Posted on 08/19/2019 1:19:41 AM PDT by kaehurowing
Don't forget we had complete control of the air over the battlefield. We could and did call in P-51s, P-47s and Typhoons to help blast away any opposition.
Good question.
I'd estimate if we lost four we'd have to withdraw our naval forces from the Western Pacific.
That'd leave us 7 CVNs with 2-3 in maintenance/refits so estimate 4-5 remaining CBGs. Some of those are deployed to the Atlantic.
We might pull 2 from the Atlantic to the Pacific.
The problem we're up against is the Chinese just need to control the local waters. We have to control the entire Pacific.
They can concentrate their forces whereas we don't have that advantage.
They will swarm the CBG with hundreds of missiles. Our side has to shoot down everyone. But, we are limited to how many SAMs the escorts carry. It's a finite number with no undersea replenishment available for the SAMs.
We haven't even discussed the sub threat.
It's not a good spot to be in.
They were showing that on Chernobyl. I'm sure they were 100% effective.
What about territorial defense? You know, the country which now has around 1/3 of its territory now under control of Mexican nationals and their political supporters? How difficult would it be for China to co-opt Mexico itself, thereby political control 1/3 of the US?
FR really has been going down the tubes. We have people exhibiting a complete disconnect between reality and fantasy. On one hand, there's not a person here who realizes that fed.gov is in essence an occupation force. But on the other hand, they're quick to defend a military organization that has failed in its core mission to defend the states & citizens themselves from both foreign & domestic enemies.
This thread is an excellent example of mindless chest thumping, whereas the real action is in demographics and long-term strategic plays. Why oh why would a culture that's been around for 5,000 years lack the patience to wait another 50? With current demo trends, that's all it's going to take to render both EU & US as majority low IQ, small stature, physically weak countries.
If we have to fight a tank war with the PRC we’ve already lost.
“Never fight a land war is Asia” is still a good dictum for the USA.
Our fight will be in the air and sea, and above all, economic.
Sink Chinese oil tankers and commercial ships worldwide and declare our debt to them null and void. Cut all their commercial ties to overseas buyers and suppliers. Shoot down their airliners. Strike and bite all around their periphery.
Right now, at least, we have a global reach and they do not.
I do worry about the swarm missile attacks. We need to coax them into depleting these as early as possible.
No President of the United States could or would order the deaths of tens of millions of civilians over the loss of a military target in the open ocean with zero collateral damage.
It is unimaginable.
Don't be ridiculous.
In case anyone forgot, nuclear weapons rendered warfare between 1st rate powers obsolete. Has everyone forgotten MAD? Think the long standing policy obsolete or somehow defunct? LOL
Just as a reminder, the way the global power game has been played now for 50-60 years is via proxy. Russia uses MENA, the Chicoms use Mexico & latin America, and the USA uses the petro-dollar and $ reserve status to coerce cooperation.
It's all fun and games to play global strategic warfare, as long as no one makes a mistake and gets everyone killed. So, the neo-cons still want to go after Russia, whereas the elite want to replace their existing populations with dumber, weaker, more complacent peasants. And China? Just waiting, waiting and waiting some more to prove that diversity isn't strength.
Uh did you read the first paragraph of the article? First of all this ridiculous scenario will never happen because the Chicoms know our boomers are out there and most certainly will take out Beijeng and/or other important targets.
I’ve shot many of them, but wouldn’t waste the money on a purchase. They’re basically crap.
The STOVAL version of the F-35 flies off the smaller carriers. It a very capable aircraft
They are having to rebuild the flight decks because the F-35 in STOVL or VTOL mode melts the original surface.
https://thediplomat.com/2019/08/delivery-of-us-navys-f-35b-carrying-amphibious-assault-ship-delayed/
The Chinese never signed on to the ABM treaty.
I had read that the coatings turned out to not be enough and that they’re going to be rebuilding the deck in the launch areas. The article I linked above seems to indicate that even the new build LHA with a brand new deck that presumably had the new coatings is going to have to have the deck modified/rebuilt.
They would still have overland routes and pipelines that are out of range of carrier strike aircraft. Airliners could still fly out of the eastern part of their country. Chinese stuff going to Europe and parts of Africa and the Middle East goes by train and truck, not just by freighters.
OK first off did you even notice the article is from the South China Morning Post? Its ridiculous Chinese propaganda. The Chinese are not going to attack our naval fleet and all of our Asian military bases for many reasons both political and economic. Our retaliation for that level of act of war would be devastating. That would be in the area of DEFCON 2 or 1
The South China Morning Post is an English-language Hong Kong newspaper.
And I do not agree with you that the United States would kill ten million women and children to retaliate for the loss of a military target with zero collateral damage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.