The United States will not ever begin launching our nuclear arsenal for the sheer fact that if we any one of those weapons heads towards China, then Russia will become instantly aggressive - especially with fallout added into the equation. Other countries in the surrounding region may actually come to China's aid because of their strong financial backing (especially in regards to the U.S.'s current financial crisis). China, being not only diabolical, but not having anyone who can stand against them on the opposite side of the world, would more than likely have no problem launching against United soils if it really came down to a push-shove contest (the likes which we haven't seen in a long time, but on a lesser scale).
@RMS
Did you not read the part where I specifically mention we are completely outnumbered in by sheer military numbers? Not all military units magically gain the "bombs" template to use.
And as a side note, America is fucking terrible at choosing when and where to fight - as demonstrated by the last forty years of warfare. Wars of attrition have had terrible outcomes and always end not in victory, but in exhaustion and insolvency. Yeah, we spend the most money on defense - do you know why? Because of the exorbitant cost it takes to make said machines and weaponry IN AMERICA. Paying our people to make classified shit is expensive, and it's one of the few sectors of work where we don't import (can't trust other countries with our private crap). Do you know why most CIA operatives and Secret Service spy's turn to private sector work instead of continuing their work with the government? The pay SUCKS is why, and that is also the leading reason why spy's have actually turned their coats.
America hasn't used strategy in warfare in a very long time. We have generals who have spent decades studying the art of warfare, only to be unable to act as they see fit due to political struggles between the damned branches of our government (specifically the "broken branch" aka Legislature). Our lack of strategy was most notable in Vietnam, where failure to bomb supply trains was not due to lack of intelligence, but to discord amongst politicians at home (some felt they were smarter than the military leaders and decided to not bomb said lines, thus extending the length of the war for a good period of time).
Do we have fantastic technology? Yes
Do we have a strong military (as in training/tactics/etc)? Yes
Is our military allowed to actually use strategy freely to win wars? No
Do we, as of now, have an underequipped military? Yes
Does the United States, as a leading superpower (even in all it's current turmoil) have far more to lose by unleashing a nuclear arsenal on another nation than China Does? Yes!
Is the United States completely in debt to China? Yes
----Yeah, if we unleashed our arsenal on China they would be obliterated, but there is hopefully no way of that happening (and vice versa). but even if China were to launch its VASTLY SMALLER arsenal our way - all they have to do is hit a few specific targets and our entire economy would hit the shitter. China's authoritarian regime is unrelenting, and they hardly care what the UN thinks (or most of the world for that matter, as long as it doesn't dampen trade that is): they have one of the longest list of human rights violations and are at all times using cyber-warfare in both the public and private sector to gain information and establish niche's where they might - and they do this OPENLY. The U.S. would never admit to such things, because we have far more to lose on an international stage.
Hypothetically, if we were to have each country meet in their current conditions, I feel China would win due to the insane amount of bullshit that has dug its claws into the way the U.S. system operates. We cannot win a war of attrition with China, and if we tried it would be suicide. Stealth and subterfuge would be the only way, and as I already pointed out we have enough problems with that as it is.
