Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: spetznaz; Strategerist; AntiGuv; nuconvert

"Despite the frantic hype the PRC Navy and Air Force simply aren't that great. No ship is absolutely invulnerable, and yes, a Carrier is sinkable, but we've got plenty of those."
***It would really only take the loss of one or 2 of these and we're down $1trillion or so, plus the loss of about 10k lives, and the U.S. is likely to lose stomach for more fighting.


"And destroying one would likely end up with the PRC losing all of their naval and air power-projecting capability in the process."
***This neglects the already mentioned strategy of asymmetrical warfare. An attack would be in the form of a swarm of antiship missiles, they wouldn't care if 90% of them get shot down. The remaining 10% could get through and sink carriers (with planes & men aboard) at the loss of a few dozen pilots and planes. After that, the power-projecting capability rests with the army, which engages in its own form of swarm tactics (previously utilized in Korea), with the willingness to accept tens of millions of casualties.


The PRC is likely to be completely helpless at ASW warfare, and, thus, incapable of projecting power anywhere overseas.
***China doesn't necessarily want to project power overseas other than across the Taiwan Straits, which are well within their currently tested missile capabilities.

The assumption you make is that the chinese, if they ever engaged in warfare against the US, would meet us mano-a-mano. It is common knowledge to all that facing the US in open warfare, where all the advantages inherent in the American style of warfare (3rd generation maneuver) come into play is basically a death trap.
***The maneuver card is trumped by the tight quarters presented on such a small island as Taiwan. And the chinese could wipe out the american air advantage with hundreds of thousands of cheap, light anti-aircraft missiles such as are flooding the market after the soviets were knocked out of Afghanistan. They would aim for the same approach to antitank weapons. An army marching in force with hundreds of thousands of swarming, cheap anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons would be formidable enough to instill heavy casualties in American lines. That's all they would be aiming for, they don't have to aim to win the battle. It's kind of like the Vietnamese, who said that our efforts at winning every battle were "irrelevant".

There is no force on earth that is as adept at destroying massed formations of men/aircraft/naval resources like the US is.
***Agreed, but there is also no populace that expects more from their armed forces than the American press.

If they send their J-11s and J-10s against our F-15s and F-22s, they will lose. If they send their T-72s against our Abrams ....you get the picture.
***If the Chinese send hundreds of J10s and thousands of antiship & antiaircraft missiles, how many do you think will be shot down? This won't be J10 vs F15, it will be J10 + 30 antiaircraft + 40 antiship missiles vs F15 & 1 ship.



What the Chinese will do is follow the formula that has consistently defeated super-power/regional-power level nations. 4th generation decentralized warfare (whcih defeated the US in Lebanon and Vietnam, Russia in Afghanistan and Chechnya, the French in Algeria etc etc).
***These 2 statements are contradictory with each other: "The Chinese are not dumb enough to follow Saddam's example of hoping to match the US blow for blow."

Not even the Russians could hope to last in an open conventional war against us.
***The chinese will be going for an open UNconventional war.


261 posted on 12/04/2004 7:04:52 AM PST by Kevin OMalley (Kevin O'Malley)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies ]


To: Kevin OMalley

"***It would really only take the loss of one or 2 of these and we're down $1trillion or so, plus the loss of about 10k lives, and the U.S. is likely to lose stomach for more fighting. "

Modern aircraft carriers are extremely tough ships as the fires aboard the Oriskany(I believe), the Forrestal, and the Enterprise attest. Even the Franklin, I believe it was, suffered tremendous damage during WW2 and survived. But it's irrelevant since a crippled carrier might as well be sunk for the time it is under repairs. And if the free traders have their way the steel makers that produce the large componets for conducting the repairs will be out of business. Their equipment bought up and scrapped or shipped overseas. The ships might very well be unrepairable.

"***China doesn't necessarily want to project power overseas other than across the Taiwan Straits, which are well within their currently tested missile capabilities."

It'll be more than just the Taiwan Straits. They'll do their best to intimidate the Phillippines, Malaysia, Japan, and S. Korea into halting the supply of all military-critical components to the US. Once that happens, it won't take long before our technological edge starts to erode. Besides, the Chinese are patient and are not likely to try anything until American free trade policies have given them technological parity with the US in 20 years or so.


262 posted on 12/17/2004 9:29:28 PM PST by neutronsgalore ( Protectionism = Economic Patriotism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson