Who would win?

...

+1 for Chyna, it's their century after all

No question, China would get raped

faggot

Do you know anything about the politics of Vietnam and Myanmar? Theyre Chinese puppets

vietnam are america's goys, total puppets

get out of the 60s granps
how? there's no america here, who would defeat them? poos? they're occupied with the pakis, gooks and nips? as if lmao

...

Mankind

...

...

Smart Phone easily tracked

Billion poos vs billion chinks zerg rushing eachother,whoever runs out of soldiers first

The jews.

>zerg rushing
are they crossing the mountains or invading by sea?

This guy gets it

China has always had shit technology and training,despite sheer numbers,the chinese have almost always been the numerically superior force and in those situations always was outgunned.a good indicator of power is total cost,as more modern technology is more expensive and has higher maintenece costs,so using this the value of the chinese land army is worth 10 747.7MIL$ in equipment.To compare
South Korea=21 970.06MIL$
Japan=13 932.45MIL$
India=12 700.35 MIL$
Pakistan=5190.738MIL$
N.Korea=2884.2MIL$
Indonesia=1879.1MIL$
part 1/?

>India (massive numbers and production)
>japan (great tech and good potential)
>Australia (greatest military ally of America for good reason, great tactics, military organization, allies, and funding compared to these other nations)
>Malaysia/Indonesia (they don’t have hat massive of a military but they each have some Bretty gud spec ops teams)
>South Korea (good tech, good military structure and could probably take nk one on one)
Vs
>Pakistan (India could take them head on and still have troops to fight China with at the same time)
>North Korea (could be taken down by South Korea)
>China (worse military structure than India, rules by numbers alone [like ants would] inferior weapons, particularly shitty mass production, high vulnerability to viral weaponry [india is not as vulnerable, as China does not have the tech or espionage to accomplish this, where as Japan, South Korea, and Australia could all do it]
>Cambodia (not a threat in the slightest, the Philippines could take them on and win)
>Ceylon and Tibet (not a threat military wise, at all. Honestly neither of them have military organization of note, and the smaller nations could take them one with no trouble.)
>every other blue nation (add numbers but aren’t particularly important, but still good strategic points to have for many of them, also have a lot of economic support to provide for the way effort)

/thread

The end result is a pretty conclusive blue victory, so long as the strategy itself is overseen by Australia. The only trouble I see would be if nukes were on the table, but even then, India and Australia have a sizeable stockpile. However there still could be a trouble with China’s numbers, but seeing as they have bad organization, and haven’t been in any major wars, and their military is comprised of those who paid their way in so they had a ticket for communist power, they most likely will not be so much of a problem if we use our superior tactics, and applied forces.

>China
>allying with muslims

Are you new?
>India and Australia have a sizeable stockpile
>Tibet
You ok user?

Blue by far

Of nuclear weaponry, yes they do. They also have enrichment programs and rocket delivery systems that are superior to china’s, and in combination, they would most likely win with the nuclear option, especially considering China has such a high population density in all the cities that matter to them.
>Tibet
Tibet, Nepal, whatever. Between India’s claim, China’s claim, and their independent claim, the only name that matters for it would be the one that they get after this theoretical war is said and done.

>Indians occupied by Paki's
This isn't the 40s anymore bud, Pakistan is literally irrelevant to India's security

No they aren't...Vietnam hates china and Myanmar hasn't been as close to China since the Junta fell

Australia has a massive nuclear stockpile

Australia has more nukes than Chyna? Id like some sauce

terrain shithead
the desert next to pakistan-india border, the steppes in mongolia and the jungles in burma, lagos and 'nam

would have said china, but then I saw the superpower of India in blue

Paki nukes aren't irrelevant, if they were poos wouldn't care so much about it and have so many plans about a war with pakis

Yeah and if Pakistan uses nukes they'll know be completely obliterated off the map, look at the size difference between the two, india would suffer but at least they'd exist.

As far as this thread goes, it's primarily a scenario with conventional warfare not involving nukes

Chong would win, deffo

>SK could take NK one on one lol no

Many here seem to disagree. Why do u think Cheng would win?

Officially, Australia only has the world's largest recoverable uranium reserve, plus several assembly and launch facilities. We say we don't have nukes because we haven't put the ones we have through the final assembly stages.

Technically we have none, but we have all the ingredients sitting ready for a very large stockpile in a very short time.

China would win. china is far superior technologically speaking than India, and even more superior than countries like indonesia, etc. japan and aus aren't militarized enough to make a difference.

China. Blue hasn't even taken Papua new Guinea which means they don't get the +2 troops for holding Australia.

The chinese are many, but the people's army is a piece of shit. My bet is also on the blue team

Welcome to Sup Forums DoD :)

Vietnam hates the Chinese more than any other country. They just stopped fighting the Chinese in the early 90s

Blue would win here but I don't see the logic for these alliances

That's how they're related in the real world

This. I thought everyone on oil knew it

what if we add a third faction?