Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Military Strategy and Tactics

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


What if war were to break out between southeast asia?

This is a discussion on What if war were to break out between southeast asia? within the Military Strategy and Tactics forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; I'm just asking this for fun, details of the armys are down below. Indonesian & Thailand Army : 1374,852 (Both ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old June 18th, 2011   #1
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1
Threads:
What if war were to break out between southeast asia?

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?
icejoe246 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 19th, 2011   #2
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 2,767
Threads:
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.
t68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 19th, 2011   #3
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
T.C.P da Devil's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Dhaka,Bangladesh
Posts: 614
Threads:
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.
________________
Be loyal to Bangladesh no matter what. We have given blood to earn our freedom and will give more to protect it!
T.C.P da Devil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 19th, 2011   #4
Defense Aficionado
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,346
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.C.P da Devil View Post
, 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.
STURM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 19th, 2011   #5
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
T.C.P da Devil's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Dhaka,Bangladesh
Posts: 614
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by STURM View Post
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.
________________
Be loyal to Bangladesh no matter what. We have given blood to earn our freedom and will give more to protect it!
T.C.P da Devil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 19th, 2011   #6
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.C.P da Devil View Post
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.
mqd123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 19th, 2011   #7
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
NICO's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: AZ, USA
Posts: 208
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by icejoe246 View Post
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.
NICO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2011   #8
Just Hatched
Private
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by NICO View Post
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.
mqd123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2011   #9
Defense Aficionado
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,346
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mqd123 View Post
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.
STURM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2011   #10
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
T.C.P da Devil's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Dhaka,Bangladesh
Posts: 614
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mqd123 View Post
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.
________________
Be loyal to Bangladesh no matter what. We have given blood to earn our freedom and will give more to protect it!
T.C.P da Devil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2011   #11
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 15,014
Threads:
Т-35? Т-28? What? Is that a typo or do you really think these are in service?

http://www.tanksinworldwar2.com/pict...ion/t35-02.jpg
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21st, 2011   #12
Banned Member
Colonel
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,452
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by STURM View Post
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.
riksavage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21st, 2011   #13
Banned Member
Master Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 328
Threads:
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 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21st, 2011   #14
Banned Member
Master Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 328
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by riksavage View Post
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!
Sampanviking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 21st, 2011   #15
Defense Aficionado
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,346
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sampanviking View Post
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.

Last edited by STURM; June 21st, 2011 at 06:49 AM.
STURM is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:49 PM.