Who would win in a war. China or Russia? Just those two fighting,, no other countries involved

Who would win in a war. China or Russia? Just those two fighting,, no other countries involved.

China

...

why do their carriers have an underbite

i'd say China, they've got way more people. Especially if Russia was bringing the fight to them.

The world

...

>what is a ramp

Russia

Russia. Chinese military still pretty much untested in combat.

because they are too small for planes to take off without it.

Best answer

Russia.

Nukes bro

China has nukes.....

Pretty sure that, with the cold war, russia has both many more nukes, and vastly superior nuke defense capabilities.

Also, population centers are far from the parts of russia, close to china

China has only over 200 but it's still enough to destroy all the russian big cities.

My money is on Russia. They've endured hardships and wars for centuries, including some of the bloodiest campaigns in history.

China are the new kids on the scene, because they made a fuck ton of money producing cheap merch to feed the West they're spanking it all on planes and aircraft carriers. As recently as 70 years ago China were still just a bunch of dumbfuck farmers. Sure they built a huge wall to keep out rampaging snow spics but thier experience with modern warfare is next to non existant.

Russia. Sure their equipment is dogshit but they've seen real war and not just massacring farmers or political dissidents. Their generals have a history of using established doctrines and a methodological approach to warfare that would pretty much mulch chinese infantry and light mechanized.
Chinese military is untested, equipment only so-so, and their generals/soldiers don't know how to think on their feet.

China, Russia is bankrupt.

bumpp

russia easily.

japan beat all of china and it didn't even try.

This is a tough one, Russia and China both had their assess kicked by the japs and their main strategy is to zerg, i think it would be pretty even they both would have trouble in land invasions of each other would probably end in status quo my friend

Russia look this up Dmitri Donskoy (TK-208) Aboard the sub are 20 Bulava (NATO-code SS-N-30) intercontinental ballistic missiles with an estimated up to 200 nuclear warheads. I always ask why do people think a aircrafts carriers are great for modern war they are good if ur fighting a 3world country but one dame nuke can wipe out a hole carrier fleet.the main reason Russia never built one

China would fuck eat Russia.

they are pretty evenly matched in everything escept
russia has a better navy
better navy = control of seas
control of seas = an edge in the air
an edge in the air = control of the air
control of the air = an edge on the ground
an edge on the ground = control of the ground
so it will eventually result in russia occupying china and china resorting to insurgency-resistance warfare
if russia can maintain that for 2-3 generations they will win

You think it's still operational don't you....

Russian Navy...kek

China would mop the floor with Putin's entrails.

>or, put them in a soup because you know...China.

If the rules states no nukes :

China
A hell lot more manpower
Bigger industry

One produces shit the other copies shit. idk fam they would go down by the numbers.

Aboard the sub are 20 Bulava (NATO-code SS-N-30) intercontinental ballistic missiles with an estimated up to 200 nuclear warheads Russia almost has he same on just one ballistic missile sub Russia all the way

The scenario means a lot. If Russia is attacking China then China's going to win. If China attacks Russia then Russia is going to win.

You're talking about a pair of countries that are more or less invincible inside their own borders and just outside of them but neither one can project military power for shit anywhere else.

I seem to recall Russia tried this shit before with the Japanese.
it did not end well for them, when they finally got their "fleet" into eastern waters.

>cant project power

are you forgetting about subs and ICBMs? and 5th gen fighters? and the experience?

the fuck does china have besides massacring some fucking Tibetans and some shitty brownwater subs

Both will have massive logistical problems with an invasion of Siberia, but I reckon China would have the edge over the long haul.

Who do you think built both those Aircraft Carriers up there?

at the time Russia had no military port on the Pacific and no direct naval route to the Pacific
since then Russia has established an eastern port and they developed their submarine fleet that can travel from Achangeleski to the Pacific under the Arctic ice
if Russia initiates the war they would move the bulk of their fleet to the Pacific before attacking
if China initiates, Russia can hold off China long enough to move their fleet to the Pacific
but if you want to believe that nothing has changed in 100 years, go ahead and keep your head in the sand

Awww, their carriers need little ramps on the end to launch their jets. That's cute.

Guess which one shat itself 'steaming' to the Med?

...

Russia would win right now. China only has 1 aircraft carrier and a small navy and gas powered subs. Russia has unlimited Oil, wood, metals. China has to import everything. But 10 years from now... China would win. ( a 100 million man army from the east heads into Armageddon.)

As your graph clearly shows, that spike didn't come from military spending.

Gee, I wonder what global financial catastrophe happened around 2008 that could've possibly caused it...

also at the time of the Russo-Japanese war the Tsar was getting rid of much of their easter territories
they had just sold Alaska to the US and signed treaties with the US and Canada relinquishing their claim to their territories on the Pacific coast that reach all the way down to Seattle
Russia and Japan both had claims on the northern island in the Japanese archipelago
Russia didn't so much care about retaining possession of that island as getting Japan to pay Russia to end their claim

Usa bitches

It still is it an if not Russia 4th generation ballistic missile sub is .also it was sent to Syria in 2015 as show of force to the west so I would assume it still In use.but do link me the info it not I would like to know

think a little harder - the Russians have only point of supply and repair for their surface vessels. The Chinese have several. The war could devolve to a blockade of the Chinese coast from Haiphong to Batshit-Crazy Korea - but that would be quite an ask for the Russians who concentrated on ballistic supply systems rather than naval interdiction. And they all have to come through the narrows, right next to Alaska. Secure the eastern Siberia and the Russian navy is out.

>ignoring that its 800,000,000,000 dollars and rising steadily

is that smoke behind the superstructure?
they arent using diesel carriers are they?

this

Who ever has the dirtier boat will lose

China has to import everything?
What the fuck are u talking about?

In a war between china and Russia the only real winner would be the United States... sit back and gather intel on everyone's weapons while our two biggest headaches fight it out.

Need I remind you, China pushed the U.S. and the UN back over the 38th During the height of the Korean War. Don't think they've just been sitting on their hands since then.

Smoke did you say?

In all honesty probably China assuming nukes are also out of play simply due to numbers. With nukes Russia would shit all over China. Decades later Russians would be telling their 8 legged, 3 cocked, 17 fingered granddaughters about how they nuked china to a wasteland.

>everything china had
>vs a halfassed effort on the US's part

people need to remember, the WWII USA effort and Korea/VietNam USA effort are vastly different things. The latter two didnt have that whole national 'buckle-down or we all die' thing going on.

so when you say china pushed back the US, thats like saying I KNOCKED IT OVER... when 'it' was a jenga tower. good job, you are so powerful

Russia.

china can't even feed its own fucking people properly.

>aircraft carrier with no launch catapults
What the actual fuck??

conventional war? lol china.

nuclear? probabbbbbbly Russia, although Russia's nuclear weapon technology is pre-DOS, and they've had so many documented modern failures with their outdated ICBM's.

>half-assed
You only think that because, like Vietnam a short time later, you failed your objective and now want to make it seem like that it was never your intention to truly 'win' anyway.

But I'm pretty sure if you knock over someone's tower, that means you won, especially if their intention was to keep the tower standing.

Apparently, they can.

when China and the US enter their first skirmishes under trump, it will obviously be small (aircraft losses/naval losses)

The conventional war will cost both nations hundreds of thousands soldiers.

And then there's Mattis/Trump's war on Iran. That's not going to be anything like Iraq.

God im glad for people like you
Atleast im not a complete dumbfuck

...the fuck does population growth have to do with starvation rates?

that graph proves literally nothing other than they keep fucking and having kids. post relevant shit next time.

Look at the size of those deep sea rods. What are they fishing for?

Kind of difficult for a population to grow if everyone's starving to death, innit?

Don't overthink it. Just know that China isn't the same as it was in 1976.

Eh, his comment made me laugh.

Russians have been having all sorts of trouble with their carrier since it's been off Syria, planes just keep going right off the deck instead of landing properly. Cables breaking and all sorts of shit. Poor Kuznetsov is apparently barely maintained by the looks of it.

...not really, you dense fuck.

if anything, the population growing as much as it does only strains the food supply even MORE because you're producing even MORE people you can't afford to feed.

again, literally proves nothing.
t. a china man.

Your ignorance is towering.

China only last year started to relax its notorious one-child policy as it had achieved the goal of stabilising population growth.

That actually looks pretty cozy.

>this autism

The two statistics are NOT related in the slightest. Claiming they are is just pure conjecture on your part. If I say "they can't feed their people", proving how many people they have does nothing to prove/disprove anything I just fucking said.

It just shows that the population is growing. Which is fucking irrelevant information in this context.

You clearly missed my point, and are likely a Chinese living in somewhere 'safe' like Canada or the UK. Think before you post next time, you should know better.

It was a capital back in old-China for a time.

this is not true, but i agree their carriers suck.

Your point was fucking irrelevant and I've been saying as much in every possible way to get this through your thick fucking skull. The two statistics ARE NOT RELATED.

Peak U.S. ground troops in Korea was 300,000 which was about 8%% of the military deployed at that time and only a total of 1.5 million ever saw the country (out of 6million deployed). Wanna guess how many chinese/nork casualties that paltry number of troops inflicted without serious bombing or naval raids and in an extremely limited strategic objective with almost no intention of bringing real power to bear? Fucking heinous is what it was.

The only thing keeping China militarily relevant is their nuclear arsenal.

russia would get obliterated

China would win hands down. Better navy stronger industry to replace lost equipment. Better short range missile tech, bigger army. Stronger Nationalism. And most importantly they've got something to lose.

oh look. more irrelevant statistics.

my original claim was that russia would win so im pretty sure you're linking to the wrong user. at least you better be.

>drops mic

And your evidence of widespread starvation in China is based on what?
Alternative facts?
NGO's?
CIA?
Fox News?
Something you read on the urinal wall?

Please do share your superior knowledge.

>You only think that because, like Vietnam a short time later, you failed your objective and now want to make it seem like that it was never your intention to truly 'win' anyway.

no, i think that because if you ever read/watch anything on the subject, its obvious the conflicts were failed due to waining support. people of china/russia didnt want to be in that shit as much as we did, except they werent allowed to think that and certainly not say it out loud. Americans could shout and harass politicians and stage demonstrations etcetc and the more noise was made the less intense our efforts were.

and specifically in korea, they didnt push shit. we came in at the last second and returned the boundary to where it was before north korea bulldozed the south down to their litter corner.

>last year

CHYNA!

winter would claim the chinese just as it's done to the every other country that tried to play around with russia.

ruskaya doroga

last year the relax was made official.

it has been lax for a long time though, weak fines or something if you broke it. its not like they post-natal abort the kid if the found out (back in the 70s though... maybe lol)

If nukes and bioweapons were kept out it (impossible), China would simply zerg attack Russia and literally walk over them in a fermented fish and garlic pork wall of exploding bodies and stench.. No joke, it would be bad.. But the reality? 20 minutes into it nukes and bioweapons are flying, within a week reactors pop, within two years the last human somewhere lets out their last gasp.

Russia

Because bullpup rifles are shit.

>implying china doesnt make every fuckin piece of winter gear youve ever worn

not weighing in on the OPs thing but your argument is plum fuckin' retarded

>Rampaging snow spics
Kek

why do you need that if you have no planes

Russia. Easily.

Russia has the most powerful nuclear weaponry in the world.

Russia, because useless gooks.

china, history proves white man never win their wars.

China on both. Russian industrial output is shit. They do have the edge in oil production but that is it. Boris would have to fly his jet with one wing blown off whereas China would produce 10 for every one that was shot out of the sky.

China has 300 nuclear weapons, less than one-forth of which are deployed and ready for use.
Russia has 1200+ nuclear weapons deployed currently with a stockpile of nearly 12,000. Russia also has bunkers for population centers and a mast amount of hardened targets.

>China pushed the U.S.
Not quite. They jumped in and jeopardized an operation. The U.S. didn't want war with China, and if you actually knew anything the casualty rate of the Chinese troops during the U.S. withdraw of those deployed to the south was over 80% because of the weather. When the U.S. threatened to use nuclear power against China they allowed the U.S. troops to evacuate.

mass amount *

This seriously, even if the Chinese planes are shit if they can make more of them they will have air superiority.

China may only have a coastal defense fleet mainly, but they have some fucking DANK anti ship missiles launched from land.

If Russia tried to invade Chinks would probably be a stalemate assuming just conventional warfare. Chinks Invading Russia they would make stunning victories for a few months just like every other cunt that invaded Russia, then get pushed back once ruskyas get their shit together.

Tbh Russian eastern fleet wouldn't be able to do much, as the Chinese one would be willing to come out and play and Russia only has one aircraft carrier, so they would be swarmed by planed and anti ship missiles.