- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
The Baker
| Favorite team: | |
| Location: | This is fine. |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | Student |
| Number of Posts: | 17133 |
| Registered on: | 12/2/2011 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/14/25 at 7:34 am
quote:
At this point I can only assume you're fricking with me. I already said plane to plane the Gap isn't wide. The Gap comes with the overall ISR capabilities. For frick's sake are you even trying
Okay then. The fact that they can produce theirs more cheaply and faster concerns me and it does not concern you. I guess we’re done here.
0
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/14/25 at 7:26 am
quote:
So whoop-dee-doo India bought a few high-end planes from Europe. You can bet your arse they don't have anything vaguely resembling our ISR capabilities. Nothing even close.
China has 5th generation fighters too :lol:
If this is any indication of their capability, those might not actually be shitty. Which has been what everyone is banking on.
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/14/25 at 6:55 am
quote:
This Thread is about whether or not the Chinese can beat us using the same tactics. And that's an unequivocal no.
Right, this is why I brought up their focus on mass production and large numbers. Its a fundamental difference in philosophy. Using the example of the sherman vs panzer/tiger in wwII. We didnt beat germans using the same tactics.
But now we have a hard data point that their J-10 downed a relatively recent/advanced western jet. It was common knowledge before that rafale’s were superior aircraft…
on equal footing their gen 4.5 aircraft bested frances gen 4.5 aircraft…. And they can make them 10 times as fast… so yeah i think its strange that anyone raising an eyebrow at that would piss you off so much.
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/14/25 at 6:41 am
quote:
Why you keep giving retarded examples like one guy going to compete against the whole Army.
I resort to it bc yall are literally cursing me out for saying
quote:
Sure numbers can matter
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/14/25 at 6:38 am
quote:
I mean for frick sake man every person of even moderate knowledge knows the Tet Offensive was a failure militarily and we kicked the shite out of them. It proved to be successful politically because American people lost their resolve. But you damn shrink and I make a fricking military living if you get Tet Offensive results with your attacks. I mean for god sakes we absolutely beat the shite out of them
LINK
quote:
offensive as a failure for the Vietcong, pointing to their retreat and staggering casualties. But when General William Westmoreland reported that completing the Vietcong's defeat would necessitate 200,000 more American soldiers and require an activation of the reserves, even loyal supporters of the war effort began to see that a change in strategy was needed.
Why would Westmoreland need more troops? Thats a weird thing to ask for since it doesn’t matter.
Its not about the literal outcome of the individual battle, my point is that this is how communists have always fought wars. Throw huge numbers at the enemy, over and over again. We never conquered north vietnam bc we weren’t willing to commit to the numbers.
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 11:24 pm
quote:
And even then they got the absolute shite kicked out of them and absent winter they were still going to get creamed. Let me know when the Chinese are going to be able to take advantage of a blizzard in the sky! LOL
Okay that example was too cold for you?
Tet offensive
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 11:18 pm
quote:
Not to mention supply chain problems that exist when you go that far forward on the ground. Meanwhile even if we were fighting in Chinese airspace our ability to loiter is longer than theirs because of all of our other air assets. Dude you just have no fricking idea what you're talking about I'm sorry
Why are yall losing your shite so much?
Just send one fricking army private at the PLA then, and finish them off. I just don’t understand how yall think mass production and shear numbers do not matter one iota in military conflict.
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 11:08 pm
quote:
great way to get a lot of people dead.
That’s how commies fight, look at Stalingrad
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 10:20 pm
quote:
So they are going to outslug us in a regional conflict with substandard equipment and inferior training is your threat?
Lets frame it this way.
Starting from the absurd case:
One F-35 vs the entire PLAAF? Who wins?
Eventually you’ll just run out of munitions.
One F-35 vs 1000 JF-17’s okay you snuck up on all of them but downed half of them, now the remaining 500 see you and fire back.
One F-35 vs 100 JF-17s…
At what point do you think numbers dont matter?
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 10:12 pm
quote:we seem to have a lot of our eggs in that basket, no?
So we have a false sense of security?
Uber high end weaponry that is expensive to develop and manufacture vs the Chinese strategy of lower end weaponry mass produced at scale.
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 10:08 pm
quote:
Frankly his entire argument seems to be to deny the vast sensor differential. I honestly don't know what his point is at this point. At first he seemed to think that sheer numbers could overwhelm the fact we see you first but now he has shifted to being skeptical that we can see you first
Yes, I do think sheer numbers matter greatly in combat. There is all of human history as precedent and only conjecture that it doesn’t matter going forward.
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 10:03 pm
quote:
Um. You do realize that we're not just guessing on this right? We frick with them on the edges all the goddamn time. Just like we do the Russians.
Why would China reveal their best detection capabilities during reaction scramble probe? I know I wouldn’t remove an enemy’s false sense of security.
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 9:56 pm
quote:
Well except we have far superior submarine capabilities. We have superior space assets We have superior ISR capabilities. We have far superior naval assets. We have the ability to move larger amounts of forces and assets within days.
Yes submarine and space superiority is what will keep us alive. Everything conventional is now peer to peer.
Trump creating the space force in 2016 may end up being his greatest contribution.
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 9:47 pm
quote:
Look I don't know how to say this without sounding condescending because I'm really really not trying to sound condescending.
quote:
Top Gun was fun when it came out but we don't fight like that anymore we're not even trying to fight like that anymore. In fact if we are dodging the other plane we have already fricked up!
Look, I know you think I’m some guy who’s imagining planes twirling around shooting guns at each other but in reality the only people bringing up dog fighting and top gun are the rest of you. If yall wanna keep beating that strawman, be my guest. I’ll disengage bc repeatedly trying to shift the discussion back to what I actually said is too boring.
Anyways, I’ll try one last time.
I’ve read/heard about the same capabilities of our 5th gen fighters that you’re parroting now for over 10 years. “They can’t see us, they’ll get shot before they know we’re there, no one can compete”. This isnt something that you know, and that I dont know… What I’m saying is that THEY know, they HAVE known, and they WILL be prepared. Their mass production strategy does serve an advantage… bc in the event our fighters arent the ghosts we think they are, it WILL be a problem.
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 9:36 pm
quote:
They have limited command and control capacity. Limited combat experience. No deep water Navy What do they bring for to be he table currently or in the near future?
For one we dont even know if aircraft carriers in general are obsolete. With hypersonics, you’re sinking to the bottom of the ocean before you see what hit you.
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 9:32 pm
quote:
Of course not. They know they have no ability to project force even in there own neighborhood.
This mentality is a death sentence.
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 9:31 pm
quote:
Yes and I said horses, not Shermans
To dodge the actual premise of the assertion. Ad absurdum
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 9:29 pm
quote:
Lol so no actual force projection.
That’s not their strategy
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 9:28 pm
quote:
The ability to kill your enemy before he even knows you're trying to kill him is what every military on the planet is trying to do and at least so far Nobody Does it Better than we do.
Everything thus far has been non symmetric. We have no idea how well its going to go.
re: Tim Sheehy: "Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology"
Posted by The Baker on 5/13/25 at 9:26 pm
quote:
They have no current ability to forward project power in any sustainable way
Because all they need to do is A2AD
Popular
51
