

With the current armament of the US it really isn't a concern to me. Would a war between major powers now last long enough to have the supply chain make a large difference?

swalsh 8y ago

I'm just an armchair general, so take this for what it's worth. I view US vs China in the same way I view Japan vs US in WW2. At the start of the war, we're going to start with the maximum amount of resources. We have more "Kinetic" energy. But I personally think China has more "Potential" energy. Unless we win in the first volleys of the war, I think China could very reasonably extend the length of the war, and ultimately win.

JumpCrisscross 8y ago
> China has more "Potential" energy America mines its own minerals and pumps its own oil. China cannot. This was the same weakness Japan had. In an American-Chinese conventional or proxy war, among the first Chinese targets would be its ports, pipelines and oil tankers.
- tivert 8y ago
  > America mines its own minerals and pumps its own oil. China cannot. This was the same weakness Japan had. In an American-Chinese conventional or proxy war, among the first Chinese targets would be its ports, pipelines and oil tankers. Russia also pumps oil for export and shares a land border with China. It's also relatively friendly to China and relatively antagonistic to the US.
tossaccount123 8y ago
China has no blue water Navy and can't feed it's own population without importing billions in food. US would blockade Brazil and stop exports of soy and corn to China. China would starve within months if not weeks China has zero force projection ability

RhodesianHunter 8y ago

Between super powers? Unless someone resorted to nukes then yes. We're still in Iraq and Afghanistan to some extent all these years later and those countries had armies weaker than some states' national guard

adrianN 8y ago
Winning against an army is quite different from keeping peace in an occupied country.
- foldr 8y ago
  But in a way that's the point. If the US can't occupy China, how can it really win a war?
  - dsfyu404ed 8y ago
    >If the US can't occupy China, how can it really win a war? Lay waste to everything of value until the enemy surrenders on terms you can accept then leave. Sure there will be resentment but traditionally this is how wars were "won" prior to 1945. The rebuilding of Europe and Japan after WW2 was the first big break from the status quo. Obviously this assumes a conventional war without nukes. Nuclear powers don't get in shooting wars with other nuclear powers (see Cuban missile crisis) so it doesn't really matter.
    - foldr 8y ago
      China's huge. Even the US doesn't have sufficient military power to lay waste to "everything of value" without using nukes or occupying the country.
  - thefounder 8y ago
    If nukes are used the loosing party would need another 100 years to get back on its feets. I'm pretty sure the loosing party would get some restrictions as well(i.e no army). I doubt they would start blowing themselves up like in the middle east either.