TO TAKE TAIWAN, FIRST KILL A CARRIER

The Jamestown Foundation ^ | July 8, 2002 | Richard D. Fisher, Jr.

[color_tear]

...and all of the enlisted stay for only a year. God knows how they are trained when outdoor trainng has to be stopped if the temperature is above 35 C.

Where did you get this information? That is not correct. Navy & Airforce enlisted are required to stay 3 years because of the nature of technology training. Army enlisted stay for 2 years and special forces stay for 3 years.

When I was in the Army there we never were stopped because of the hot weather.

I participated couple war games with Army reserves, 10 day training for those reserves. I was totally amazed by their ability to pick up so quick and fight so well even with some had beer bellies.

[section9]

1) You assume China wants to take Taiwan in order to drive the US out.

A correct assumption. The Taiwanese will not declare independence first. China will attempt to invade at a time of its own choosing. China wants its place in the Sun, a la Wilhelmine Germany in the post-Bismarck era. To attain this manifest destiny of theirs, they must of needs be confront the Americans.

2) You assume China believes Japan will be neutral.

I believe that the Chinese will try to use diplomacy to neutralize Japan, but that Japan, recognizing its vital commercial and national interests do not lie with becoming a "tribute kingdom" of the Forbidden City, will act militarily in its own defense.

3) You assume China wants take Taiwan in order to the sea lanes.

My assumption is correct. Control of the Taiwan strait gives China sway over the sea lanes which lie between Indonesia and Japan. Neutralization of Japanese power is a long term Chinese strategic goal. It would be your goal too if you had a national memory of millions of your countrymen dying at the hands of the Imperial Japanese Army.

The PLA will never attack first before they are attacked by the US. The question is: what will the US do to militarily assist Taiwan if China attacks Taiwan? Does the US have to attack the Chinese forces first?

Yes, they will. I cite Korea as a historical example. The United States assumed, incorrectly, the China would not attack unless attack first. The Chinese attacked in force and with relish, forcing Eighth Army out of North Korea and MacArthur into retirement.

A few other items:

They can take Penghui first as the springboard. The island sits in the middle of the strait.

Which sort of gives the whole game away, eh? If you're going to take Taiwan, you don't exactly advertise it on Broadway by taking Penghui, now do you?

They don't have to resort to ground forces to destroy the communications systems. Missiles and fight bombers can get the job done.

Absolute bollocks. What about Taiwan's underground facilities? Airbases? Communications centers and redundant stations? Sorry, if you're the Chinese, you've got to have maximum shock, from the getgo. Gotta send in the airborne. This does not mean that you don't use ALCM's and fighter aircraft.

Have you ever studied the PLA's battle for Hainan Island in 1950 when the PLA had no navy and air force?

No, I have not. Question, however: did the PLA's opponents have cruise missiles and nuclear submarines? I didn't think so.

The fact is, the Chinese will have to move the equivalent of a full field army across the straits. That will be an enormous undertaking. You can't land on beaches with cargo ships. You need assault boats. They provide targets.

"Decisive battle" is your assumption, not Chinese way of thinking. Comparing Japan who has extremely limited resouces in a small island to China doesn't make sense.

Then why do they insist on building up the blue ocean version of their navy to kill carriers if not to wage the decisive battle? China is primarily a land power. She has not been a maritime power since the 15th Century. However, she must find a way to engage the U.S. Navy in proximity to the Chinese homeland that works to China's advantage.

I point out that China's need to get troops across the Strait provides the seeds of her own defeat.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[Lake]

>>When I was in the Army there we never were stopped because of the hot weather.

When YOU were in the army? I was talking about NOW. Those kids can't see the targets whe it rains because 90% of them are near-sighted and have to wear glasses. Their parents are worried about the "human rights" of thier spoiled kids. Do you know how the PLA soldiers are trained? Toguher than the Imperial Japanese army in WWII.

[color_tear]

They can take Penghui first as the springboard. The island sits in the middle of the strait.

Which sort of gives the whole game away, eh? If you're going to take Taiwan, you don't exactly advertise it on Broadway by taking Penghui, now do you?

How BIG an operation does PLA needs to accomplish this? At the same time, can they have strong enough power to make sure "Kin man" and "Ma Chu" will not attack China?

Always control those two islands first but that'll take months or years and BIG MONEY, then for what? As soon as those 2 islands are attacked, the FREE world will take action.

[Lake]

>>A correct assumption. The Taiwanese will not declare independence first.

I doubt. I can't completely rule it out.

>>China will attempt to invade at a time of its own choosing.

That's true. The PLA's doctrine is to fight a war I choose in a place I choose in a manner I chooose at the time I choose.

>>To attain this manifest destiny of theirs, they must of needs be confront the Americans.

Confrontation doesn't neccessarily means war.

>>I believe that the Chinese will try to use diplomacy to neutralize Japan, but that Japan, recognizing its vital commercial and national interests do not lie with becoming a "tribute kingdom" of the Forbidden City, will act militarily in its own defense.

Your above statement implied another two assumptions: 1)"the Chinese will try to use diplomacy to neutralize Japan" means Japan "becoming a "tribute kingdom" of the Forbidden City". 2)Japan has to "act militarily" to China's use of diplomacy. Neither of them is valid.

>>Control of the Taiwan strait gives China sway over the sea lanes which lie between Indonesia and Japan.

Control of Taiwan strait is not a problem at all. There had been no merchant ship passing through the strait for 30 years until China declared the elimination of tension in Taiwan strait in1980. Taiwan strait is not that important to Japan.

>>Neutralization of Japanese power is a long term Chinese strategic goal. It would be your goal too if you had a national memory of millions of your countrymen dying at the hands of the Imperial Japanese Army.

What China fears is the possibility that Japan may invade China in the future. China has enough resources for its economy while Japan sits on a small island with limited resources and has repeatedly invaded China and Korea in the history. Chinese don't want Japan to pay for its crimes with millions of Japanese lives. Chinese want to make sure that there won't be another millions of Chinese lives lost to the Japanese army in the future.

>>The United States assumed, incorrectly, the China would not attack unless attack first. The Chinese attacked in force and with relish, forcing Eighth Army out of North Korea and MacArthur into retirement.

Not true.

1)The US bombed the Chinese border cities in Manchuria to prevent the North Korean troops from escaping to China, (maybe not intentionally). Therefore the US did attack China first.

2)China had repeatedly warned the US that the UN forces, excluding South Korean forces, crossing the 38 parallel would pose a serious threat to China's security and the advance to the Yalu river would be viewed as a direct attack on China. Although the US didn't have the plan to invade Manchuria, the recent disclosed Chinese documents indicated that it was the fear of the US invasion that lead to Mao's decision of sending troops to Korea. The majority of the Chiense leadership were opposed to the military action, but Mao said it was better to fight a war in Korea than in our own land.

>>If you're going to take Taiwan, you don't exactly advertise it on Broadway by taking Penghui, now do you?

I told you to learn from the history. Penghui has been the springboard for taking Taiwan many times in the Chinese history and Penghui is actually not a defensible island.

>>What about Taiwan's underground facilities? Airbases? Communications centers and redundant stations?

They mean little if all runways and radar stations are destroyed.

>>Gotta send in the airborne.

No airborne troops will be sent except for a few special forces to take port facilities. You don't expect to see thousands of parachutes coming down above your head so that you can shoot them like birds. The PLA never uses unproven tactics. Don't expect the PLA to fight in the American way.

>>The fact is, the Chinese will have to move the equivalent of a full field army across the straits.

My number will far more than that. Quantity superiority is always the PLA's doctrine. The first landing convoy will involve at least 200,000 troops, 4 field armies. The second will be 300,000.

>>That will be an enormous undertaking. You can't land on beaches with cargo ships.

You don't have to unload on beaches if you capture the coastal ports.

You need assault boats. They provide targets.

>>Then why do they insist on building up the blue ocean version of their navy to kill carriers if not to wage the decisive battle?

Chian doesn't need blue water nay to kill a carrier. Sunb and bombers with anti-ship missles can work just as well if the US fleet comes close to taiwan strait. The objective is not to defeat the US but to provide cover for the attack on Taiwan. So there will be no decisive battle between China and the US.

[Lake]

>>can they have strong enough power to make sure "Kin man" and "Ma Chu" will not attack China?

Artillery fire will be enough to silence the two islands.

[color_tear]

Won't work. PLA tried and failed many times.
Those 2 fortresses were rebuilt to be totally under ground.
Many innocent civilians will be killed by those fires and they are not Taiwanese.

[rmlew]

We have a defense: The Ticonderoga and Arleigh Burkes with Aegis CIC systems and SM2s. I can't imagine a US CVBG without 4 of these (2CG, 2DDG) plus other missle firing ships.

I do think that we need to get moving on upgrading anti-missle systems on our major ships. I question the effectivess of the Seasparrow in taking out a Sunburn. The Us is beginning to deploy Rolling Airframe Missles (RAM's a joint venture between the US and Germany) to supplement the Seasparrow. The Israeli Barak is another good alternative.

[rmlew]

We don't have 50 to 60 Nuclear armed subs. Under the START or SALT treaties, the US gave us Sub launched nuclear cruise missles. (the Tomahawk-N).
The only subs that can launch nuclear attacks are those with the Trident C-4 and D-5 missles. These are our 18 Ohio clas SLBM's. However, 4 of these are being retired from teh nuke force according to treaty terms. We have 14 Ohio SLBM's with D-5 missles.
There has been some talk about converting the remaining 4 Ohios to carry large numbers of tomahawks, making them SSGN's.

[rmlew]

6 Sunburns are supposed to get through 4 Aegis/Sm-2 ships and the Sparrow, RAM, and Phalanx CIWS's?

[gcruse]

 
6 Sunburns are supposed to get through 4 Aegis/Sm-2 ships
and the Sparrow, RAM, and Phalanx CIWS's?

Yes.  They are designed to defeat Aegis.  Coming in
at supersonic speeds just inches above the water.
Even if Phalanx hits them, the pieces still arrive
on target.  But, this if is very big.

Additionally, Yakhont and Sunburn can be launched
from sea, air, and shore.  The shore launchers are highly
mobile.  Used in the Persian Gulf and with their speed
and range, these missiles can deny the Gulf fleet
use of the gulf.

There are a number of good sites on the web to
research this.  Googling Yakhont will pull them up.

[rmlew]

1. Is the problem with Aegis array that it cannot detect the missle or that it can't react fast enough?

2. We really do need a replacement for the Harpoon.

[Rebelbase]

"But, trying to keep up with us conventionally would bankrupt them just as it did the Soviet Union"

I see a huge difference between the Soviet and Chinese military build-ups. The Soviets exported crap, mainly to its allies, which were dirt poor. China exports quality products to first world countries and earns hard currency from the wonderful marketing stratagies of Target, Kmart, Walmart, etc.

We, the American people are funding this Chinese military build-up. The very missle or super cavitating torpedo that eventually sinks a U.S. Navy carrier might end up being totally funded by the Walmart in mine or your's hometown.

[PhilDragoo]

At the time of the bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade, I thought Clinton was handing Jiang the gift of a foreign devil.

The downing of the F-117 during that odd conflict was said to indicate strides in antistealth technology (discounted by some), and the wreckage was said to have been delivered for the ingestion of reverse-engineering beetles. (Many said, rots of ruck.)

When the PLA jet jockey ran his fighter through the Cuisineart, I, like many on Free Republic, emailed the Chinese Embassy in New York in protest. I received thereafter a series of pings from Chinese technical institutes.

As Russia has publicly withdrawn from its Lourdes signals intelligence installation in Cuba, China has filled the void with its own. Particulars are out; I reposted a NewsMax item. The China Reform Monitor reported the installation had recently spoofed New York air traffic control into thinking it was U.S. military.

Unrestricted Warfare, by Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui (Beijing: PLA Literature and Arts Publishing House, February 1999) published as it was during the Kosovo thing, presents the musings of a pair of PLA officers as to a perceived array of Achilles' heels.

Certainly the venom and the will to strike the great hegemon exists in Beijing, if only as a standard around which to unite the quarreling masses.

Per recent reports, PRC, Inc. is the premier book-cooker, exaggerating growth and concealing arms expenditures.

It is the greatest customer of Russia's Arms 'R' Us, and certainly hopes to parley its new four-count-em-four Sovremennys, eight Kilos, Su-30's into a lethal force.

It wants what Bernstein and Munro said in 1997, The Coming Conflict With China, us out of Asia, reuninfied Korea, absorbed Taiwan and neutralized Japan.

It's opportunistic enough to use its Axis of Evil Muppets, North Korea, Iran and Iraq, to occupy us while it has a free(er) hand to bully Taiwan.

Its incipient regime change, with rumors that Jiang won't yield to Hu, and its widespread economic dissatisfaction (riots), and deeper economic woes may destabilize its decisions.

Perhaps something rash will be done.

Or a web already laid used to effect.

Global Crossing, established thanks to Anne Bingaman (paid two million), wife to Jeff Bingaman (whose Commission employed Charlie Trie), made Terry Clinton McAuliffe a multimillionaire before falling into Li Kashing's lap with fiber optic cables to tap for economic and military intelligence.

Russian-Chinese military games against a third power are scheduled.

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty--hence Free Republic, where the clash of ideas keeps the sword's edge keen.

Here the little gray cells are of the finest.

[gcruse]

From what I can understand, the missile launches on a upward trajectory, then loops down to just above sea level, levels out
and goes for the target faster than the speed of sound. Countermeasures are like hitting a bullet with another bullet. Know what is really aggravating? Russia offered to sell Clinton some to use as drones, target practice, whatever and Clinton turned them down. And don't forget supercavitating torpedoes...

[TheLooseThread]

Arm China - Buy a Toy.

[Paulus Invictus]

Of course they are our friends! Wal-Mart says it is so, and we always believe that Akansan behemoth that sends mega dollars to the Chicoms every day so they can build the advanced military stuff. Much of the new armanent is based upon secret plans and designs sent to them by the Felon, Loran, Motorola and other friendly companies in exchange for campaign cash etc..

As for a response to the Chicoms taking out one of our carriers, it would be a major mistake and China would join the stone age, (unless, of course, a RAT like Gore or worse like Hitlery Klintoon were to be in charge in 2008 when they hit us, then the RAT prez would say we deserve it and would not retaliate).

[TheLooseThread]

"I have great trouble with any of these 'Yellow Peril' type articles... the PRC leadership are not stupid or ignorant"

They are, however, very arrogant. That is why they will attack Taiwan.

I see history recording two wars in a relativly short time. The first will be called "The First Battle of Taiwan" and will say the the United States won. Chinese arrogance will cause them to overestimate their capabilities. This is the battle I see you talking about.

But China will not stop there. Their arrogance will cause them to stay focused on taking Taiwan. They will put all their energies into it.

I'm always amazed when looking back at previous wars how obvious it was who was going to win ahead of time. All your have to do is look at the strategic level. The South could never have won the Civil War for many strategic reasons. They gave it a good try but it was impossible from the start.

The history book will say the same thing about the second war called "The Second Battle of Taiwan". It will record how it was actually obvious that China would win. "After all", they will say, "China had 14,000 million people while the United States had 300 million. The Chinese economy had been brought up to modern capabilities. The combination of a modern economy with superior numbers made the war's conclusion set from the beginning. The American's gave it a good effort, but it was impossible for them to win from the start"

"The Second Battle of Taiwan" will record the transfer of world dominance from America to China.

[gcruse]

As for a response to the Chicoms taking out one of our
carriers, it would be a major mistake and China would join the stone
age

Do you think we can do that with conventional weaponry?
It is not necessary for supersonic antiship missiles or
supercavitating torpedoes to be nuclear in order for
them to take out a carrier.

I don't see the US making the first nuclear strike
against the PRC.  Without that, your scenario
is hard to imagine.  We certainly could not invade
and occupy China.

[LibKill]

Greetings China;

Don't even think about going there.

If you don't believe me please consult the Germans and the Japanese.

Especially the Japanese.