• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How many Americans become suitable for military service from EACH STATE in the U.S per year?

BahamaBob

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 1, 2019
Messages
2,582
Reaction score
808
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Historically speaking - it depends on the numbers. Russia ended up stomping Nazi Germany even though it had less equipment and ammunition, what it did have was vastly inferior, and it’s army of conscripts wasn’t at all qualified to use them to boot. It just kept throwing bodies at the enemy until Germany could take no more.

But before anyone starts snatching people from rice paddies the United States would have to contend with the regular and reserve Chinese forces which are several times larger than our own.
First of all, where do you think the "regular and reserve Chinese soldiers came from"? Any military is made up of elements of that country's society. The possession of privately owned firearms is non existent in China. Therefore, the so called Chinese soldier is most likely a gun novice. They most likely would be like the WW2 Russian soldiers you mentioned. The Russians faced German soldiers armed with bolt action rifles, no winter clothing, and unable to resupply. Yet the Russians suffered several times as many casualties. Mass human attacks like the Russians used would be a suicide attack against today's weapons.

Large numbers of soldiers will not carry a battle against today's weapons. As shown by the battle of Khasham, when several hundred Syrian and Russian troops attacked an American outpost manned by about 20 men. The Americans suffered no casualties, the Syrian and Russians lost about 300 men.

Second, the Chinese military is not several times the size of the US military. China has 2,035,000 active the US has 1,360,000 active and the US reserve is 335,000 larger than China's.

Lastly, the Japanese occupation of China during WW2 is a clear indicator of what occurs when your populace is unarmed. While vastly outnumber the Japanese easily controlled and slaughtered countless Chinese people.
 

Napoleon

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
10,245
Reaction score
3,777
Location
Columbus, OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
First of all, where do you think the "regular and reserve Chinese soldiers came from"? Any military is made up of elements of that country's society. The possession of privately owned firearms is non existent in China. Therefore, the so called Chinese soldier is most likely a gun novice. They most likely would be like the WW2 Russian soldiers you mentioned. The Russians faced German soldiers armed with bolt action rifles, no winter clothing, and unable to resupply. Yet the Russians suffered several times as many casualties. Mass human attacks like the Russians used would be a suicide attack against today's weapons.

Large numbers of soldiers will not carry a battle against today's weapons. As shown by the battle of Khasham, when several hundred Syrian and Russian troops attacked an American outpost manned by about 20 men. The Americans suffered no casualties, the Syrian and Russians lost about 300 men.

Second, the Chinese military is not several times the size of the US military. China has 2,035,000 active the US has 1,360,000 active and the US reserve is 335,000 larger than China's.

Lastly, the Japanese occupation of China during WW2 is a clear indicator of what occurs when your populace is unarmed. While vastly outnumber the Japanese easily controlled and slaughtered countless Chinese people.
The post I was responding to was about trained military vs civilian population. The Chinese military has 2.3 million active and 1.1 million reserve with a civilian population of 1.3 billion to augment it as needed under a conscription system that doesn’t discriminate on the basis of sex. The United States has 1.3 million active and 800,000 reserve with a population of only 59 million eligible by age and sex under the draft. It would likely be a long time if ever before some squirrelly hillbilly saw people taken from rice paddies instead of professional Chinese military in the event of invasion. The United States does not have the benefit of numbers as the Russians did in WW2.
 

Dayton3

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
6,942
Reaction score
1,031
Location
Smackover, AR.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Have you seen the weapons the modern military has these days? What possible chance would a bunch of older, overweight guys, with AR15s have against a modern military?
Why the assumption that most Americans who own firearms are overweight?
 

BahamaBob

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 1, 2019
Messages
2,582
Reaction score
808
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The post I was responding to was about trained military vs civilian population. The Chinese military has 2.3 million active and 1.1 million reserve with a civilian population of 1.3 billion to augment it as needed under a conscription system that doesn’t discriminate on the basis of sex. The United States has 1.3 million active and 800,000 reserve with a population of only 59 million eligible by age and sex under the draft. It would likely be a long time if ever before some squirrelly hillbilly saw people taken from rice paddies instead of professional Chinese military in the event of invasion. The United States does not have the benefit of numbers as the Russians did in WW2.
Your assumptions are highly flawed. If you think the entire population of China is capable of military service you are an idiot. Any military engagement outside of China would require China to have Aircraft carriers and aircraft capable of pressing their enemy. China has neither. In fact, China's large population is more of a hinderance than an asset. China only produces 25% of it's food consumption needs. If war comes to China, the people will be fighting among themselves to keep from starving rather than facing an enemy.
 

Napoleon

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
10,245
Reaction score
3,777
Location
Columbus, OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Your assumptions are highly flawed. If you think the entire population of China is capable of military service you are an idiot. Any military engagement outside of China would require China to have Aircraft carriers and aircraft capable of pressing their enemy. China has neither. In fact, China's large population is more of a hinderance than an asset. China only produces 25% of it's food consumption needs. If war comes to China, the people will be fighting among themselves to keep from starving rather than facing an enemy.
What I know is that China has an exponentially larger civilian population to supplement its military than the United States. China is 95% self-sufficient in terms of domestic grain production. They currently have two recently built aircraft carriers with more on the way. The United States has 11 carriers - about half of which are approaching end-of-life at around 50 years old. And it’s design and development is a mess. The Ford is the most recent and it’s eventually intended to replace the poor old Nimitz class ships if anyone ever wants to pay for that. And that’s a big IF. Overall, the Chinese fleet is larger, more modern, and it’s growing. The US fleet is old, less advanced, and there is a lack of appetite to spend the money required to maintain let lone grow it.
 
Last edited:

BahamaBob

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 1, 2019
Messages
2,582
Reaction score
808
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The post I was responding to was about trained military vs civilian population. The Chinese military has 2.3 million active and 1.1 million reserve with a civilian population of 1.3 billion to augment it as needed under a conscription system that doesn’t discriminate on the basis of sex. The United States has 1.3 million active and 800,000 reserve with a population of only 59 million eligible by age and sex under the draft. It would likely be a long time if ever before some squirrelly hillbilly saw people taken from rice paddies instead of professional Chinese military in the event of invasion. The United States does not have the benefit of numbers as the Russians did in WW2.
100
First of all, those numbers are only correct if you include the Chinese paramilitary in the reserve numbers. Most of those people are their police. Do you think they are going to send their police off to war? Second, an invasion of the US by China would be similar to an invasion of Russia by Germany in that the entire population of the US would be imposing the Chinese invaders. The Chinese would not be able to bring their 1.3 billion population to the fight. At most they would have an occupying army of a few hundred thousand against 100 million armed Americans. So the Americans would have the benefit of numbers.
 

Napoleon

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
10,245
Reaction score
3,777
Location
Columbus, OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
100
First of all, those numbers are only correct if you include the Chinese paramilitary in the reserve numbers. Most of those people are their police. Do you think they are going to send their police off to war? Second, an invasion of the US by China would be similar to an invasion of Russia by Germany in that the entire population of the US would be imposing the Chinese invaders. The Chinese would not be able to bring their 1.3 billion population to the fight. At most they would have an occupying army of a few hundred thousand against 100 million armed Americans. So the Americans would have the benefit of numbers.
China can afford to concentrate all of its military might on the United States if it wanted to. Nobody is afraid of the American civilian population and you vastly overestimate the ability to resist if you think everyone would take up arms to oppose an occupation. An occupation of the United States is doable. It’s just a matter of how big a slice China would want.
 

BahamaBob

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 1, 2019
Messages
2,582
Reaction score
808
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
What I know is that China has an exponentially larger civilian population to supplement its military than the United States. China is 95% self-sufficient in terms of domestic grain production. They currently have two recently built aircraft carriers with more on the way. The United States has 11 carriers - about half of which are approaching end-of-life at around 50 years old. And it’s design and development is a mess. The Ford is the most recent and it’s eventually intended to replace the poor old Nimitz class ships if anyone ever wants to pay for that. And that’s a big IF. Overall, the Chinese fleet is larger, more modern, and it’s growing. The US fleet is old, less advanced, and there is a lack of appetite to spend the money required to maintain let lone grow it.
[/QUO


Only an idiot would but what you are selling.
A large population does not equate to military power. China's huge population was easily conquered and controlled by Japan and Britain and several other countries.

Here is the scoop on the Chinese aircraft carrier.
"China also has just a single aircraft carrier in operation the Liaoning (16). The ship has an interesting history, it was initially developed as part of the Admiral Kuznetsov Class for the Soviet Union, and was known by the former names Riga and Varyag. In 1998 the ship was bought by the Hong Kong-based Chong Lot Travel Agency who had plans to convert it to a floating casino.

The conversion was never completed and the ship was taken to Ukraine after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Later it was bought by the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) of China and refitted to serve as an aircraft carrier for the PLAN. Liaoning was finally commissioned into service in September 2012. It is propelled by steam turbine propulsion and can house around 50 aircraft including fix wing"
 

Napoleon

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
10,245
Reaction score
3,777
Location
Columbus, OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
That’s like basing America’s ability to resist invasion on the War of 1812. America has its toys...but the officers who command them are incompetent. China may not have to do anything but watch American captains keep smashing their own ships into each other. :LOL:
 

BahamaBob

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 1, 2019
Messages
2,582
Reaction score
808
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
China can afford to concentrate all of its military might on the United States if it wanted to. Nobody is afraid of the American civilian population and you vastly overestimate the ability to resist if you think everyone would take up arms to oppose an occupation. An occupation of the United States is doable. It’s just a matter of how big a slice China would want.
Dude, you do realize the US in in NATO, SEATO and several other treaties? An attack on the US is suicide.

Only a fool thinks an occupation of the US is doable.
 

Napoleon

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
10,245
Reaction score
3,777
Location
Columbus, OH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Dude, you do realize the US in in NATO, SEATO and several other treaties? An attack on the US is suicide.

Only a fool thinks an occupation of the US is doable.
NATO? Lol. NATO has done a fabulous job making itself increasingly dependent on both China and Russia. Don’t imagine that China would be in it alone or that NATO would honor Article 5.
 
Top Bottom