Posted on 03/09/2024 2:46:10 PM PST by hardspunned
The United States and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) seem destined for war. Unless a major diplomatic offramp is taken—soon—the conflict will become a fait accompli.
Currently, the US military’s best strategy for fighting China’s military resides in the hands of three branches that would operate seamlessly together: the US Navy, the US Marine Corps, and the US Air Force. These three branches would be the proverbial tip of the spear in any conflict with China.
Specifically, the US Navy’s aircraft carriers would be the most likely forward deployed assets that would be charged with breaking whatever Chinese forces were being arrayed against the US military.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalinterest.org ...
The Kh-47M2 Kinzhal (Russian: Х-47М2 Кинжал, lit. 'Dagger'; NATO reporting name: AS-24 Killjoy) is a Russian hypersonic air-launched ballistic missile. It has an estimated range of 460–480 km (290–300 mi) and a reported top speed of Mach 10. It can carry either conventional or nuclear warheads and can be launched by Tu-22M3 bombers or MiG-31K interceptors, also can be launched by modified Su-34 after Ukraine war. It is the first hypersonic weapon used. Wikipedia
To match China’s effort, the United States has spent more than $8 billion on offensive hypersonic missile development over the past two years alone. Despite delays and challenges, some of these efforts are making headway. The Army’s Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon, the Air Force’s Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile, and the Navy’s Conventional Prompt Strike and Hypersonic Air-Launched Offensive Anti-Surface Warfare programs COULD all field weapons THIS DECADE. Defense News
Assuming the US can defeat the Chinese Navy and Air Force, who is going to win after the US invasion of China. And how many troops need to be stationed in the USA to defeat the fifth column which Biden flew into our cities?
The overall design of the missile is shared with the older ground-launched 9K720 Iskander missile, adapted for air launching with a modified guidance section for the Kinzhal.
In Russian media the "hypersonic" feature has been highlighted as a unique feature to create an impression it is a new and advanced design (hypersonic glide and scramjet) although the Kinzhal actually uses a standard ballistic missile technology at greater speeds.
The "hypersonic" feature is shared with many older designs and does not represent any particular technological breakthrough.
Before Ukraine: The Neocons told us that being involved in Ukraine would scare the hell out of China and thus they would not attack Taiwan (or at least discourage them from doing so). China would see how our Glitzy Weapons from our DEI-infused, Woke, and Gender-Queer military would make MINCED MEAT out of those pesky Russians.
Now China’s thinking after watching the war: “Uh, looks like taking Taiwan will be a lot easier than we thought”
As big a problem will be the sudden lose of cheap Chinese commerce. Can't be buying that stuff when we are in a shooting war.
There is no such thing as too many wars to the Deep State.
Is China interested in risking a nuclear array of strikes in its coastal cities, all to get a rather small piece of territory?
They don’t need TMSC. They could bomb all those plants such that nobody gets those chips. No need to invade. Just missile those factories and blockade the oil import facilities.
No invasion. Nothing really to attack. Just shut off the chips and oil and sit back to wait for starvation from the inability to transport food. No troops for the US to attack because no invasion taking place.
The US could send tankers filled with oil, but the ports for offloading can be wiped out.
China has the upper hand in all this. The only real obstacle would be to get the generals on their side to recognize that victory can be achieved without they having any huge battle on maps with big arrows that would make them immortal at Chinese military academies for centuries to come.
“spent more than $8 billion on offensive hypersonic missile development “
And how much for a defense against the threat?
Heck, 40-50 years ago they did not have a reliable way to counter the old SS-N-22 Sunburn. The RAM is limited in range
Nobody. The US cannot possibly conquer China - what a weird question. China has 1.4 billion people and more than enough nuclear weapons to destroy the US. It's entirely possible we can defeat China in a limited naval war by blockading them and blocking or defeating an invasion of Taiwan but that's a very different scenario. And also very dangerous.
Well that was Victoria Nuland's plan, start the Ukraine war to take out Russia and the take on China.
I think crazy in either part of the plan, but here we are supporting Ukraine and pushing NATO into the fight.
I read that the Pentagon expects to have a defense for today’s missiles in the early 2030s.
It will take out a carrier.
For a long time, in R&D, the U.S. Navy has failed to maintain a basic design, that its ships are combat ships.
Not computers afloat.
Not satellite links afloat.
Instead, all ships must be able to repel boats, ships, and boarders.
The success of the Ukraine “navy” drones, testifies.
Thank goodness, our shortcomings have been exposed before we went off against the Chicoms and saw two or three of our carriers on the bottom of the South China Sea.
Probability of success, depends on:
a) speed of the target
b) speed of the missile
As target speed increases, probability of a missile strike decreases.
And missile loses accuracy as its speed increases - cannot adjust downward ballistic path.
So, the more stationary the target, then increased probability of a strike.
IMHO
The CCP never had any intention of invading. They will simply blockade Taiwan into submission. The USN could not break such a blockade. The 60s are calling. The want their Missile Gap back.
More than one. Since we have been destroyed here, and it continues, better to wage war here.
THE CHI COMS ARE ALREADY AT WAR WITH US.
What exactly is Brandon J. Weichert’s military expertise other than being a mouth?
An energy analyst at the The-Pipeline, Brandon J. Weichert is a former Congressional staffer and geopolitical analyst who is a contributor at The Washington Times, as well as at the Asia Times. He is the author of Winning Space: How America Remains a Superpower (Republic Book Publishers), Biohacked: China’s Race to Control Life (Encounter Books), and The Shadow War: Iran’s Quest for Supremacy (Republic Book Publishers). Weichert occasionally serves as a Subject Matter Expert for various organizations, including the Department of Defense. He can be followed via Twitter @WeTheBrandon. The views expressed are his own.
The National Interest has been around forty or so years. I think Richard Nixon had a hand in founding it. What are your qualifications? What exactly in the article are you calling BS on?
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.