China’s Marine Corps: The Sea Dragons

Did you know that the Chinese Military uses Flamethrowers to knock out bunkers?

That’s an important detail to know, because the U.S. hasn’t used flamethrowers in decades, so the concept of defending from flame based weapons has fallen out of our doctrine.

Favoring instead to use Incendiary Rockets, or, later on, Thermobaric Weapons against soft targets like bunkers and barracks. A flamethrower assault is preceded by lots of tripod supported suppressive fire.

So have fun with that…

BTW, the Chinese Sea Dragons have changed from the blue pattern, to a pattern that blends in with the Taiwan forests(You can see a sample of this color on their kits). I assume the primary assault will use the blue pattern to limit friendly fire, and then they will change to the new green “Starry Sky” pattern during occupation.

Spread the love
                

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

About the Author: Johnny Paratrooper

Born and Raised in Baltimore City, Maryland. History Degree. 8 Years Airborne Infantry and Scouts Platoon. Iraq Veteran. 4-5 Years as a doorman, bar back, and bouncer in Baltimore. Worked in Construction, Heavy Equipment Demolition, Corporate Security, Sales, Forest Service contractor, and the Hospitality Industry. Raised Catholic. Hobbies are race cars and sport bikes. Side projects are HAM radio credentials and long range shooting. MY EMAIL IS [email protected]. Founder of Green Dragon Academy https://www.patreon.com/GreenDragonAcademy

32 Comments

  1. FlyBy April 2, 2021 at 08:03

    The US military relies too heavily on technology based weapons. In so doing, we display a lack of momentum and initiative.

    • Johnny Paratrooper April 3, 2021 at 15:25

      This isn’t true. While our GPS and LASER guided weapons are very complex, the average soldier is just a dude with a rifle, a truck and 2-3 buddies.

      • FlyBy April 3, 2021 at 16:29

        I’m not Army, so you would know better than I and I’ll defer to your expertise. But, don’t you find the command and control of the small unit ( a dude with a rifle, a truck and 2-3 buddies) stifling and rigid?

        • Mike April 3, 2021 at 16:46

          What are you saying? Are you asking if having a chain of command is restrictive? Are you suggesting that these fire teams should be turned loose and told to hunt the enemy without coordination? Please clarify.

          • FlyBy April 3, 2021 at 23:57

            Mike
            I believe I’ve rolled across a mine. I will attempt to clarify with the hope of not rolling across another. I made my comments based upon my experience and without supplying any context, which was serving in a command and control structure that micromanaged every nuance of an operation. There was no individual initiative while working a problem. Hence my comment about a rigid command structure. My experience and hopefully not yours. I was not suggesting that there should be no command and control, nor was I suggesting that teams should be turned loose without co-ordination between them. I was attempting to ask if given an ROE and an objective, is the team permitted the latitude to develop a plan to execute the mission?
            I hope this provides the clarification you asked for. I should been more mindful prior to posting. My mistake.

          • Johnny Paratrooper April 4, 2021 at 00:14

            By you vocabulary choice, and sentence structure, your credentials pass my smell test.
            I would parley that there is a fine line between too much micromanagement and too little.
            The “in between” is likely a debate that can last forever.

          • Mike April 4, 2021 at 01:23

            FlyBy,
            You’re good dude, I just didn’t understand what you were asking, now I believe I can attempt to answer it. Yes, the US Military practices what is known as Centralized Command with De-Centralized Control. How this works is that subordinate leaders get assigned missions along with the “commander’s intent,” which is the desired end state by the commanding officer. The subordinate leaders are then given as much flexibility as possible to accomplish the Commander’s Intent because they have a more realistic picture of the situation on the ground than the guy with a map 10 miles back. An example of this would be a Battalion Commander telling a Company Commander to defend a village “In order to block enemy forces and deny their using the highway through the village to resupply their troops.” The portion in quotes is the Commander’s Intent. The Battalion Commander then doesn’t tell the Company Commander how to set up his defense, he trusts him to figure out the best way on his own as the man on the ground.
            Admittedly, some commanders are better at this than others, and some are straight up micromanagers. However, this is the way it’s supposed to work for maximum flexibility in the chaotic environment that is a battlefield. BTW, I apologize, upon re-reading my first response I did sound a little more terse than I intended. Keep asking questions dude, it’s the only way we keep bettering ourselves.

          • FlyBy April 4, 2021 at 16:51

            No worries. We’re square.
            Reference your reply 04/042021 01:23:00

        • Johnny Paratrooper April 3, 2021 at 16:53

          That depends on the mission and the Rules of Engagement. But a couple guys in a truck can basically do whatever they want as long as they tell the same story when asked. And they have good reasons.

  2. Mike April 2, 2021 at 08:38

    Interesting, I notice that they’re all wearing LBVs, no body armor in sight.

    • NC Scout April 2, 2021 at 08:47

      They’re not concerned with casualties.

      • Mike April 2, 2021 at 11:49

        That’s fair. We are, after all, talking about the country that openly welcomed full on nuclear warfare during the Cold War because they “had enough people to spend.”

    • Luke April 2, 2021 at 09:13

      They lack diversity too dammit lol. We’re going to get our asses handed to us aren’t we. Especially if it comes down to true grit. I have a feeling the Chinese believe in the cause. The question becomes how many Americans do now? I’m thinking not so many and you can thank the diversity and inclusion for that.

      • NC Scout April 2, 2021 at 09:16

        Eh, any one American Guerrilla is worth about ten of them. Maybe more. China’s got numbers but not much else.

        • Luke April 2, 2021 at 10:45

          If they step on our soil I would agree. Right now in the US it seems like the people who are the most Patriotic which probably makes them the best fighters are in a malaise IMO. Brought on by our very own lying and oppressive govt. Love him or hate him DT pulled the curtain back on the 2 party system. I can’t tell you if that was intentional or not. I am middle aged and all my rowdy friends have settled down but I cannot see anyone back then or now wanting to go fight the Chinese in a foreign theater of war. Idk I could be mistaken. It seems to me either our own government needs to go full assault on us or an occupying force like the UN or Chinese needs to invade to bring back that true American fighting spirit.
          You guys have been on fire lately. Some great posts yesterday. Keep up the great work.

  3. Umbra April 2, 2021 at 11:49

    That amphibious vehicle, the ramp operating mechanism looks easy to foul this isn’t WWII. More information on China and the push to make us self sufficient in the electronics world. She’s not hard to look at either.
    https://youtu.be/VW1Hs_Jh-ug

  4. LivingOnTheFault April 2, 2021 at 13:11

    They got 70 million excess males in their favor. I think they will roll through a lot of America pretty easily but once they get into “Redoubt” areas of the US. I think the find regions will be ungovernable. Surrender to a Maoist army is not going to happen. As a Christian, we know this battle is to death. We know they will give no quarter, and they will kill prisoners. They have killed 120M non-combatants. Probably another 1 Billion in womb, or at birth. I am not explaining to my maker I surrendered.

    • Johnny Paratrooper April 3, 2021 at 15:24

      Fielding 70 million soldiers would be impossible. Let alone trying to command and control them. China’s plan for their 70 million lost men is to use them as colonists. China already has 45 million colonists worldwide. All they would have to do is send 1.5 people to each colonist’s home and bingo, you are rid of your extra bachelor problem.
      Logistics my dude. Logistics.

  5. Anonymous April 2, 2021 at 16:27

    4.5

  6. David Bustillos April 2, 2021 at 16:30

    The also have a number of regular Army units that are Amphibious assault brigades. This will be added to their Marine units in the assault. As a side note a large number of their Marines are airborne qualified.

    • Johnny Paratrooper April 3, 2021 at 15:32

      Yes they do. And, apparently, they plan to use them to project power in the right areas. I don’t think the Amphibious units are for Taiwan. I think the amphibious units are for places like Florida, Maryland, The Great Lakes, and Louisiana; And, obviously, anywhere else in the world that has similar terrain.
      The PLA has a pretty interesting division of equipment and personnel. You can look at it and see they have all their distances, and roles, covered.
      I am curious when they are going to start mounting Torpedo tubes, Cannons, Missile Racks, and CWIS on their cargo ships. Likely, they will be disguised as Cargo Containers on the ship.

      • Not So Free April 3, 2021 at 17:10

        Don’t they already have missles mounted in shipping containers, both on cargo ships, and “allegedly” stationed around the US and other countries.

        • Johnny Paratrooper April 3, 2021 at 17:15

          The Club-K system. Yes they do. And I bet they have a self loading artillery version, a CWIS, Surface-to-Air Missile, a Torpedo, and a Thermobaric Missile system. Imagine if they had Electronic Warfare Systems? With Food, Fuel, Small Arms, Command and Control, and Generator sets built into a series of other containers.
          It’s very real, and it was designed and built as a stealth, surprise weapon. If you stationed all of these in a port, all you would have to do is rush the port, which is pathetically guarded, and turn them on and double check the systems. Bingo, the port belongs to you… You would need a literal army to take the port back. Tanks and all.
          https://www.military.com/video/guided-missiles/advanced-weapons/club-k-container-missile-system/2932801006001

  7. Biccid April 3, 2021 at 17:41

    It would be a horrible situation to have to fight a ground war here, but after they were defeated, it might actually bring some decent change to the country.
    I would assume that they would focus on the large population centers first. Which would bring about some positive demographic changes for the rest of the more conservative-leaning United States, as those larger populations would not fight back nearly as much. Or I might just be naive.

    • Umbra April 3, 2021 at 19:25

      I don’t think throwing rocks and bottles would stop those Sea Dragons. I doubt their feelings get hurt easily either.
      Probably tactical nuke those cities and bypass.

    • Johnny Paratrooper April 5, 2021 at 10:04

      They aren’t going to attack the cities. China is financing the racial politics in the U.S. and fomenting the revolution. This would be tantamount to the Chinese attacking the ANC in South Africa. It’s fantastic. They will focus on the farmland, and the rest of the country will collapse under the weight of modernity. Which is why people need to sell their 5th, 10th, or 15th AR and buy food, radios, and water storage.

  8. Umbra April 3, 2021 at 21:27

    Turkey takes the lead for the U N team!
    https://wp.me/pbmPkd-dP

    • Johnny Paratrooper April 4, 2021 at 00:19

      If true, they will lead the rebuilding hence forth. Possibly a deal to build and not destroy. We will only know by the specific neighborhoods built up. Time will tell. I will also look into this and post commentary in the future. Thank you. We will see who is king of the hill in the Middle East.

  9. Bob Jones April 5, 2021 at 10:51

    The Chinese Marines also have attack helicopters, tanks, and naval gunfire support. All the necessary things the communist democrats just eliminated from our Marine Corps!

    • Umbra April 5, 2021 at 13:35

      There are two massive M.C. equipment depots east and west the west has a facility to rebuild and refit tanks. This is likely where the tanks are going. The intentions vary depending on who you read. Maybe someone with recent service could weigh in? Regardless it will be a cluster.

  10. Gryphon April 8, 2021 at 16:31

    The Flamethrower is without a Doubt, the most Effective Weapon that one Man can Carry. Providing he has the balls to get close enough to the Enemy to use it…
    Virtually All Military Vehicles are powered by Diesel Engines, or in the rare Exception, a Gas-Turbine (Turboshaft) Engine like in the U.S. M-1 Series. Both are completely Vulnerable to Destruction by the Flamethrower. Armor is of No Use in protecting a Vehicle, as the introduction of Burning Fuel to the Air Intake of either type of Engine results in an Immediate, Uncontrolled Overspeed, that CANNOT be stopped by “Turning Off the Ignition” or Fuel. Most Turbine Engines run at or near their Redline RPM as a matter of course, and so even a few Seconds of Overspeed will Destroy one, and the Vehicle it’s in. Even a bunch of Molotovs on the Engine Deck of a Tank will accomplish this.
    Food for thought – How About some PVC Pipe, CO-2 Bottle, Valve, and Gasoline Bomb?

Comments are closed.

GUNS N GEAR

Categories

Archives

Spread the love