Great Fictional World War III book (China & allies VS US & allies)

Re: Great China VS U.S war book

Finn McCool said:

I think that this war would cause the extincion of humanity. Nuclear weapons are used frequently (both in military purposes and for the liftoff of spacecraft) and the orbital bombardment weapons would have terrible effects on the planets climate (remember what happened to the dinosaurs?).

Click to expand...

Actually, the use is very limited by the standards of what is available to the nation's involved. The book attempts to establish that BMD defense, on both sides becomes a deterrent to use...particularly to the Chinese who do not in any way want to play to the American strength in this regard. When it is established that both sides are adept at shooting down and destroying tatctical use...strategic use never escalates in the story.

As to it destroying the world. I do not thionk so on the scale of use presented in this book. There were far more atmospheric tests of nuclear weapons in the cold war than what occur in this novel, and yet the world still exists. Granted, when infrastructure and cities begin taking hits, the standard of living and availability of many of the creature comforts we take for granted are impacted significantly..

Finn McCool said:

As for the military tactics/technology side of things, I think that the vast technology advances are realistic. Think about the difference in weaponry at the beginning of WWII and the end. In both cases, the basis of the technology exsisted (jet engines, rockets, radar, true aircraft carrier fleets for WWII and advanced space travel, hypersonic aircraft, LRASD weapons and all the other goodies in Dragon's Fury) but were only in beginning stages at the start of the war. At the end of the war, they were developed into a more developed form.

Click to expand...

I agree. In this case the innovation is driven by abject need on both sides to emerge victorious. In this case, it is true that war drives technology...that is taken for granted...each side wants to win. As to the other, call it greed, or call it simply the entreprenurial spirit of the free market (which I would characterize as being driven more by profit and the promise of free enterprize more than greed). The fact is, when people are unleashed to use their own free will to their own benefit...and that of their society...technology really has a good opportunity to shine.

Thanks for the comments and thoughts!

Re: Great China VS U.S war book

Jeff Head said:

Actually, the use is very limited by the standards of what is available to the nation's involved. The book attempts to establish that BMD defense, on both sides becomes a deterrent to use...particularly to the Chinese who do not in any way want to play to the American strength in this regard. When it is established that both sides are adept at shooting down and destroying tatctical use...strategic use never escalates in the story.

As to it destroying the world. I do not thionk so on the scale of use presented in this book. There were far more atmospheric tests of nuclear weapons in the cold war than what occur in this novel, and yet the world still exists. Granted, when infrastructure and cities begin taking hits, the standard of living and availability of many of the creature comforts we take for granted are impacted significantly..

Click to expand...

I was more focusing on the orbital bombardment weapons. It seems as though these weapons were used dozens of times, but I could be wrong. Anyway, that many asteroid impacts would massively affect the planets climate, rapidly too. That is the main plot hole in the book.

Another good touch in the story was that the leaders sometimes made illogical decisions. The CAS invasion of Russia is a good example. It wasn't a necessary thing for them to do and it was essentially a war-losing decsion. But then again, dictators are known for their egomania, and that comes across. The Allies wouldn't have won WWII if it weren't for some bad/egomanical decisions by Hitler. The main one that comes to mind is again invading Russia, but smaller things like micromanaging technological development and demanding command the Panzer Divisions in France (thus making them late to counterattack on D-Day) are also instances that show the strengths of a democratic nation over an authoritarian one in war.

Re: Great China VS U.S war book

Finn McCool said:

I was more focusing on the orbital bombardment weapons. It seems as though these weapons were used dozens of times, but I could be wrong. Anyway, that many asteroid impacts would massively affect the planets climate, rapidly too. That is the main plot hole in the book.

Click to expand...

Well, the relative size of the impacts were small...compared to any large asteroids...and that was intentional to try and avoid the type of consequences you describe. Those "projectiles" were sought out specifically for their material composition...or at least that was the intent of the plot line...so that smaller objects could penetrate all the way through the atmosphere with precision, and with only localized damage, and with no radiation consequence. Anyhow...as in all fiction...the actual, real-life consequences are hard to guage without a lot more study and real-life research.

Finn McCool said:

Another good touch in the story was that the leaders sometimes made illogical decisions. The CAS invasion of Russia is a good example. It wasn't a necessary thing for them to do and it was essentially a war-losing decsion. But then again, dictators are known for their egomania, and that comes across. The Allies wouldn't have won WWII if it weren't for some bad/egomanical decisions by Hitler. The main one that comes to mind is again invading Russia, but smaller things like micromanaging technological development and demanding command the Panzer Divisions in France (thus making them late to counterattack on D-Day) are also instances that show the strengths of a democratic nation over an authoritarian one in war.

Click to expand...

Thanks...part of that message was the intent...and throughout the book there are many parallels back to prior-war lessons that are (as in real life) constantly relearned. The Chinese invasion of Russia was to secure for themselves all of Siberia, and to try and put an end to what would ultimately be a pwoerful threat on their northern borders. The Chinese even called it Barbarosa II in their own language...knowing full well what happened to the Germans, but convinced that with their numbers, augmented by the Indian numbers, they could succeed where the Germans failed...and except for the development and application of the Hail-storm missile systems (an advanced development of the current metal-storm research), they probably would have.

Again, thanks for the great commentary, discussion, and points you make about the novel...both ways. BTW, the printed, hardback version is now available (finally) on both and . Quite a few people who have downloaded it and read it are letting me know they enjoyed it enough to now add it to their library...others, who weren't as impressed, are not...and that is ok and was the whole purpose of letting people read it for free as an Adobe download in the first place.

Best regards.

Re: Great China VS U.S war book

Finn McCool said:

What about the Sino-Vietnamese Wars?

Jeff-I've been reading your book and I have liked it a lot so far. I'm almost done. People say that it is unrealistic, but certain "unrealistic" things have to be allowed for within the parameters of the story for the story to even happen at all. The story is about what would happen if a unified Islamic nation, India and a better-armed China took on the US with the aim of world domination. It doesn't matter if that is realistic...that's what the story is about.

Click to expand...

Since you obviously have trouble reading, let me give you same quote, for convenient, with the important part highlighted.

...it is invading a former ally and sovereign nation which it has recognised with intention of annexing land it has recognised as the others, a thing PRC had never done before),

Click to expand...

So, do you intend to prove that the war of '79 was one of conquest, not, as widely believe and characterised by both the Chinese government and academics, a war for geopolitical purposes (show up the Soviet Union, support Cambodia, combination of the above two, and others)?

Re: Great China VS U.S war book

I've been reading the book and have to say it's far better than certain unmentionable Clancy title. Kudos to Jeff!

I have some comments that contain spoilers, so this is a spoiler warning -



Spoiler warning



Spoiler warning



Spoiler warning



* I like the fact that Jeff attempted the address the point about America's production power. It's very unlikely that any other nation could match US output in war materials. In Jeff's book, we read about attacks on US Navy shipyards and killing of skilled workers at the yards.

IMO human resource is just as important as the material resources. When attacking an AFB, you prolly want to target the barracks and kill the pilots and mechanics too. Skilled labor takes years to train and is often more difficult to replace than materials.

* A successful decapitation strike on the US would require the PRC to take out political, military, and manufacturing base, as well as the ability to rebuild. The conventional strikes described in Vol 1 - Vol 2 on US mainland resulted in a lot of damage, but most (except human lives) could be rebuild. Few terriorists roaming the Mississippi armed with RPG's isn't going to stop the reconstruction.

I feel that the PRC's strike is akin to Hannibal's invasion of Rome/Italy. He was able to do a lot of damage, but ultimately he was only able to break Rome's windows but not its foundation. To be successful you'd need to destroy the whole house, like the conquest of Aztec Empire, which shook the Aztec's very foundation and disrupted its human resources (people) beyond repair.

* To accompolish such goal the PRC would've had to look for an opportunity, such as time of great internal strife within the US and siding one one faction against the other, or have some means to destroy America's human resource via WMDs. Like the Spanish unleashing European diseases on the Aztecs, the biological weapon described later in the book should've been deployed first and on a much larger scale from logical point of view. If you can destroy the enemy's human resource, then they have nothing to rebuild with.

Alternatively, if the PRC was able to develop good ABM system and build ICBM/SLBMs on USSR's scale, we could also do a massive pre-emptive nuclear strike on every major US & Canadian city, as well as important military & economic/industrial centers. Though I think it'd be unrealistic for them to build that many missiles in such a short time.

* When the analysts of the 19 century wrote their predictions of the 20th century, often they assuem a continuation of the traditional European powers in center stage of world politics. 2 world wars later we find a very different world in the 20th century.

I feel that too many fictions today make the same assumption, giving US or PRC rise in 21st century and beyond. Sci-Fi channel's "Firefly" is one such example. I'd like to see something different, like if US-PRC were to have a nuclear exchange and took each other down, as well as dragging EU, Japan, etc. with them, the center of power shifts to Latin America in 2200-2300 AD, and Spanish becomes the new Lingua Franca. That, I think, would be a "fresh" fiction to read.

* If the PRC was able to form political and economic alliance with GIR/India/etc., I don't see a need for them to go to war on such a grand scale. I think it'd be more logical for the PRC leadership to work on consolidating the new alliance and propping himself up in center stage. If there were conflicts, I think they'd be more like proxy wars in some 3rd world country like the Cold War.

* Apologies to Jeff for nit picking:

In the epilogue of Vol 2, it reads "Over one billion Muslims in the GIR, over one billion Hindus in India, and well over one billion people, mostly of Buddhist background in China".

The time-line in Jeff's story is 2006. India only reached 1 billion mark in 1999, and about 1.1 billion in 2005, of which 890 million are Hindu. I think it's not possible to have over one billion Hindus in India in 2006.

50 years of Communist rule and events like the cultural revolution has destroyed much of China's traditional Buddhist culture. The most optimistic (and unrealistc) estimate puts up to 350 million people in China as having Buddhist background, but it's likely to be far less. Conservative estimate on TOTAL number of Buddhists in the world is about 350 million total.

Re: Great China VS U.S war book

adeptitus said:

I've been reading the book and have to say it's far better than certain unmentionable Clancy title. Kudos to Jeff!

Click to expand...

Thanks for those very kind words. I just hope the read was enjoyable for you and others.

adeptitus said:

* I like the fact that Jeff attempted the address the point about America's production power. It's very unlikely that any other nation could match US output in war materials. In Jeff's book, we read about attacks on US Navy shipyards and killing of skilled workers at the yards.

IMO human resource is just as important as the material resources. When attacking an AFB, you prolly want to target the barracks and kill the pilots and mechanics too. Skilled labor takes years to train and is often more difficult to replace than materials.

* A successful decapitation strike on the US would require the PRC to take out political, military, and manufacturing base, as well as the ability to rebuild. The conventional strikes described in Vol 1 - Vol 2 on US mainland resulted in a lot of damage, but most (except human lives) could be rebuild. Few terriorists roaming the Mississippi armed with RPG's isn't going to stop the reconstruction.

I feel that the PRC's strike is akin to Hannibal's invasion of Rome/Italy. He was able to do a lot of damage, but ultimately he was only able to break Rome's windows but not its foundation. To be successful you'd need to destroy the whole house, like the conquest of Aztec Empire, which shook the Aztec's very foundation and disrupted its human resources (people) beyond repair.

Click to expand...

Again, thanks for the comments and the analysis.

adeptitus said:

* Apologies to Jeff for nit picking:

Click to expand...

No apologies necessary, thanks for pointing your issues and concerns and points out.

adeptitus said:

The time-line in Jeff's story is 2006. India only reached 1 billion mark in 1999, and about 1.1 billion in 2005, of which 890 million are Hindu. I think it's not possible to have over one billion Hindus in India in 2006.

Click to expand...

The new edition, rewritten in 2006, shifts the year centricity to quite a bnit later, without naming the dates at all. It is clearly well after the Olympics. That's what the and the new printed versions are all showing now...but I think the 1 billion Hindus is pretty close.

adeptitus said:

50 years of Communist rule and events like the cultural revolution has destroyed much of China's traditional Buddhist culture. The most optimistic (and unrealistc) estimate puts up to 350 million people in China as having Buddhist background, but it's likely to be far less. Conservative estimate on TOTAL number of Buddhists in the world is about 350 million total.

Click to expand...

I still believe that there is a Budhist background for more than 1 billion of the Chinese, even if the current generation only numbers 350 million. That was my intent...I realize the actual, professing Budhists is now a much smaller number...but their parents and grandparents were quite possibly active Budhists which means they have that background.

Again, thanks for the comments and the critique!

Re: Great China VS U.S war book

There's a another new novel about Islamic Terrorists plotting to sink VLCCs in Strait of Malacca, and it features a new Chinese nuclear sub and US Carrier Strike Group, (just like the real thing Song vs Kitty Hawk) it can be found in THE STRAIT....by Robert Melley
The real star is the 21st century technology, i.e., the USS Virginia (SSN-774) and the new ASDS mini-sub.

Re: Great China VS U.S war book

Jeff Head said:

I still believe that there is a Budhist background for more than 1 billion of the Chinese, even if the current generation only numbers 350 million. That was my intent...I realize the actual, professing Budhists is now a much smaller number...but their parents and grandparents were quite possibly active Budhists which means they have that background.

Click to expand...

Hi Jeff,

I think Buddhism has become something of a (faulty) "catch all" category for all Chinese folk religions. The Chua Ba Thien Hau Temple in Los Angeles Chinatown, for example, is sometimes advertised as a Chinese/Teochow Buddhist Temple, but it's actually dedicated to the Goddess Lin Meng (Matsu), a Taoist Sea Goddess, along with 2 other Taoist deities.

IMO prior to the communist take-over, the largest "religious practice" was prolly ancestroal worship & folk religions, followed by Mahayana Buddhism, Taoism, then various smaller sects. But it's often difficult to classify folk religions due to their syncretic & polytheist nature. For example if we look at this shrine:


We see everything from the Goddess of Mercy Kuan Yin, to Datuk Kong, which is an animist spirit demi-god in Malaysia.

From personal experience, I can say that the majority of my Chinese/Taiwanese relatives can burn incense and perform ancestral worship rituals, but knows little about Buddhism except vegetarian food. It's quite ironic considering our family name is of Buddhist/Verdic origin (Yan, derived from Sanskirt Yama Raja).

Re: Great China VS U.S war book

adeptitus said:

Hi Jeff,

I think Buddhism has become something of a (faulty) "catch all" category for all Chinese folk religions. The Chua Ba Thien Hau Temple in Los Angeles Chinatown, for example, is sometimes advertised as a Chinese/Teochow Buddhist Temple, but it's actually dedicated to the Goddess Lin Meng (Matsu), a Taoist Sea Goddess, along with 2 other Taoist deities.

IMO prior to the communist take-over, the largest "religious practice" was prolly ancestroal worship & folk religions, followed by Mahayana Buddhism, Taoism, then various smaller sects. But it's often difficult to classify folk religions due to their syncretic & polytheist nature.

From personal experience, I can say that the majority of my Chinese/Taiwanese relatives can burn incense and perform ancestral worship rituals, but knows little about Buddhism except vegetarian food. It's quite ironic considering our family name is of Buddhist/Verdic origin (Yan, derived from Sanskirt Yama Raja).

Click to expand...

Thanks...that is very good info and I will surely take your word for it because I believe you are certainly correct. I could probably more correctly state that Budhist, Taoist, and other traditonal Chinese religious backgrounds constitute that number...and that the larger part of them, though having such a background, are now relatively disassociated from it.

Nit Pickings....

I first want to thank Jeff for his generosity for allowing free downloads of this book "DFS - WorldWar". I downloaded it and have only read frew pages so far. I could see a great effort has put into writing this book.

There is one tiny tiny little thing I would like to bring up -- please pay attention to the Chinese names. Some of the names used in this book cannot be possibly Chinese names as they don't exist when expressed in pinyin. For instance, "Jien Zenim". In Mandarin, there is no sound such as "Jien" and "nim".

This doesn't make any difference in the storyline, but would make it a bit more plausible.

Again, thanks for the book!