|
|
Post by dustdevil28 on Jul 20, 2005 3:51:13 GMT -8
The Pentagon released a report on China recently and it appears that we may be close (5-10 years) to facing a conflict with China should they decide to invade Taiwon. What should we do now? We are currently preoccupied with Afganistan and Iraq so a war is out of the question unless it involves a nucular or some other massive attack against their known army positions and naval piers. www.cnn.com/2005/US/07/19/china.us.military.ap/index.html |
|
|
|
Post by FightingFalcon on Jul 20, 2005 14:31:09 GMT -8
The Pentagon released a report on China recently and it appears that we may be close (5-10 years) to facing a conflict with China should they decide to invade Taiwon. What should we do now? We are currently preoccupied with Afganistan and Iraq so a war is out of the question unless it involves a nucular or some other massive attack against their known army positions and naval piers. www.cnn.com/2005/US/07/19/china.us.military.ap/index.htmlNo, the Army and Marines are pre-occupied with Iraq and Afghanistan. The USAF and USN are more than able to deal with the PRC. Seeing as though they have no blue-water fleet and a less-than-respectable Air Force, we could easily defeat them if need be. Even if our Army was ready, a land invasion would be out of the question. 150,000 troops could never subdue a nation of 1 billion people. |
|
|
|
Post by dustdevil28 on Jul 20, 2005 19:16:05 GMT -8
The Pentagon released a report on China recently and it appears that we may be close (5-10 years) to facing a conflict with China should they decide to invade Taiwon. What should we do now? We are currently preoccupied with Afganistan and Iraq so a war is out of the question unless it involves a nucular or some other massive attack against their known army positions and naval piers. www.cnn.com/2005/US/07/19/china.us.military.ap/index.htmlNo, the Army and Marines are pre-occupied with Iraq and Afghanistan. The USAF and USN are more than able to deal with the PRC. Seeing as though they have no blue-water fleet and a less-than-respectable Air Force, we could easily defeat them if need be. Even if our Army was ready, a land invasion would be out of the question. 150,000 troops could never subdue a nation of 1 billion people. The Navy and AF aren't occupied? We have two carrier's in the Gulf right now and we would need at least 2 to deal with China, preferably 3. The Air Force has had repeated deployments to Iraq, mostly to Balad air base. I know we went over this before, but a Naval bombardment in conjuntion with constant air raids may contain the Chinease, but would not defeat them. If we are to deal with China our focus should be to finish training the Iraqi troops to deal with the insurgency, pull out. Find OBL, put 2 in his head. Than spend as much time as we can preparing our armed forces with our Asia allies. With the troops from these nations and whoever else is willing to help our combined forces could exceed over 1 million in a war with China. |
|
|
|
Post by americanpride on Jul 20, 2005 19:32:50 GMT -8
One word: NMD Which is in actuality three words: National Missile Defense  |
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Jul 21, 2005 17:55:54 GMT -8
Maybe I'd better wise you guys up on something about the Peoples Liberation Army, Air Force and Navy.
Even with the current drawdown plans the total active Chinese military will total about 3.5 million men. With total mobilization of reserves we are looking at well over 10 million chinamen in uniform.
Their air force contains not only a thousand older style MiGs and Sukois (and their locally built copies) but also at least a hundred MODERN MiG and Sukoi fighters, interceptors and fighter bombers of the latest types armed with most of the latest Russian weapons.
The Navy ... they are well on the way to owning a full fledged blue water force. Currently they have approximately 80 surface combatants including Russian SOVREMMENY class DDGs (2 in commission and 2 to be delivered shortly) and home grown AEGIS type destroyers. A Chinese owned company was one of the subcontractors building our AEGIS systems, so swiping the designs was no problem. 2 AEGIS ships of about 6000 tons are completing now and will begin trials shortly, 2 more larger ships have been laid down and will be launched in just over a year, in service in about 2.5 years. They have also produced a couple dozen large and medium amphibious assault ships with a couple dozen more expected.
Submarines. At least 4 Russian KILO class diesel SSKs are in service with 8 more on order from Moscow. The SONG class SSK (home grown but pretty good I'm hearing) in serial production, first units in the fleet now. A new class SSN in production, don't really know much about it yet. The old HAN class piece of shit boats have been retired. And a new class of SSBN is in production, I think the first one is in service or will be shortly along with a brand new ballistic missile for it.
The only major warship type that they lack is an aircraft carrier. But they do have the hulk of the Russian CVN VARYAG squirreled away in one of their major ports (Shanghi I think) near a major shipyard.
Care to place any bets against them trying to use it in some way?
Falcon wrote: "Seeing as though they have no blue-water fleet and a less-than-respectable Air Force, we could easily defeat them if need be."
Care to rethink that thought shipmate? I would.
|
|
|
|
Post by dustdevil28 on Jul 21, 2005 18:31:08 GMT -8
One word: NMD Which is in actuality three words: National Missile Defense It's a nice thought Chris, but it doesn't take many bombs sneaking through to be considered a failure of diplomacy if we strike first. I believe Lincoln said this when it was suggested to him to declare war on Britain to unite the country and possibly forgo Civil war. "One war at a time." Lets finish what we've started in Iraq and Afganistan before we start looking for other wars to fight. |
|
|
|
Post by dustdevil28 on Jul 21, 2005 18:33:34 GMT -8
Maybe I'd better wise you guys up on something about the Peoples Liberation Army, Air Force and Navy. Even with the current drawdown plans the total active Chinese military will total about 3.5 million men. With total mobilization of reserves we are looking at well over 10 million chinamen in uniform. Their air force contains not only a thousand older style MiGs and Sukois (and their locally built copies) but also at least a hundred MODERN MiG and Sukoi fighters, interceptors and fighter bombers of the latest types armed with most of the latest Russian weapons. The Navy ... they are well on the way to owning a full fledged blue water force. Currently they have approximately 80 surface combatants including Russian SOVREMMENY class DDGs (2 in commission and 2 to be delivered shortly) and home grown AEGIS type destroyers. A Chinese owned company was one of the subcontractors building our AEGIS systems, so swiping the designs was no problem. 2 AEGIS ships of about 6000 tons are completing now and will begin trials shortly, 2 more larger ships have been laid down and will be launched in just over a year, in service in about 2.5 years. They have also produced a couple dozen large and medium amphibious assault ships with a couple dozen more expected. Submarines. At least 4 Russian KILO class diesel SSKs are in service with 8 more on order from Moscow. The SONG class SSK (home grown but pretty good I'm hearing) in serial production, first units in the fleet now. A new class SSN in production, don't really know much about it yet. The old HAN class piece of shit boats have been retired. And a new class of SSBN is in production, I think the first one is in service or will be shortly along with a brand new ballistic missile for it. The only major warship type that they lack is an aircraft carrier. But they do have the hulk of the Russian CVN VARYAG squirreled away in one of their major ports (Shanghi I think) near a major shipyard. Care to place any bets against them trying to use it in some way? Falcon wrote: "Seeing as though they have no blue-water fleet and a less-than-respectable Air Force, we could easily defeat them if need be." Care to rethink that thought shipmate? I would. Thanks for the info Sailor, I knew they had something considerable on the Navy side, but wasn't sure about their Air Force. It seems where they lack in quality they more than make up in quantity. All this say that there can be no war with China unless they fire the first shots |
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Jul 24, 2005 16:45:10 GMT -8
Thanks for the info Sailor, I knew they had something considerable on the Navy side, but wasn't sure about their Air Force. It seems where they lack in quality they more than make up in quantity. All this say that there can be no war with China unless they fire the first shots If they do fire that first shot it will be over Taiwan. Most of their building programs will be complete within the next 5 years or so. They won't need a carrier to take the island, it's well within range of land based air and missiles. On the otherhand we will need carriers and long range landbased air (B-1/B-52 armed with cruise missiles and B-2) flying out of Guam and Japan. Watch for North Korea to make serious trouble about that time too. |
|
|
|
Post by americanpride on Jul 24, 2005 16:46:26 GMT -8
Thanks for the info Sailor, I knew they had something considerable on the Navy side, but wasn't sure about their Air Force. It seems where they lack in quality they more than make up in quantity. All this say that there can be no war with China unless they fire the first shots If they do fire that first shot it will be over Taiwan. Most of their building programs will be complete within the next 5 years or so. They won't need a carrier to take the island, it's well within range of land based air and missiles. On the otherhand we will need carriers and long range landbased air (B-1/B-52 armed with cruise missiles and B-2) flying out of Guam and Japan. Watch for North Korea to make serious trouble about that time too. I think North Korea will implode by that time. |
|
|
|
Post by tits on Jul 24, 2005 20:38:11 GMT -8
need or want.
We will lose the carriers and most of our strike aircraft within the first few days. Even the B-1 is vulnerable and we would lose a few of them. Their navy and air force and defense systems are nothing to sneeze at. Check Jane's Military for a current look. Like the Soviets against the Nazis, they swamped the superior military and technology of the Nazis by sheer numbers. (however, the Il-2 and T-32 were perhaps the best systems in the Eastern Front)
The cascade effect of an armed conflict would be terrible and missiles will have to be used. Once that happens it will be the domino effect of involvement. DPRK will thump the ROK and they will retaliate. India, Austria, Malaysia, and Japan will teeter on involvement. EU and UK will have to get involved to protect their oil interest. WWIII scenario?
The economic impact to the US economy would be devastating. The loss of billion dollar ships, aircraft, and first line personnel would be beyond current understanding.
China, would be bloodied terribly and that famous new damn would disappear because of the destructive force of nature would lay the down stream industries barren.
I would wage the War College and strategic intel centers have this scenario worked every way and find that a situation that should be avoided.
|
|
|
|
Post by CommonSense on Jul 28, 2005 10:43:15 GMT -8
I agree that a land invasion should be avoided at almost all costs. Bomb the hell out of them military, civilian, whatever. Major naval battles are to be expected the likes we haven't seen since WW2. A land force could be used to liberate Taiwan and we know the Japanese and Australians will take on the Chinese with outstanding courage. In the end I think we'll defeat the Chinese in any world war thanks to the power of allies and all out war on everything Chinese. We will lose many many people and our world will never be the same. Expect to see the ME go up in flames in any scenario as Iran, Syria, and Palestine see their chance to take on Israel without US protection. Israel would collapse and let's face it, there would be nothing we could do about it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Jul 28, 2005 16:31:09 GMT -8
Chris wrote: "I think North Korea will implode by that time."
We've been watching NK since the ceasefire went into effect, expecting that at some point the regime would collapse due to (at first) the terrible losses in personnel during the war and the deprivations suffered by the population under their "centrally controlled" economy since.
Ain't happened and I doubt it will any time soon.
Tittus wrote: "China, would be bloodied terribly and that famous new damn would disappear because of the destructive force of nature would lay the down stream industries barren.
I would wage the War College and strategic intel centers have this scenario worked every way and find that a situation that should be avoided."
They probably have. The 3 Gorges Dam is not invulnerable. On the first firing of a Chinese nuclear firecracker in anger anywhere a single B-2 delivering a single B-61 would drop the damn like a stripper's modesty.
Or a special forces unit (on a probable 1 way mission) might be able to plant a 1 to 5 kt SADM at the base of the damn (preferably on the UPSTREAM side) to produce a breach similar in concept to the WW2 "Damn Busters" raids.
Tittus, I think the EU would set this one out. A war in the Pacific would not threaten their oil supplies out of the mideast UNLESS the PRC were to choose to expand in that direction. The Indochina oil reserves are much closer. Japan would loose her supplies from everywhere but Alaska as would South Korea. Would Australia get into it? Good question, I don't have an answer.
Or a resolution to the entire problem.
Wish I did. This is going to get real expensive if it happens.
|
|
|
|
Post by tits on Jul 28, 2005 18:29:23 GMT -8
The EU will attempt to sit that conflict out, but with the loss of the US as a buffer, Israel will have to assume an offensive defense. That would bring a unified Arab world against Israel and that would bring the EU (probably France first) into the conflict.
The conflict in China would eventually bring the UK because of the close economic ties still in Singapore and Hong Kong. The Germans and French have strong ties to Malaysia. The Islamic insurgents have a very strong presence in all of SEA, if the West attempts to side with Israel in the former case, then they may side with PRC. It just seems that no matter how this is sliced, it will become global.
Wouldn't it be neat to see what those boys at the intel have worked on this scenario?
This is fun, I like this kind of discussion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Jul 30, 2005 15:30:08 GMT -8
Tittus wrote: "The EU will attempt to sit that conflict out, but with the loss of the US as a buffer, Israel will have to assume an offensive defense. That would bring a unified Arab world against Israel and that would bring the EU (probably France first) into the conflict." The French? On whose side?  Tittus: "The conflict in China would eventually bring the UK because of the close economic ties still in Singapore and Hong Kong. The Germans and French have strong ties to Malaysia. The Islamic insurgents have a very strong presence in all of SEA, if the West attempts to side with Israel in the former case, then they may side with PRC. It just seems that no matter how this is sliced, it will become global." I hadn't considered that, just getting too damn tired I think. Which way do you think Russia would go? With their trading partners in Europe, or their trading partner in the PRC? If Europe gets into it I don't see Moscow setting on it's hands. |
|
|
|
Post by tits on Jul 31, 2005 17:39:39 GMT -8
When the major oil conglomerates are evaluated, almost all pass through Paris. The Iraqi/Turkey/France connection at the beginning of this war was laid open but no one pursued it. I would say that the huge Muslim population and the strong anti-Semitic voice would place France on the side of the Arab. “The French? On whose side? ” “Which way do you think Russia would go? With their trading partners in Europe, or their trading partner in the PRC? If Europe gets into it I don't see Moscow setting on it's hands.” I could see Moscow going either way. However, I could see a scenario where China would see an opportunity to capture the vast Caspian fields as a land route. Given the current state of the Russian Military, Beijing may see it as a good opportunity. To go for the SWA/ME oil would mean crossing India/Pakistan and a few others whereas a single swift blow against Russia just may win everything in one move. |
|
