What if war were to break out between southeast asia?

[icejoe246]

I'm just asking this for fun, details of the armys are down below.

Indonesian & Thailand Army : 1374,852 (Both Combined)

Malaysia & Vietnam : 215,618,13

Equipment :
Vietnam & Malaysia :
Tanks : Poland T-72M1 Main battle tank (480)
Soviet Union T-62 Main battle tank (220)
Soviet Union T-54/55 Main battle tank (990+, upgrading to T-55 M3)
Israel T-55M3 Main battle tank upgraded version of T-55 (990 planned)
People's Republic of China Type-59 Main battle tank (360)
People's Republic of China Type-63 Amphibious light tank (320)
People's Republic of China Type 62 Light tank (180)
Soviet Union PT-76 Light tank (300)
North Korea PT-85 Light Tank (45)
Soviet Union SU-100 Tank destroyer (132) - for training

Helicopters : Soviet Union Mil Mi-24A/D Hind attack helicopters (36)
Soviet Union Mil Mi-6 Hook heavy transport helicopter (10-15+)
Soviet Union Mil Mi-8 Hip transport helicopters (66)
Soviet Union Mil Mi-17 Hip-H transport helicopters (69)
United States Bell UH-1H Huey utility helicopter (15+)

Indonesia, Australia & Thailand :
Helicopters : MH-60R (Romeo) , and NH-90
AH-64 APACHE
MIL-24 HINDS
And finally AH1 cobra

Tanks : T-35
T-24
T-28
IS-4
T-10

No nukes were used, and allies are not in this.

Invading : Vietnam & Malaysia
Defending : Thailand, Aussy, and Indonesia


So who would win in this type of war in your opinion?

 

[t68]

Invading whom and why?

What is Singapore doing and New Zealand add to that China, Philippines, Cambodia and Laos

Australia, Indonesia and Thailand do not operate AH-64 Apache helicopters; Australia operates ARH Tiger which have not reached operational status yet.

 

[T.C.P]

Also I doubt that Vietnam and Malaysia have invading capabilities, the Malaysian mily is small and the Vietnamese are trying their best to create a military strong enough to thwart Chinese aggression.

 

[STURM]

, the Malaysian mily is small

I think small is a relative term . We have about 40 infantry battalions in a country with a 26 million population. Some would argue that the army has to be downsized.

Vietnams military is much larger, but as you rightfully pointed out, both countries would not have the assets and the logistics capability to sustain operations for an extended period, abroad.

Icejoe246,

Perhaps a more realistic or plausible scenario would be speculating how different countries might react, in the event of a 'clash' between vessels from 2 different claimants in the Sratleys, leads to something more serious.

 

[T.C.P]

I think small is a relative term . We have about 40 infantry battalions in a country with a 26 million population. Some would argue that the army has to be downsized.

Vietnams military is much larger, but as you rightfully pointed out, both countries would not have the assets and the logistics capability to sustain operations for an extended period, abroad.

Icejoe246,

Perhaps a more realistic or plausible scenario would be speculating how different countries might react, in the event of a 'clash' between vessels from 2 different claimants in the Sratleys, leads to something more serious.

I only meant that that the Malaysian military was not large enough to take on such a huge invasion, I was not doubting its capability to defend its country.

 

[mqd123]

Also I doubt that Vietnam and Malaysia have invading capabilities, the Malaysian mily is small and the Vietnamese are trying their best to create a military strong enough to thwart Chinese aggression.

Vietnam invaded Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge days and kicked China's butt during the same period.

China and Vietnam might go at it again shortly. I hear that there is some territorial disputes that are heating up.

 

[NICO]

I'm just asking this for fun, details of the armys are down below.

Indonesian & Thailand Army : 1374,852 (Both Combined)

Malaysia & Vietnam : 215,618,13

Equipment :
Vietnam & Malaysia :
Tanks : Poland T-72M1 Main battle tank (480)
Soviet Union T-62 Main battle tank (220)
Soviet Union T-54/55 Main battle tank (990+, upgrading to T-55 M3)
Israel T-55M3 Main battle tank upgraded version of T-55 (990 planned)
People's Republic of China Type-59 Main battle tank (360)
People's Republic of China Type-63 Amphibious light tank (320)
People's Republic of China Type 62 Light tank (180)
Soviet Union PT-76 Light tank (300)
North Korea PT-85 Light Tank (45)
Soviet Union SU-100 Tank destroyer (132) - for training

Helicopters : Soviet Union Mil Mi-24A/D Hind attack helicopters (36)
Soviet Union Mil Mi-6 Hook heavy transport helicopter (10-15+)
Soviet Union Mil Mi-8 Hip transport helicopters (66)
Soviet Union Mil Mi-17 Hip-H transport helicopters (69)
United States Bell UH-1H Huey utility helicopter (15+)

Indonesia, Australia & Thailand :
Helicopters : MH-60R (Romeo) , and NH-90
AH-64 APACHE
MIL-24 HINDS
And finally AH1 cobra

Tanks : T-35
T-24
T-28
IS-4
T-10

No nukes were used, and allies are not in this.

Invading : Vietnam & Malaysia
Defending : Thailand, Aussy, and Indonesia


So who would win in this type of war in your opinion?

It would be nice if we had maybe a scenario/story line to work with, kind of lay down the ground rules, so to speak.

Also most of the countries cited are islands, without or at best limited amphibious capability, a few tanks or helicopters ain't going to do much here.

 

[mqd123]

It would be nice if we had maybe a scenario/story line to work with, kind of lay down the ground rules, so to speak.

Also most of the countries cited are islands, without or at best limited amphibious capability, a few tanks or helicopters ain't going to do much here.

I'd put my money on Vietnam taking out Cambodia, Laos (Vietnam would have to take out one of these guys to get to Thailand) and Thailand. It doesn't have much of a Navy, so, I'm not sure how it would get to the other countries. But in a jungle fight, you have to lean towards Vietnam.

 

[STURM]

Vietnam invaded Cambodia during the Khmer Rouge days and kicked China's butt during the same period.

And Vietnam got bogged down in a 10 year occupation, which took its toll on the economy, against a number of resistance groups that it never subdued.

If a border clash were to take place again between Vietnam and China, the results could be very different. The PLA is a completely different force than it was in 1979.

 

[T.C.P]

I'd put my money on Vietnam taking out Cambodia, Laos (Vietnam would have to take out one of these guys to get to Thailand) and Thailand. It doesn't have much of a Navy, so, I'm not sure how it would get to the other countries. But in a jungle fight, you have to lean towards Vietnam.

Thailand isn't exactly Cambosia or Laos, it has a strong full fledged military , with a highly capable air force. I very much doubt if Vietnam has the logistic or mily capabilities, to fight all the way to Thailand and take on the Thai military on their home turf.

 

[Feanor]

Т-35? Т-28? What? Is that a typo or do you really think these are in service?

 

[riksavage]

And Vietnam got bogged down in a 10 year occupation, which took its toll on the economy, against a number of resistance groups that it never subdued.

If a border clash were to take place again between Vietnam and China, the results could be very different. The PLA is a completely different force than it was in 1979.

Maybe so, but they would be wise to draw on lessons from the French and US experience. China has never conducted extended operations in a Jungle environment where any technological advantage would be much reduced. The Vietnamese aren't called the Prussians of Asia for nothing.

In 79 the Chinese were given a right mauling, I think they would be wise to focus on a maritime campaign and choke off Vietnam's maritime supply routes and restrict access to the South China Sea.

 

[Sampanviking]

No matter who the participants were in any local conflict, the fact that SEA is such a vital strategic area and given the varied interests of larger powers both locally and further afield, it can be assumed as a given, that greater powers would quickly assume an interest or seek to increase their influence over one side or the other, and that the conflict would fairly quickly become a proxy war.

That of course assumes that it did not begin that way and that the competing interests of big powers were: if not the fuel of the conflict itself, at least the oxygen which inflamed it.

 

[Sampanviking]

Maybe so, but they would be wise to draw on lessons from the French and US experience. China has never conducted extended operations in a Jungle environment where any technological advantage would be much reduced. The Vietnamese aren't called the Prussians of Asia for nothing.

In 79 the Chinese were given a right mauling, I think they would be wise to focus on a maritime campaign and choke off Vietnam's maritime supply routes and restrict access to the South China Sea.

Oh, so you have observed the PLA training operations in Yunnan?

It is true that in 79, the PLA underperformed in the border operation. They did however penetrate deep Vietnamese territory and defeat the Vietnamese Army. This experience was key in enabling Deng to start his root and branch reform of the military as continues today.

After 30 years of such reform and modernisation, I think it is as ridiculous to use 79 as a measure of current performance, as it would be to use the boxer movement!

 

[STURM]

After 30 years of such reform and modernisation, I think it is as ridiculous to use 79 as a measure of current performance, as it would be to use the boxer movement!

So very true!

The PLA is a completely different animal than it was in 1979 - there has been so many changes, not just in new gear but in organisational patterns, operational mindsets, etc. I'm no expert but I doubt the same can be said for the Vietnamese army, which remains largely equipped with the same gear it was in 1979. If the gaps in firepower between both armies were already wide in 1979, it's much wider now. Given recent events at sea, I would expect that the Vietnamese would be investing more in their navy rather than the army.

 

[Ananda]

So very true!

The PLA is a completely different animal than it was in 1979 - there has been so many changes, not just in new gear but in organisational patterns, operational mindsets, etc. I'm no expert but I doubt the same can be said for the Vietnamese army, which remains largely equipped with the same gear it was in 1979. If the gaps in firepower between both armies were already wide in 1979, it's much wider now. Given recent events at sea, I would expect that the Vietnamese would be investing more in their navy rather than the army.

Still Sturm, Vietnam will still have home field advantages. The way they done it with French and the US was the abbility to tied-up large resources of opposite more powerfull forces on long junggle warfare. PLA with no doubt have better caoabilities to thrust themselves upon Vietnam teritory. But like many smaller forces, Vietnam ability to make. It long and bloddy insurgences warfare that need to be seen whether PLA can commit themselves that long without opening chances of weaken second front from more formidable forces facing their borders.

 

[Feanor]

Vietnam is investing in their navy.

 

[W82DIE]

Even if nukes are not used explosive warheads and anti-ship rockets would be used an seriously China has tons of those. China is also building an aircraft carrier and seriously why would you need a carrier unless you plan to attack somebody. Carriers are just ships that carry aircraft and increase their portability to enable an invasion.

 

[surpreme]

So very true!

The PLA is a completely different animal than it was in 1979 - there has been so many changes, not just in new gear but in organisational patterns, operational mindsets, etc. I'm no expert but I doubt the same can be said for the Vietnamese army, which remains largely equipped with the same gear it was in 1979. If the gaps in firepower between both armies were already wide in 1979, it's much wider now. Given recent events at sea, I would expect that the Vietnamese would be investing more in their navy rather than the army.

I agreed with you on that the PLA is much different than 1979. But don't count the Vietnamese out they are some great warriors and when it come to defending your country its a big different. If China do try to invade Vietnam it will not be a cake walk I'll tell you that. Yes China will prevailed but with heavy loses.

 

[Ananda]

If China do try to invade Vietnam it will not be a cake walk I'll tell you that. Yes China will prevailed but with heavy loses.

That considerable loss that China need to think, considering they facing more formidable forces on their northern borders, and eastern border/sea. Something people that tend to forgot is, yes China building formidable armed forces, but considering they have Russia, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, India, and US on their border, even tiny forces of Southeast Asian countries is not something they tend can write off as easily on the paper.