The key to understanding the Eastern Front of WW2 is that Russia could trade space for time. However, it was a damn near thing for Russia--had Hitler been a wee bit more competent in 1941, the German Army would've taken Moscow, and that would have given them the central position in European Russia (every major rail line passed through Moscow, making for a spectacular single-point-of-failure scenario).
A human wave assault across a large body of water is a defender's dream: many of the troops needed for a "successful" human wave assault would be shark chow before they ever engaged.
Also, the PLA is downsizing sharply--they're cutting half of their troops. China cannot afford to equip 2.5 million troops with modern weapons and equipment--so they're cutting their forces down to 1.2 million. The problem is that they cannot afford human wave attacks with only 1.2 million troops, especially since they're also going to have to modernize their force structure and increase the ratio of support troops to combat arms personnel within that 1.2 million.
You are right on the mark that this is a crucial point. As the world's 6th largest oil producing nation, China produces about 3.5 million barrels of oil per day, about the same as Iran.
And they import a s**tload more. 3.5M bbls/day is a drop in the bucket relative to their wartime needs.
And if we are serious about making hot war, we will go after their production and storage facilities, which they have been madly filling, though it is apparently less than our strategic reserve, or Japan's 90 day reserve. But going after storage on the mainland is a serious escalation from just stopping the Chinese in the water and air.
So what? We have absolute escalation dominance (i.e., we can escalate to attacks on their homeland, and there ain't jack-s**t the ChiComs can do about it except commit national suicide by shooting nukes at us.)
If North Korea went that far in making trouble instead of just playing footsie at the DMZ and with missile launches, and as well as activating their fifth column resources, then my guess (for all it is worth) is that they shelled Seoul instead, and there are a few hundred thousand dead South Koreans, and a shattered South Korean economy.
Followed by the ROK Army exacting a very bloody revenge on the DPRK. Also, you're assuming that those guns will be completely unmolested during the days it would take to do that.
We're pulling our forces out of Korea because they are entirely unnecessary to South Korean security. For the past 15 years or so, they've been there to restrain the South Korean government from trying to invade North Korea, not the other way around.
And instead of North Koreans retreating across the Yalu River, we might well be looking at Chinese troops across the DMZ.
ChiCom troops invading South Korea and Taiwan?
One or the other, but not both, grasshopper, unless they really do want to lose both wars.
I hope so. You are right that that is exactly what we would like to do, and we have plans to that effect which were bruited when the final turnover was made. But do you think we have enough spare folks -- it was, what, about 28,000 men that went in with Just Cause (a lot of people jumped in for Just Cause, and this time we don't have any folks already on the ground) -- to pull that off right now? Especially if we are engaged with the Chinese?
We wouldn't need 28,000 men; one Marine Expeditionary Unit and the alert battalion of the 82nd Airborne would suffice.
The whole point of China causing a ruckus in Panama is to stretch our forces thin, and such a diversion of troops sounds to me like they would be succeeding.
Kindly leave the military analysis to those of us who actually know what we're talking about, OK, sweetie? We needed 28K for Just Cause because we were fighting against the Panamanian government; this time, we'd be there at the request of the Panamanian government.
As for the government of Panama making noises, I wouldn't guess that their plaints alone would be enough; even threatening to terminate the contract probably wouldn't mean much in that case.
Did you read the threat? "Re-open the f***ing Canal, or we'll start hacking your wives and kids apart with machetes" makes a wonderful attention-gainer.
Yes. Japan has claims in the Kurils. China claims Taiwan. Lot of claims going on around Asia. It wouldn't shock me if Russian didn't do a quid pro quo over Taiwan.
It would shock the Russian General Staff, provoke them into storming the Kremlin to execute the traitor responsible for giving away Russian territory, and then nuking China.
Okay, that's an interesting scenario. My wild guess would instead be that Putin would rather deal on this issue than just summarily nuke China.
Putin merely hopes that the issue doesn't come up; if it does, he's likely to act ruthlessly and preemptively. He doesn't fancy getting put up against a wall and shot by his own generals.
But the upshot of all of this is who takes which side in a conflict over Taiwan.
All we'd have to do is freeze all foreign assets in the US, and announce that if anybody doesn't enthusiastically support us against China, we will make our currency nonconvertible with theirs.
Russia? Given a quid pro quo, I wouldn't be surprised if they support China.
The quid pro quo would be unacceptable to the Russian military, which would quickly become the new government of Russia.
India? My guess is quiet support for China.
You would guess wrong--they have a 42-year-old grudge, and China getting their a$$es kicked would provide an opportunity for settling it.
Japan? Might ask us to leave Japan if things got too far out of hand, but then again, if China were stupid enough to go directly after them (and China has been notably klutzy with respect to Japan), Japan might join us, but it would extraordinarily painful with respect to oil.
And going against us would ensure that we'd never
That 90 day reserve will disappear quickly indeed.
And we'd keep the sea lanes to Japan open.
Singapore? I think that they will support China.
And go bankrupt in thirty seconds.
Australia? Who knows after the recent noises from Canberra.
Chinese maps laying claim to Australia as part of "Greater China" are a continual annoyance to the Australians.
Britain? Yes, my guess is that we can count on them, but I think that their self-interest is limited and so would be their support.
And it wouldn't be needed.
As for the rest of our allies, Pakistan will be on China's side in this one.
No, Musharraf understands that we're perfectly willing to let India overrun Pakistan if he pi$$es us off enough.
NATO? Well, let's just say that I don't see Germany giving us big support on this.
And they won't need to, anyway.
China's position vs. Taiwan is extraordinarily weak, and will remain so for a very long time; and China's heading towards a very bloody and messy civil war before they'll be ready to take Taiwan.