having said all that. The Chinese don’t really need to invade, they just need to park ships off the coast and blockade Taiwan until it’s on it’s knees.
This is a bit like the fantasy of setting up a no-fly-zone over Ukraine. A NFZ requires shooting down aircraft that try to enter the zone, i.e. NATO shooting down Russian aircraft. A blockade of Taiwan would require China to sink U.S. ships that sailed to Taiwan. A blockade is really just a euphemism for starting a war.
in 10 years or so it will have half a dozen aircraft carriers
The flippant answer to this is so what?
Well obviously I wasn't making the comment in relation to an invasion of Taiwan. I was pointing out that China is clearly determined to assert itself. A country with half a dozen aircraft carriers should not be flippantly dismissed - aircraft carriers cost astronomical amounts of money to build and maintain, very few can afford to own one let alone half a dozen. It is a measure of China's determination that it has such an aircraft carrier building programme.
aircraft carriers cost astronomical amounts of money to build and maintain,
And as others have pointed out, the arse has just fallen out of China's real estate market (a huge part of it's economy) and the largest developer propped up by the leadership has gone under with debts of $250B. I think you'd probably get evens at bookie that half of these carriers won't even get built.
China might surpass the U.S. as the dominant world economy, it’s also possible they will stagnate like Japan. At this point, it’s impossible to know.
China has had 20-25% of the World's economy for most of it's existence (in various guises) apart from say 1880-2000.
It will return to be the dominant World economic power within out lifetimes.
The Chinese don’t really need to invade, they just need to park ships off the coast and blockade Taiwan until it’s on it’s knees. But that’s not as tub thumping or headline grabbing and looks nothing at all like “wolf-warrior” diplomacy
The Chinese don't need to invade this is correct, but if they did they'll do it on their own timeline. (I don't think they've any intention of doing it any time soon anyhow. They, like the Americans, would rather the Taiwan economy and technology centres remain intact. )
Anyhow, you say the US is so experienced. The US is experienced at being the worlds bully. They also have little modern day experience of fighting a near peer. And last time the Chinese and Russians got involved in seriously backing war against the US, the US lost that war. Before that it ended up in a draw.
So, I wouldn't be so confident of their dominance in a straight up face off.
It's ridiculous conversation anyhow. Both of them need to stay the hell away from this kinda provocation.
The US is experienced at being the worlds bully.
What's the point you are making?
the US lost that war
Hang on, potential nit picking alert and without me googling to check.
Did the US not withdraw after it sort of stale mated, under terms along the lines of a ceasefire first, the north then attacked and won afterwards?
Not meant as a counter, more a piqued curiosity. I dont have much history on that one.
They also have little modern day experience of fighting a near peer.
Is it that much different to fighting a desperately weak poverty riddled country? Quite recently the US lost the Afghan war which they had been fighting for a couple of decades.
piemonster
Free Member
the US lost that warHang on, potential nit picking alert and without me googling to check.
Did the US not withdraw after it sort of stale mated, under terms along the lines of a ceasefire first, the north then attacked and won afterwards?
Not meant as a counter, more a piqued curiosity. I dont have much history on that one.
Could go into that kinda detail I guess aye. Point I'm making is that US hegemony isn't as guaranteed as some think it is.
What’s the point you are making?
Since the end of WW2 and the rise of US hegemony, all war has declined to a point that it's essentially "not a thing" any more in comparison to any other time in human history.
ernielynch
Free Member
They also have little modern day experience of fighting a near peer.Is it that much different to fighting a desperately weak poverty riddled country?
In the sense that it'll affect us badly, yes, it's much different. We might not all die as I posited yesterday. But just look at the effect the Ukraine war is having on the Energy prices. Even a small scale war between China and America would have serious global repercussions.
It should be avoided at all costs.
nickc
Full Member
What’s the point you are making?Since the end of WW2 and the rise of US hegemony, all war has declined to a point that it’s essentially “not a thing” any more in comparison to any other time in human history.
Yeah, we all get that. But US hegemony isn't alone anymore, we need to live in a world were US and Chinese hegemony can live side by side. Both their militaries are too big for anything else.
From a military perspective Russias invasion of Crimea has shown that invading a country even with a massive army, is not as easy as orthodxy said.
A well motivated defense force and relatively cheap, modern drones & antitank weapons make things much harder than many experts thought this time 6 months ago.
I dont think Xi is as ill informed as Putin, so Id expect lots of sabre rattling rather than actual war- tho sabre rattling certainly raises the liklihood of war
aircraft carriers cost astronomical amounts of money to build and maintain, very few can afford to own one let alone half a dozen. It is a measure of China’s determination that it has such an aircraft carrier building programme.
unfortunately for Aircraft carriers, drones do not cost a lot to build & maintain
just ask the Russians how vulnerable warships are to cheap drones & long range smart missiles
kimbers
Free Member
From a military perspective Russias invasion of Crimea has shown that invading a country even with a massive army, is not as easy as orthodxcy said.
A well motivated defense force and relatively cheap, modern drones & antitank weapons make things much harder than many experts thought this time 6 months ago.
I dont think Xi is as ill informed as Putin, so Id expect lots of sabre rattling rather than actual war- tho sabre rattling certainly raises the liklihood of war
I don't think there's any likelihood of war at the minute, 10-15 years down the line though is a different story. The quality of our politicians is only getting worse.
just ask the Russians how vulnerable warships are to cheap drones & long range smart missiles
Now you mention it - after the UK has just built and commissioned a couple of aircraft carriers! 😉
Although you would have thought that the UK might have learnt the lesson of smart missiles 40 years ago after the sinking of HMS Sheffield!
This isn't Korea in the 1950s. There won't be any human wave tactics; lao bai xing isn't going to take too kindly to the family's one and only son coming back in a body bag, whatever the rhetoric of the online wolf warriors.
Not having a go at you Ernie but...
Is it that much different to fighting a desperately weak poverty riddled country? Quite recently the US lost the Afghan war which they had been fighting for a couple of decades
As the US discovered 1955-1975 you can't fight an army that melts back into the population, Britain was simultaneously learning the same lesson in N. Ireland and yet the UK/US joined forces to repeat it in Afghanistan. It's the politicians rather than the military who are so often at fault
Now you mention it – after the UK has just built and commissioned a couple of aircraft carriers! 😉
The contracts were announced 15 years ago and they would have been designed years before that. Drones existed then but wouldn't have particularly been on the MoDs radar 🙂
They were designed around new gen VTOL aircraft and didn't need the steam catapults that we first demonstrated in 1950. Built with cheaper engines and without catapults meant that we could afford two carriers, the same number as China
The contracts were announced 15 years ago and they would have been designed years before that. Drones existed then but wouldn’t have particularly been on the MoDs radar
So the UK's two spanking new aircraft carriers are already obsolete. I guess that's the bad news. The good news must be that their imminent scrapping will save an astronomical fortune?
and yet the UK/US joined forces to repeat it in Afghanistan.
Why don't politicians listen to their military?
Edit: Since China currently definitely knows about drones and their capabilities why they planning to have another 3 or 4 aircraft carriers? They are not exactly cheap to build and maintain so it must surely be more than a willy waving exercise?
China is throwing a childish tantrum.'I'll hold my breath till i turn blue.....'
Tanks down the beach, posturing for nothing. Last time I checked tank rounds didnt have a range of 100 miles.
posturing for nothing
Weren't they amphibious tanks? I believe that China has modified many of her merchant ships by strengthening them to take military vehicles onboard. I would have thought that at some point amphibious tanks/fighting vehicles crews would need to have experience on beach terrain - otherwise what is the point of having amphibious vehicles?
It is obviously posturing by China but I am less convinced that their posturing means that they can't pose a threat. And presumably their posturing isn't for the likes of you and me but for the benefit of those who are more acutely aware of China's actual capabilities?
Amphibious or not tanks aren't loaded via the beach.They'll be probably lifted on, and if that being the case there will be plenty of warning.
As to experience of beach landings, they'll already have that from conducting exercises. o while the tanks are on the beach, nothing involving them is going to happen, as you say its aimed towards the Taiwanese government and military as in look at this as a scenario.
But as we've seen with the Russian military, who on paper were supposed to be 2nd top, when it all comes down to it who knows how the Chinese troops will react. The only country who we can be assured have a tested military is the US, and I reckon while China has faith in its armed forces, they'll have taken the lessons of what happened to Russia when they came up against a smaller force as in the Ukrainians.
Useful thread on Chinese military modernization.
https://twitter.com/MarkHertling/status/1555205418502209536
As to experience of beach landings, they’ll already have that from conducting exercises.
The People’s Liberation Army are associated with RO-RO ferries. It sounds like a joke, but what better way to supply additional materiel on a secure coastline https://maritime-executive.com/editorials/china-s-navy-is-exploring-ways-to-use-ferries-for-military-landings
As to experience of beach landings, they’ll already have that from conducting exercises.
I've never stormed a beach under enemy fire but I'd bet money on the reality being a bit trickier than peacetime exercises. The ease with which Ukrainian forces took out Russian tanks with portable missiles and drones means that landing craft will be equally vulnerable as they approach a beach. Then, having established a beach-head, the Chinese forces will need to resupply before they can move inland. All those logistics vessels will be vulnerable to missile attack too. To make serious progress, China will need to capture a harbour to unload heavy equipment, but any ships docking at the harbour will be extremely vulnerable to missile attack too.
China will need to capture a harbour to unload heavy equipment
The RO-RO ferries can be used with a pontoon harbour system on any secure beach, the big thing with the system is that it's never been tried in battle
The start will be radar, comms and anti-aircraft suppression followed by air superiority and then fingers-crossed. The US has stealth capability to sort the first three, does the PLA? The J20 Mighty Dragon with mach 2 and external weapons seems to be missing the point
So the UK’s two spanking new aircraft carriers are already obsolete.
That's not really how carriers work - they are part of a massive battle group with lots of escorts, many specialised in defence. If the carrier is fighting off drones then something has gone seriously wrong. Hypersonic anti-ship missiles are a bit more of a concern though.
On the other hand war between Taiwan, China, and the USA would be good for ecosystems. The massive disruption to wrld trade would cut CO2.
We are in a climate emergency after all.
but for the benefit of those who are more acutely aware of China’s actual capabilities?
I think that's the big question isn't it? No one - not even the Chinese, are in a position to know what their forces are actually capable of. Exercises are all well and good, but at the risk of repeating it, the US military make this stuff* look way easier than it actually is.
*combined and very sophisticated operations that involves many different branches of the military working together to a plan
nickc
Full MemberI think that’s the big question isn’t it? No one – not even the Chinese, are in a position to know what their forces are actually capable of
I'm willing to bet the Chinese are acutely aware they aren't there yet. I think more importantly they'll be aware that fighting a war while their energy imports are vulnerable to blockade is more than iffy. (Pretty much their reasoning for the building of the spratly islands isn't it, so they can control the malacca straits if needed.)
Hiya Vlad, hiya pal.
Yeah I think that probably right. There's an old saying that goes along the lines of; Army General is a job where you pretend to do it for ages and then get precisely one chance to see if you're actually any good at it for real*
I don't think for a minute that the Chinese want to "chance" it. I read somewhere that the Chinese Govt really sat up and took notice of the fact that Russia was banned from the SWIFT system in a moment. I think that response really took them by surprise.
*Obviously it's a bit more pithy than that, but you get the gist.
thols2
Free Member
As to experience of beach landings, they’ll already have that from conducting exercises.I’ve never stormed a beach under enemy fire but I’d bet money on the reality being a bit trickier than peacetime exercises. The ease with which Ukrainian forces took out Russian tanks with portable missiles and drones means that landing craft will be equally vulnerable as they approach a beach. Then, having established a beach-head, the Chinese forces will need to resupply before they can move inland. All those logistics vessels will be vulnerable to missile attack too. To make serious progress, China will need to capture a harbour to unload heavy equipment, but any ships docking at the harbour will be extremely vulnerable to missile attack too.
I think comparing Taiwan to Ukraine in a military sense is probably limited tbh? Geographically they are miles apart. Taiwan is mountainous, but it is also tiny in comparison, it's the size of Belgium. It would be a completely different war. Geopolitical lessons of Ukraine are more what the Chinese will be looking at rather than on the ground miltary maneuvers. The Taiwanese would be more dug in than the Ukrainians need to be, and would have little options for re-supply once the Chinese blockade the island with a million aircraft carriers and battleships.
I also wouldn't doubt that the Chinese would have total air superiority. Only way they wouldn't is if the Americans were up for a straight up fight.
I think more importantly they’ll be aware that fighting a war while their energy imports are vulnerable to blockade is more than iffy.
Not just energy
Something we can also relate too
piemonster
Free Member
I think more importantly they’ll be aware that fighting a war while their energy imports are vulnerable to blockade is more than iffy.Not just energy
Interesting, cheers will have a read.
It's wild though isn't it, the buzzword these days really is self-sufficiency. Globalisation is a busted flush by the looks of it.
It’s wild though isn’t it, the buzzword these days really is self-sufficiency. Globalisation is a busted flush by the looks of it.
Theres talking about, theres doing it, and theres not ending up like North Korea.
Globalisation is a busted flush by the looks of it.
Possibly not entirely but there is certainly a lot more interest in diversification and ensuring that you have a couple of different sources for anything important.
I think comparing Taiwan to Ukraine in a military sense is probably limited tbh?
I think in the sense that lots of small countries who border large sometimes belligerent regional powers turn themselves into "porcupine" states; Ukraine and Taiwan are similar They realise that ultimately they can't defeat the power in any conventional sense, but they can make themselves pretty unpalatable to try to swallow.
But yeah, Taiwan and Ukraine are very different otherwise
piemonster
Free MemberTheres talking about, theres doing it, and theres not ending up like North Korea.
Seems to be somewhat of a strength of the Chinese looking at the last 30 years, identify a problem and go and fix it. They aren't really the types to sit and mull over a problem.
Well, maybe. Sometimes their attempts to "fix" things dont go so well.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine
Im not really making any calls on how its going to go fir good or bad, my crystal ball fell off the dining table last week and refuses to tune in anymore.
*yes I know, outside your given timeframe
One thing to keep in mind here is that this dispute is happening because the Chinese leadership chose to have it, just like the Ukraine war happened because Putin chose to have it. Taiwan has been a separate country to China for over 70 years, it's a prosperous liberal democracy. The Taiwanese people clearly do not want to be annexed by China and re-educated to be Chinese, especially after seeing the Hong Kong democracy advocates being crushed and thrown into jail. The Chinese leadership have pushed the line that an independent Taiwan is a national humiliation for China because it served their nationalistic purposes, it gets Chinese citizens rallying around the flag. China could have just brushed the Pelosi visit aside, but they chose to react very belligerently.
Talk of China imposing a blockade is talk of China starting a war. A blockade has to be enforced and blockading Taiwan would mean being prepared to fire on ships from the U.S. or other allies of Taiwan if they tried to sail to Taiwan. Guam is a couple of hours flight time from Taiwan and has a large airbase. On top of that, the U.S. has a very powerful Pacific fleet with aircraft carriers, hundreds of advanced aircraft, and submarines. If the Chinese fired on U.S. warships, any U.S. president would have to react with military force. I'm sure the Chinese would cause a lot of damage to the U.S. Navy, but I think the U.S. would utterly destroy the Chinese surface fleet.
So, that would only happen because the Chinese leaders chose it, they would be the ones to push things to armed conflict. It's not impossible that their dreams of a Greater Chinese Empire will cloud their judgement and lead them to make a catastrophic mistake, but if they are pragmatic, they will make a lot of noise and then get back to worrying about their economic situation.
If push came to shove do you think Biden would react? he's under an awful lot of pressure over Ukraine, I expect in a similar state with China.
Taiwan has been a separate country to China for over 70 years, it’s a prosperous liberal democracy.
Pretty contentious tbh, there's only about 14 countries actually recognise them as such at the UN. Taiwan also claim to be the legitimate gov of PRC. It's not really really as simple as taking the ukraine template and applying it to Taiwan. Which is what you seem to be trying to do.
If push came to shove do you think Biden would react? he’s under an awful lot of pressure over Ukraine, I expect in a similar state with China.
I don't think any U.S. president could not support Taiwan. There's a long history of pressure from Congress on it, presidents are usually trying to tell congress to ease up, exactly as has happened with Pelosi. It doesn't mean the U.S. would declare war directly but I can't see the U.S. being deterred from supporting Taiwan with arms deliveries, intelligence and targeting information, etc.
Pretty contentious tbh, there’s only about 14 countries actually recognise them as such at the UN.
There have been two governments for over 70 years. Nothing contentious about that, it's historical fact.
