Posted on 01/25/2023 7:59:38 PM PST by SeekAndFind
A new study released this week by the D.C.-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has concluded that America's defense industry is "not adequately prepared" for "a protracted conventional war" with an enemy with a large military like China.
The findings were the result of a war games simulation which also relied heavily on observations and statistics being gained from the Ukraine-Russia war, and Washington's ongoing military support role to Kiev.
Information from the Ukraine war led CSIS to find that the US would rapidly deplete its munitions, particularly long-range, precision-guided ones - in merely less than a week of a hot war with China in the Taiwan Strait.
“The main problem is that the U.S. defense industrial base — including the munitions industrial base — is not currently equipped to support a protracted conventional war," the study emphasized.
"The bottom line is the defense industrial base, in my judgment, is not prepared for the security environment that now exists," CSIS’s Seth Jones concluded in a statement to The Wall Street Journal.
As the study's main author, Jones posed the question: "How do you effectively deter if you don’t have sufficient stockpiles of the kinds of munitions you’re going to need for a China-Taiwan Strait kind of scenario?" According to more from the study:
"As the war in Ukraine illustrates, a war between major powers is likely to be a protracted, industrial-style conflict that needs a robust defense industry able to produce enough munitions and other weapons systems for a protracted war if deterrence fails..."
"Given the lead time for industrial production, it would likely be too late for the defense industry to ramp up production if a war were to occur without major changes."
The report additionally pointed out that the slow-moving nature of US bureaucracy and oversight is also a fundamental aspect to the problem:
The study also said that the U.S.’s foreign military sales (FMS) take too long because they need to be initiated by the Department of State and then executed by the Department of Defense and ultimately approved by Congress. Foreign sales have benefits, including supporting the U.S. defense industry, strengthening ally relations and preventing the sale of adversary systems to other countries, the study said.
"The U.S. FMS system is not optimal for today’s competitive environment — an environment where such countries as China are building significant military capabilities and increasingly looking to sell them overseas," the study stated.
It does seem the Pentagon is taking note, and is aware that events in Ukraine have exposed US defense shortcomings, as the Biden administration chooses to get more and more involved. The New York Times reported Tuesday that the US plans to boost production of artillery ammunition by 500% over the next two years.
Whereas the US Army previously produced 14,400 155mm shells a month, the new plans could see those numbers hit over 90,000 each month.
Are we-all in the denial stage of a not-improbale near future?
Isn’t it stupid to publicly publicize this?
Really? How so?
Isn’t it stupid to publicly publicize this?
I bet those toilets shined!
Which systems are being squandered in Ukraine?
Its best to be specific.
IMHO China CAN out-manufacture the US, if it gets the chance to do that. But an East Asian Naval-Air war this year will leave China with no Navy. China can’t protect its assets, either warships or shipyards. And it will instantly lose nearly all its trade, through distant blockade, seizure and “freezing”. China can’t protect its trade.
US Naval losses aren’t likely to be enormous. The USN just needs to stay a certain distance off the China coast. The US still has a great strategic recon advantage.
In return China can cause great trade losses to its neighbors, from Singapore to Japan.
The outcome is probably going to be a stalemate - China won’t be able to land a hit, while losing its fleet, in harbor or at sea, while taking severe economic damage, while in turn inflicting great economic damage. A quick ceasefire is the likely outcome.
The interesting part will be what happens during the resulting “peace”. There will be a period of intense military buildup, a real arms race.
Military budgets are increasing, and some at least of the “global warming” foolishness has been mitigated.
This statement is so broad as to be meaningless. It is dependent on the size and scope of the operation and the consumption and allotment tables to be employed. That is just some generalizations to start with. A real discussion of estimated projected consumption rates per system would really be a real classified document.
China has also developed anti-satellite weapons, your birds have to be able to stay in the sky in order to see.
China has also developed anti-satellite weapons, your birds have to be able to stay in the sky in order to see.
“US Naval losses aren’t likely to be enormous. The USN just needs to stay a certain distance off the China coast. The US still has a great strategic recon advantage.”
A few in this thread have said similar things.
What you’re all missing is that China has focused on area denial for the surrounding region. The DF-21 missile is a repurposed (hypersonic) ICBM that’s considered a viable threat to US ships out to 1200 miles. It’s launched from mobile launchers, so not easy to take out either.
US carrier aircraft can’t strike from that distance without aerial refueling.
China has also developed a very long range air-to-air missile, carried by their stealthy J-20 fighters. It’s primarily designed to destroy our quite vulnerable tanker aircraft.
Our long-range bombers are likely to be our best asset. One B-1 can carry up to 24 LRASMs (Long Range Anti-Ship Missile). Those could do some serious damage to the Chinese surface fleet. Our subs are of limited utility in the shallow waters of the Taiwan Strait.
As to any ‘recon advantage’, China is actively working on ways to defeat our satellites. I wouldn’t count on many remaining viable for any length of time.
The approach should be to heavily arm Taiwan with mobile anti-ship and anti-air missiles, making it next to impossible for China to land assault forces. That said, Taiwan faces a large force of conventional ballistic missiles that China could try to use to force capitulation.
I hope this conflict doesn’t happen, it’ll be horrific if it does - not to mention it being a huge hit for the world economy. It could also very easily go nuclear, just as could happen with Ukraine.
YEAH; we’ll have whole divisions of TRANNIES, FAGS, and LESBIANS to fight off a million man army of horny chinks.
Will our side have their “STRESS CARDS” ready to wave when the Chinees don’t use their proper pronouns?
Whatever that means.
Russian propaganda.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ivandjiiski
Yes!
We have a great supply of strongly worded letters - on letterhead!
Thanks for your reply and reasoning.
I’m not very comfortable about this topic right now, but
I honestly don’t know how to judge it overall.
While we may be low on some stuff, I’m suspect we have
redundancy in other areas.
Smile...
Just off the East coast of Taiwan is deep water.
Submarines should have no problems hiding there. Its well within Tomahawk range of the Chinese coast.
There is deep water or allied coastal waters everywhere within range of the Chinese coast. There is nowhere for the Chinese fleet to hide. And thats just from submarines.
All potential invasion harbors are in range of Tomahawk, and then there is sub-launched Harpoon, which puts all Chinese warships or transports anywhere near Taiwan at risk.
As for ASATs, that is top secret stuff. If China can shoot down US satellites, the US can shoot down theirs, and with that goes most of the antiship ICBM threat vs carrier groups.
Anyway, the Chinese missile threats vs various US systems is speculative as all this is the stuff of technological trumps, measures/countermeasures. We have no idea what each sides toys can do to the other side, nor which weapons will be effective or ineffective. We are out of the loop.
Very True, the ability to produce the weapons of war is what wins wars.
However, China would lose their #1 export market. It's doubtful they would want to start a war with us.
Nevertheless, the US needs to get prepared. There is just no excuse for not having the weapons on hand, or the industrial base to produce them.
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.