Chinese Infantry Effectiveness

Guess the chinese agents that were on earlier went to bed or are to lazy to respond.

Nice bait

People will continue to be skeptical of China's military capabilities until they can show that they're able to operate as effectively in an actual combat environment as they claim. While it's certainly possible that China's public weapons research projects will yield increases in combat effectiveness, their performance in recent conflicts (the few they've been involved in) leaves a lot to be desired.
China's relatively poor performance against both the Soviets and Vietnamese through the 70's and 80's has set a certain reputation for the PLA, and while advances in the country's technology, industry, and planning have certainly improved things, China has yet to prove that they're on par with other modern, professional forces.

Probably would still employ human wave attacks.

Not that I think the Chinese military is worth a damn, cause it's not, but after seeing Sadam get BTFO'ed in Desert Storm, Chinese planners have made it a priority to move away from mass infantry and armor formations to focus on combined arms. How well that has worked remains to be seen.

I won't pretend to be an expert but I feel combined arms ops only come to from actual use.
As in your leaders and trigger-pullers have to get some experience for that clusterfuck of a machine to work well.

One major advantage the US has is experience in its leaders who have had to do the tango at least once before in some way or another so they know what to expect to some degree.

Exercises are great but when you're actually dealing with a competent enemy you need to keep things going and everyone still needs to do their job. I'll believe the chinks can do that when I see it. It would legit be very implessive

Well, I'd say we'd have to squint for the results. We'll notice they'd have a chink in their armor, which would make the fight a bit slanted. But I should re-orient and say that it'd be a wanton ordeal.

Exactly. The value of a seasoned group of mid-level leaders, especially NCOs, cannot be underestimated. This is something China is sorely lacking. Throughout history, armies would send officers to observe other countries fighting wars they themselves weren't involved in. I'm not sure if the Chinese have a similar program, but it would likely do them good.

>One major advantage the US has is experience in its leaders who have had to do the tango at least once before in some way or another so they know what to expect to some degree.
And When was the last time the US faced a near parity opponent?
In all conflicts since WWII, US forces had Full-spectrum dominance and can delete entire enemy columns before engaging them.
Strip that all away and the US have no less that experience of even China, let alone the Russian Federation have.

While experience is great, I wonder how much of the recent American experience is actually good experience when it comes to fighting a near-peer adversary. From what little I know the US tends to send in far too few infantry and rely heavily on support assets.
That being said, the PLA has had almost no experience in recent years. In a straight on fight infantry-to-infantry it's likely more or less equally matched, with the US forces probably coming out on top more often just because of superior tactics that have proven effective against other infantry. In a large scale China vs. US fight though, who knows what can happen.

when was the last time china faced an opponent on par with what the US has faced?
my point with my post is that the US military has a lot more experience in its members than the chinese military.

>Strip that all away and the US have no less that experience of even China
english clearly isnt your first language
No matter how you paint it, the US mil has more experience than the chinese mil at combined arms warfare.

>English is clearly not your first language.

>In a large scale China vs. US fight though, who knows what can happen.
yeah i was actually thinking of this earlier today and that whole "sleeping giant" quote for the US in ww2.
whether the quote was spoken or not, China is now potentially on par as far as "sleeping giants" go due to their industrial capability.
I think Chinese culture is our greatest ally in such a conflict though due to the focus on maximum gain in as a little time as possible, leading to cut corners and general tomfoolery.

>They ran away and let the un workers get blacked and killed
Nothing of importance was lost
>Vietnam kicked their ass
Less than when Vietnam kicked American ass, so by that logic China is better than America

>What
China sent officers to train the Syrian Army that is why the Assad is winning, not because of Russian support but because of Chinese guidance.

lol

>chinese officers' guidance does more than the direct support russia provides
wew lad

Attached: 1554834567495.png (494x400, 25K)

Boots on the ground is better than birds on the air.

>when was the last time china faced an opponent on par with what the US has faced?
Vietnam. And morally China won that one yet America was crushed thoroughly.

>chinese officers are boots on the ground
noted

Attached: 1554607185355.jpg (441x438, 56K)

Good point on the US becoming to reliant on COIN tactics since 9/11. That does, however, seem to be changing as America is starting to refocus on peer-level adversaries in recent years. I doubt China and the US will ever fight infantry to infantry beyond island hopping, though. It'll mostly be a naval/air conflict if it ever comes, which no country has any experience in since 1945.

To , I'd counter that any experience under fire is better than none, even if that experience is just low-intensity terrorist hunting. Just knowing the basics of how one's units and systems under wartime demands is helpful. On top of that, the US absolutely has recent experience in combined-arms warfare, importantly the development and testing of SEAD techniques during the Gulf War, which are an absolutely a necessity given America's reliance on air superiority. The US hasn't faced an opponent without full-spectrum dominance precisely because full-spectrum dominance is literally their strategy.

Its a joke, try again in 20 years. Also, lots of Chang posts on the catalog. Its probably high time in the 20 cent army.

nice bait chang

While there is some degree of uncertainty about who would win in such a war, I doubt it'll come down to the industrial capability of either side. Any modern peer-level war would cause attrition of advanced systems much greater than what any factory could replace before the fighting ended. I can't imagine a US-China war lasting more than a year, regardless of who wins.

lmao you're delusional
chinese got spanked in vietnam

>Sino-Vietnamese war: 3 weeks, around 10,000 dead Chinese
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War
>US-Vietnam war: well over a decade if not 2, 60,000 dead Americans
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

I think the US did ok compared to China

So basically since you had no follow up, China's actual experience in battle is very little to none, while the US or Russia has tons of it.

Especially the US since an entire generation has practically grew up knowing war, whereas the Chinese haven't seen any real war in decades.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Ch'ongch'on_River
Who would win?
254k fat mutts armed to the teeth with full air support vs 230k brave Chinese soldiers with inadequate ammunition, clothing and no air support.
at -30 F
I bet most of the Chinese casualty was due to weather and the lack of medical attention. And looking at the statistic, it was!
the US army is a joke.

Attached: 1548305562661.jpg (1400x788, 126K)

Not just no experience, but negative experience. They admitted to losing nearly 7,000 men in 3 weeks, while some Chinese dissidents claim the number was closer to 10,000. China lost 10,000 men in a month... against fucking Vietnam.

They're in the middle of a modernization that started after they and the Soviets collectively shit their pants at seeing how the (former) Warsaw Pact's style of warfare completely fell apart for Iraq in 1991. Where the idea of the heavy hitters being the best units, then backed up by the much more numerous but inferior units (and then the paramilitary forces behind that) just did not work. Once those best units are tangled up in engaging, the other forces quickly collapse when put under pressure. They Soviet/Russians and Chinese paid attention and realized they needed to improve their forces across the board by ideally giving them all the same level of training and equipment. But that takes a lot of time, development, and money and neither Russia or China is at that level (and if things continue to constantly develop then they may never be able to truly outfit everyone equally.)

>I bet most of the Chinese casualty was due to weather and the lack of medical attention

cope.jpg

>1950
Unfortunately for you, Chang, things have progressed since then. At least for the West.

>Unironically quoting dissidents
Let me guess Total US casualties in the Middle East exceed 100,000?

Air support is much more effective at winning infantry fights today, see literally every war the US has fought since Vietnam. China, or anyone else for that matter, simply can't compete with the US right now. Who knows what the next few decades will bring, but I think America's position as sole global superpower will be just fine for the foreseeable future.

>Unfortunately for you, Chang, things have regressed since then. At least for the West.
Sounds about right

they spend most of their time being indoctrinated to follow the communist party, not actual military training.

I'm surprised they managed to take a picture that looks good. Wait, aren't some of those women?

Holy Christ, the Chinese were losing men from 406 to possibly 1238 a day. The Chinese lost more men in 3 weeks than the US has in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That's insane lmao, imagine if China stayed in Vietnam as long as the US did, they'd probably end up conscripting women and children to fill in the losses.

Attached: 1526019781597.jpg (375x516, 43K)

That's fair, so 7,000 Chinese soldiers (their number) were killed by the Vietnamese over the course of 3 weeks. That makes it so much less embarrassing.

The Iraqis had zero air cover though.
Their army collapsed even before engaging UN forces.

They literally couldn't stay in Vietnam as long as the US did, they were hemorrhaging men like a victim of a quantum Chinese escalator hemorrhages blood.

the biggest thing I want to see is how their interbranch effectiveness will be.

Attached: xzibit_yo_dawg_render_by_kernelpanicx-d5aa710.png (391x401, 156K)

In exchange for 10,000 Vietnamese civilians and over 11,000 Vietnamese crack troops dead.
The Chinese estimate around 57,000 troops and 60,000 border troops
And contrary to what the Westerners say, according to Viet records, Vietnam actually had to pull their elite units out of Cambodia to confront the Chinese.

If China was doing so well how come they didn't win, chang?

Lets make this clear, even if your numbers are correct, they aren't the Chinese were being massacred on a hilarious scale, China's goal was to remove Vietnam's presences in Cambodia, and they withdrew from Vietnam saying they succeeded in that mission, except history shows Vietnam still in Cambodia for another 10 years.

There's no mental gymnastic you can perform to somehow lessen that defeat. China lost in Veitnam, and it lost troops at a rate that would have surpassed US losses well within a year, even going by Chinese estimates.

>Pushed up until they are on the outskirts of Hanoi
>Not Win
Pick one Waitopiggu

They didn't. Historically, factually, they didn't win. You saying they didn't doesn't make that true.

>muh hanoi
lmao

Which is how the US fights every war against a state-level adversary. China's air force, while effective compared to its neighbors, simply cannot win against the USAF due to vast disparities in numbers, training, and technology. Once their fighters and strike aircraft have been neutralized, SEAD missions will eventual remove China's only other means of preventing total US air superiority. At this point, Chinese infantry and naval assets will be relatively undefended, and the actual ground war, if necessary, can begin. Unless China can somehow beat the USAF (which it absolutely can't) and the USN (which it probably can't) at their own game, they simply cannot afford an armed confrontation with the United States.

You are the only one competing in the Special Olympics lol
You cannot deny the fact the PLA had Hanoi at its full mercy, along with the entire Vietnamese leadership.
You cannot deny that the Vietnamese lost more troops than the PLA.
You cannot deny that there were far more Viet POWs than PLA POWs.
Those are facts, not opinions.

Okay so why did China still lose?

naw they're opinions
chinese got btfo

>this is how the tiger argues
welp im not worried one bit

>Forced Vietnam to relinquish Cambodia and later Laos
>Soviet Union did Jackshit to stop the invasion
>Stripped the Northern Provinces of all heavy machinery and everything of value
>Started an uprising among Vietnam's long oppressed minorities, reviving FULRO
>Suffered less casualties than the Vietnamese
>Gained popular support (& Investment) for stopping the spread of communism
Claiming China did not win is illogical at best

They won by every metric.

Yeah Germany beat Russia in WW2 because they got to the outskirts of Moscow, too.

Says the Wuss who cannot accept that the Viets performed far worse than the Chinks

You literally cannot counter these facts.

>China wants Vietnam out of Cambodia
>Vietnam massacres China on its own border so bad they go home
>Decades later, Vietnam is rapidly becoming an American ally against the Chinese Menace
>tfw you might finally see GI and VC fighting side by side to start a new century of humiliation

Attached: FrankReynoldsVietCong.png (960x540, 593K)

more like housecat
holy shit stop with the lies

So do you really want Beijing to occupy Hanoi?
At that time, they could.

D E L U S I O N

I see I've rendered your primitive brain to emotional outbursts, simply by suggesting you are using mental gymnastics.

The numbers in Chinese and Vietnamese losses are contested, while there are more sources proving Vietnam's statements are more likely true, I still gave you that to save what was left of your dignity, but lets be honest we both know that the Vietnamese were battle hardened and ready to handle the rudimentary tactics the PLA could pitifully yield, that's why even by Chinese estimates you were losing around 406 soldiers a day.

You have yet to address the fact China's main goal was to remove Vietnam's presence in Cambodia, yet they pulled out of Vietnam and Vietnam stayed in Cambodia for 10 more years.

You lost, and got your asses handed to you, that is an undisputed fact.

>So do you really want Beijing to occupy Hanoi?
>At that time, they could.
So why didn't they? That would have won the war for them. Which they lost.

Probably maybe
If every Southeast Nation not hate Vietnam

Cope
Your irrational subhuman mind cannot deal with the truth

it'd be funny as fuck
the cry-nese would seethe so hard blood would pour from their eyeballs

In what way did they lost?
See: Vietnam could not do jackshit and CAMBODIA LIVES

Fine, a new century of humiliation may be a little far fetched. Another Nanjing perhaps?

Attached: SmilingImperialJapanese.jpg (322x400, 26K)

I thought the only reason why the sino vietnam war happened was because of a political scheme by Deng to show the oldies in the government how ineffective and shitty the current military was and how they needed much needed change?

>Nip Monkey angry engrish noises
>Gets nuked the third time
>???

you forgot to mention buttravaged chinks calling everyone pajeets

So why did Vietnam stay there until 26 September 1989?

That sounds like a great excuse for losing 7,000 men in less than a month.

China's action is basically like if you saw your buddy being beaten up on by some bigger guy and you go to help your friend by kicking the guy once, tripping, and knocking yourself out only to have the guy look up for a moment to then resume pounding your friends face in for 10 more minutes.

But hey, your friend didn't die though, that means you won that fight, right? By every metric, you did more damage to him than he did to you, and you did get his attention for a moment, you accomplished your goals.

>I was only pretending to be retarded
Ancient chinese secret!

this much coping lmao

>says the wuss
im just a bystander enjoying the show, fren

>Being this butthurt over a war that briefly happened 40 years ago.

China implemented an ancient Chinese invention known in inferior western circles as "Quantum Victory." The war was in a constant superposition of being both another embarrassment on the world stage and a glorious victory for the Chinese people. Truly, we still have much to learn from the noble scholars of the east.

>Be Viet
>Gets kicked up the rear-end and raped
>Bitching on the internet
Sounds about right

It's the PLA's only "victory" they can cling to, that's why they're outright lying about it.

It's desperation, and everyone can practically taste it through his posts.

You are the only one here desperately trying to convince others that you are 'right'.

I thought chinamen weren't allowed internet access to the rest of the world?

Holy shit, I hadn't even thought about that. The Sino-Vietnamese war is literally the MOST successful China has been in a modern conflict. Oof

Not Viet, I'm American, if anything I should be siding with you on this, but I'm not because it's very clear to me China lost.

China was losing more than 406 soldiers a day, China could only handle 3 weeks because it told Moscow that it was going to be a brief incursion limited to a ground war (That's why your air force was nearly nonexistent here), China's goal was to remove Vietnam from Cambodia, yet Vietnam was still there for a decade after China retreated.

By all means, China lost and only damaged Vietnam in the short run.

Come on guys, we all know china has a long military tradition, with many impressive achievements

Attached: DecisiveTangVictory.png (1878x1187, 1.7M)

They won through indigestion, thats why they eat mostly onions.

We got a live one hear boys

Exactly
Which makes it such perfect bait

Attached: Bait-the-Musical.gif (900x900, 371K)

And eggs soaked in boy's urine, apparently

those who care find working vpns to defend their glorious nation
they do it for free

Attached: winston.png (723x567, 1007K)

Ask Russia about 1945 which is the greatest year of its life.