Can the US win a war with China? Shocking new simulation reveals what could happen if Taiwan is attacked

[UKBengali]

Thoughts on Carriers vs China

Here’s my take on the carrier debate with China in mind:

If the UK sells one of its carriers to Australia, it changes the balance in the Pacific big time. Imagine this:

• 2 Japanese carriers (likely 2 more coming).
• 1 Australian carrier (if they get the UK’s).
• At least 5 U.S. carriers in the region after their Pacific realignment.

That’s 8 carrier groups, each with superior jets, operational long before China even fields its planned 4-6 carriers.

Now throw in another U.S. carrier and 2-3 Indian carriers in the Indian Ocean. These sit smack on China's supply lines and chokepoints like the Malacca Strait. The result? China’s ability to project global power gets wrecked. Their dream of rivaling the U.S. Navy goes poof.

China’s stuck within the South China Sea and their infamous "Nine-Dash Line." If they venture out, they face overwhelming allied naval power, all while avoiding China’s hypersonic missiles (DF-21, DF-26). Allied carriers don't even need to enter those ranges.

• U.S. stealth refueling drones and long-range tankers make this possible. They operate from safe rear zones, letting F-35s and other jets strike PLAN forces from a distance.
• Meanwhile, PLAN aircraft, non-stealth bombers, and tankers have to fight far from their own shores. And when they run into a wall of superior allied F-35s, it’s game over.

On top of that, the U.S. is fortifying the Pacific like crazy—three new airbases in the Philippines, expanded island bases, and permanent deployments of SSNs, bombers, and Marines in Australia.

China’s strength is undeniable inside the "Nine-Dash Line." But if you blockade them outside their AA/AD zones, it’s lights out for their trade routes and naval ambitions. No need to even fight in the South China Sea or mainland China.

Then there’s the submarine game:

• PLAN’s 58 submarines are facing:
  • 22 Japanese subs.
  • 5 Australian subs (more coming via AUKUS).
  • 20+ U.S. SSNs in peacetime (and more in conflict).

Not to mention:

• 2 Philippine subs (they’re building up).
• 6 Taiwanese subs (with new additions coming).
• 14+ South Korean subs (always underestimated).

Obama’s Pacific realignment plan is still paying off, with even more U.S. submarines available if needed. Just the AUKUS-Quad submarine fleet can bottle up PLAN subs effectively.

China might dominate near its coasts, but step outside their comfort zone, and they’re surrounded. The combined carrier and sub forces of AUKUS, Quad, and allies make it nearly impossible for them to project power globally.

Major flaw in that reasoning.


2 Chinese carriers(Type-003 and Type 004) armed with 8-10 squadrons of J-35Ns would be able to hold off 5 US supercarriers with 25 squadrons of F-18/F-35 and 3 Japan/Australia carriers with 6 squadrons of F-35B - even worse than F-35C on USN carriers.

The F-35 is not designed for air supremacy and so will be at a disadvantage against J-35N. It cannot supercruise and maneuvres like a Turkey.

Also Chinese HGV ASBM will keep the carriers so far away from the Chinese coast that this will dramatically reduce F-35 sortie rates. Beidou mid-course correction and passive radar seekers on the ASBM will make going anywhere closer than 1500km to China extremely dangerous for USN.

For Taiwan scenario where USN needs to come towards China, USN nuclear submarines are practically useless and will be hunted by silent Chinese diesel electric submarines, lurking off the coast of Taiwan.

China can bypass Malacca straights by going through the water sthat Jakarta sits on, and in a war scenario it can get all the raw materials it needs from Russia and Kazakhstan.


@Han Patriot - Don't worry about jhungary as he is an infantry grunt. He knows his stuff about land warfare when he is not being biased but next to nothing about air and sea warfare.

 

[Afif]

Major flaw in that reasoning.


2 Chinese carriers(Type-003 and Type 004) armed with 8-10 squadrons of J-35Ns would be able to hold off 5 US supercarriers with 25 squadrons of F-18/F-35 and 3 Japan/Australia carriers with 6 squadrons of F-35B - even worse than F-35C on USN carriers.

Even PLA doesn't believe that.

Not to mention US silent service will very likely sink chinese carriers before any such confrontation as they have absolute under sea dominance in open ocean.

Neither in quality nor in quantity Chinese SSN fleet
comes close to USN fleet as of now.

 

[BHAN85]

The base of MAD nuclear doctrine is the invisibility of SSBN (SLBM armed submarines).

Because all the other kind of nukes can be destroyed in a first strike. Only SSBN give a opportunity for retaliation.

But we're in 21st century, SOSUS network and underwater drones are a lot cheaper than decades ago, and maybe foes SSBN are not invisible anymore.

Remember MH370 flight disappearance was useful for USA to search in the sea around China for "strange things" when China unveiled a new own SOSUS network in 2014.

Detect the position of every foe SSBN is the key for China and USA to win a war of that kind.

 

[j_hungary]

If so, that would mean Russia and North Korea are involved, both are Japan's arch enemies which have ongoing island disputes with Japan.
North Korea always shoots missiles over Japan and Russia's strategic bombers regularly circle Japan.

I am not talking about dispute

I am talking about the only way that it makes sense for China to drag US into this war is to attack US bases in Japan, and if you attack US bases in Japan that's most definitely dragging Japan into this war. Otherwise, it's just dumb to just attack US bases in Guam and Mariana (US territories) when you leave the base in Japan, which is THE CLOSEST to Taiwan, alone.

 

[j_hungary]

In World War II, the U.S. Allied forces relied on their air force to defeat the German Army. The U.S. Army equipped with M4 simply cannot compete with the German Army equipped with Tiger and Panther tanks.

The number of troops stationed on both sides on the 300-kilometer front is one million

The failure of Russia's attack on Kiev was mainly due to Ukraine's use of advanced portable weapons provided by Western allies to gain an advantage in street fighting, the poor performance of Russia's logistics and equipment, the failure of the Russian Air Force to achieve air superiority, the rigidity of Russian military command, and Russia's military suffering during the siege of major cities. Attrition, these attacks were unsuccessful. The Russian army achieved significant results only in the south.

Umm, no.

There are arguably 3 turning point in WW2 to flip the war from Germany to Allied favor.

The Battle of Starlingard, which lead to the encirclement of German Six Armies and lead to the subsequent destruction of Germany in Eastern Europe

The Battle of El Alamein, which lead to the German withdrawn from North Africa, which open the door to Italy, as well as cut off Middle East and African oil and resource to Germany

The Battle of Normandy, which lead to the German being rolled over in Western Europe. Which draw the German Troop from the East for the Ardenne assault.

All 3 were not known as Air Force contribution. The Air Force back in 1940 is largely pointless but provide basic CAS duty. Before Jet Age, Fighter and Bomber aircraft is too slow to basically trump over land base AA and you have to get close to score as missile is not a thing back then, which mean unless you have aircraft directly above you, they are not going to benefit to you as a grunt.

 

[liuzhengdong]

Umm, no.

There are arguably 3 turning point in WW2 to flip the war from Germany to Allied favor.

The Battle of Starlingard, which lead to the encirclement of German Six Armies and lead to the subsequent destruction of Germany in Eastern Europe

The Battle of El Alamein, which lead to the German withdrawn from North Africa, which open the door to Italy, as well as cut off Middle East and African oil and resource to Germany

The Battle of Normandy, which lead to the German being rolled over in Western Europe. Which draw the German Troop from the East for the Ardenne assault.

All 3 were not known as Air Force contribution. The Air Force back in 1940 is largely pointless but provide basic CAS duty. Before Jet Age, Fighter and Bomber aircraft is too slow to basically trump over land base AA and you have to get close to score as missile is not a thing back then, which mean unless you have aircraft directly above you, they are not going to benefit to you as a grunt.

Without air force cover, the US and British navies could not even reach the coast of Normandy.

Without the air force's continuous bombing of the German mainland, the production of German Tiger and Panther tanks could reach tens of thousands.

 

[j_hungary]

OOO ok from destroying coastal Chinese cities to destroying coastal cities facing Taiwan, to destroying certain assets within those cities. Your circle is getting smaller and smaller mate. HAHAHAHAHAHA. Have you come to a realization on your ignorance? Dude, There are roughly 10 large cities facing Taiwan. Most don't even have airports, most ammunitions and missiles are produced in Sichuan 1000km away, major naval yards in guangzhou, Dalian and Shanghai. So tell me wtf are you attacking? Unless you are stupid enough to just blow up buildings for fun, and if 100 AB used up all their missiles, what are you going to use to defend against our fighters and ships? I am assuming all your VLS are used for Tomahawks since you want to DESTROY our cities right? LOL. That is also assuming none of our radars, ADs are working, also assuming NONE of our naval assets are going to attack. We will just tie our hands up.

View attachment 84835

This is what I said on the VERY FIRST POST with your exchange

Dude, you have a serious case of Putin Syndrome

What do you think will happen to US city? Can you even attack any US cities outside Guam? And do you think Taiwan themselves does not have SSM that can flew over 160km and hit your coast? And do you think you can intercept them all? At the nearest point, even extended range ATACMS can reach China coast, that mean even if US is not directly involved, the Taiwanese themselves have the reach on Chinese coast already.

The only way you would be able to attack US Mainland is Nuclear, Are you suggesting to end the world because you wanted Taiwan? Xi is not as stupid as you suggest....

Dude, maybe leave the war game to the actual professional before you open your mouth?

I cannot be held responsible for you being blind and dumb and think I talk about Guangzhou

Doesn't matter termite or ants. The maximum damage radius is 20m. Our major air bases are not even located that near Taiwan for obvious reasons. Duh!

Huh? You do know even 81mm mortar have maximum damage radius of 300 meters, right?

Indirect Fire

So you are saying a missile have 5 times less the blast radius than a 40mm grenade?? Maybe I should shoot a grenade at you and you stand 25meters from where I am aiming, as you obviously think the MAXIMUM blast range for a bomb is only 20 meters...........

But then, who am I asking........

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

You were saying? LOL. A1 identifying isn't rocket science mate.

Dude, I am not saying AI IDentifying a target is not a possibility, I said REAL TIME targetting using AI is not a possibility. Which you will need because even hypersonic, 10 minutes of delay (from ID time to flight time) you are talking about a 30 square kilometers radius HEP. Good luck trying to saturate that area to blanket a carrier

And I take that you don't have an answer to my question, you know AI my arse.....

Awww, do you want to start our old debate which you lost?LOL Remember you flunked out of IT and went into some arts degree. LOL.

First of all, I am still waiting on you to answer the old question, and second of all, I never flunk out of IT and go do commerce (not art, I never have an art degree) And finally, You still have not even proven you even been to college.

I don't see no debate here, because you know shit on the topic

Definitely more than the US in one day mate. I saw a video, they still manually attach missile parts. lol

Yes, you saw a video and that must be true, carry on.

A simple houthi warning sent the insurance rates up the roof in the Mid East, and they stopped the lines for a few weeks . So the Iraqis and Afghanis could do a naval blockade? LOLOL.

Maersk will deliver to a warzone under naval blockade? My uncle works in Maersk and they stopped delivering to Ukraine when Russia blockaded Odessa. Stop talking if you don't know jacksht.

Again, you know shit in actual shipping as much as you know shit how to maintain a ship at sea, my cousin still laughing at your a$$ talking about painting a ship mid-sea with all the wave washing up on your ship.

In a war, US MSC will charter civilian ship into their rank, that's their entire Civilian Service Mariner Corp is for, to man those ship

Civil Service Mariners

It's different in Ukraine because all military traffic is blocked because Bosphorus is blocked by Turkey as per international law. You basically ship there at your own risk.

And Maresk did run blockade back in 1970 in the middle east with US navy escorting using MSC crew.

Son, I know exactly how it works. When there is a naval blockade with the threat of sinking, the insurance won't cover it, understand! No liners with their right mind will deliver to Taiwan. Even if you get one or two CIA fronts to deliver, how are you going to feed 20 mil people?

Dude, that just mean you know shit about histroy.

It doesn't affect UK blockade of Falkland, it does not affect Iran blockade of Iraq oil, it does not affect Israeli blockade of Egypt back in 1970

In fact, even Maresk resume their route in Red Sea.

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/12/25/business/maersk-red-sea-suez-canal-intl-hnk/index.html

Guess it something your "Maresk Uncle" didn't told you about??

Are you stupid or something, even one missile will punch a hole into a ship but due to ballasting tanks, it won't sink easily, you need a few more destroyed. Quick google ballast tanks. LOL. I build ships for a living mate, again don't talk about something you don't understand. You don't need to punch the same place twice dimwit.

And so you then must be familiar with DC Central counter flooding opposite ballast tank.

And lol, as my cousin said, since when people who build ship know how do DC Central?

"The U.S. officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the information, did not provide evidence to support the assessment and did not disclose what precisely was driving high Russian missile failure rates."

So Russian missiles using an outdate unprecise glonass is now compared to the worlds most precise gps system? Failiure could be anything from not hitting the target to flying off the course to exploding mid air. So a guesstimate is now the official number? Even let's say we assume 50% failure rate, 100 missile boats off the coast with 8 missiles will still hit the target with 4 missiles each, 3 missiles is enough to sink your Burket, then we use DF21 to sink your carriers, fine one is not enough, we use 3 DF21, is it enought? LOL

Again, I am using 80% hit rate in that calculation and that mean 16% you can score 8 direct hit, and are you saying DF-21 can shit with 80% accuracy?

And lol, yes 100 missile boat we will just let them approach without challenging it. Seems like the guns, missile, torpedo, helicopter in a Burke class is just for show for you.

And do you even know how missile damage work? It is thru a compression blast. Not actually destroy anything. Oh, wait, you are going to tell me you actually fire DF-21 to test the ship you build.

Which is exactly my point, you were talking as if US with a bunch of destroyers and carriers is gonna be the top dog in this conflict. When combined together, missile boats, covrvettes, frigates becomes lethal. Quantity is a quality by itself, imagine a barrage of missiles against your CBG. 1 missle boat can sink 1 Burke. Understand?

Yes, 1 missile boat can sink 1 burke, it's just that easy, I believe you, no need to submit any strategic, tactics or even remotely describe how you can do it.

Sure, why not. LOL

You think only you have subs? You know the difference between a nuclear and diesel sub is just the endurance right other than the radiation emitted So again, a diesel sub is lethal for this conflict. Why do we have to chase the US, we just fight you within a 400km max distance from our coast on the east side, 200km Southern, Northern and Western Side. The most vulnerable would be the Eastern side but all major Taiwanese cities are located on the Western side and you have a mountain range in the middle. We just need to blockade you understand near major ports. Hey you think you need to blockade every inch of the coast numb numb. You blockade key ports and landing areas. Do you even understand what a blockade is? Gosh!

View attachment 85009

Dude, first of all, endurance is a big issue with sub, because you can't track the sub, but you can track the submarine tender because you don't resupply a sub underwater. Which mean if you have to surface more frequent, you are going to get tracked easier. That's number 1

Second, nuclear sub has less moving mechanical moving part, it's consider a lot more silent than diesel sub, because for it to be silent, they need to use their electric motor, which mean less endurance (previous point) which mean you can cover less ground under stealth

What is a nuclear submarine and why would you want one?

A fast guide to the fast (and stealthy) new subs on the horizon for Australia.

www.smh.com.au

A cousin of mine is a submariner, but then you probably going to claim you build submarine next.

OMG, you blockade ports and key areas, not the whole length of the island. For the straits is even easier, your ship with their anti ship missiles and radar is set in strategic areas to cover the area, are you thinking you need to park ships side by side for the whole 200km lenght? LOLOL.

LOL do you even know how many port Taiwan have in their coast? And how about mke shift port? How about natural landing (Which is what supported Normandy invasion until cherborg come online?)

Dude, said it before, YOU CAN'T BLOCKADE A COUNTRY JUST BLOCKADING PORT. For a blockade to work, it HAS TO BE AN AREA.

How many times do I have to repeat this, no dimwit in China is going to sail in 100s of ships without first clearing off the defenses. Oww, now you know how to calculate the time taken after I told you that it takes 10 hours for US to send in reinforcements. LOLOL. You must've been thinking Okinawa is so near, Guam is so near on the map. There is already a Taiwanese report on all possible beaches PLA might land in, you don't have to repeat it like a parrot. Why do you think we have drone carriers now? You think it is for fun, it is to bust those remnant coastal bunkers mate. You are forgetting about the thousands of fishing boats we have. Imagine arming each with Javelin type missiles, drones, each can carry 25 soldiers. 25 x 1000 is 25'000 troops mate, they can sneak in on any coastal areas. Have you thought about that? Do you know every single fishing boat is registered with Chinese Naval Militia? Why do you think that's the case？They report directly to the Navy in times of war. Why do you think US is worried about China building car carriers? Even container ships can be disguised? So many unconventional ways to transport troops mate. I believe the attack will be hybrid. First wave will be missile barrage, artillery barrage from the coast, then drones and stealth fighters to attack the air defenses. Then once the AD is cleared, bombers/fighter come in, then drones. Then special forces to secure and destroy key points, then large scale amphibious assault, combined with civillian forces. That does not include our fifth column in Taiwan, the 20% unification supporters, our sleeper cells in the Taiwanese military who swore to uphold the ROC aka Republic of CHINA.

Are you for real? First you said "No dimwit in China is going to sail 100s of ship without first clearing off the defense"

Then you start blasting about there are thousand of fishing boat that can carruy 25 soldier each with 25 drone and storm the defense.........

First of all. Sure, that would work, until you need to think where you are going to disembark with those 1000 fishing boat. There are only 2 type of coastal ground, flat ground or raised ground, for flat ground such as beach, you can't get close or you are going to round aground with contagious shelf and/or any undersea obstacle. Most fishing boat have 5 to 10 feet draft and that's with 5 fisherman and maybe a ton of fish, not 25 soldier each loaded with hundred of kilogram equipment. You are going to get stranded about 100-200 meters away from the beach head. If it is a serviced ground, it mean you have to have gangway to access. How are you going to unload everything in that 1000 boats? And finally, 25000 men is not really a big number, you are talking about 2 division worth of men, this get you maybe 2 points of the ENTIRE COAST LINE. Each division can fight in a 30km front line, and from Taipei to Tainan, it's 307 km. You are going to get in what we call a "Hard Time" if you just going to land 2 division of men in
And lol, you can't disguise a cargoship into a transport, again, you are going to need proper way to disembark. If you can use that car carrier, you ALREADY have the coast.

And lol, I am not even wanting to comment on your "Battle Plan" which is absurd, first of all, 25000 men first wave and you think you can drop artillery (which is outside the range of even EX Base Bleed round) can remove all the AD. Which in itself is NOT going to be in the coast to begin with, is virtually impossible. Russian march that many men toward Hostomel, with a friggin air assualt and still can''t defeat the AD for just 1 airport and 1 city. And you think you can get the entire Taiwanese Coast

Second, lol, 20% supporter of Chinese? lol. For real? Even Taliban support in Afghanistan population is not over 9%........And you think if China invades 20% of Taiwanese is going to be your sleeper agent...........dude, why not 40? Why not 80% of Taiwanese would support China, game over, war don't even start, GG and Good night.

We can't shoot artillery over Taiwan? You do know MLRS is a type of artillery, right? LOL
Our MLRS is 400km range laser guided with Beidou. Those are cheap rockets when compared to cruise missiles. Read above on the sequence. Again, we can outproduce anybody on earth, this is war exactly like Ukraine, it depends on the the weapons production rate and I believe US will cheer on exactly like in Ukraine. You guys are cheerleaders afterall.

MLRS have a range of 80-120km, if you are talking about missile like ATACMS, those aren't artillery, those are ballistic missile. You can't shoot a GMLRS over 400km..........

What minefield? A beach with mines is not a minefield? To destroy our CITIES, you don't have to land your troops? OOO yah, your definition got smaller and smaller, it is now destroying some targets in a city. hahahahahahaha. Yes, only Taiwan is prepared and we are not? Until a few post ago, I bet you didn't even know how to calculate nautical travel times. LOL, am I right?

Tell me where did I Even say US need to invade China?

Taiwan is a near peer? NEAR PEER? FFS, WHAT DO YOU SMOKE!!! OMG, your stupidity amazed me. Explain to me how Taiwan is a near peer.

Russia got attack near Crimea off the coast of Ukraine. You think you can send your speedboat with 1 tonne of explosive 200km from the coast genius? Yes and why not, you think they can fly in from Poland like in Ukraine? hhahahaha. Naha air base is 650km from Taipei FFS.

Dude.....Are you for real?

Can you not distinguish the 2 separate term "Peer Adversary" and "Near Peer Adversary"?

US and China are peer adversary, similar outlook and similar combat power, with similar level of technology. RAND defined Russia as no longer a peer to the US in this article, only China is a peer

https://www.rand.org/pubs/perspectives/PE310.html

Near peer is having capability to challenge you as an adversary, it may not share the same combat power or technological level to challenge you but it will still pose a significant risk to your current operation.

The DoD has classified 5 near peer threat China (again, I would say it is a peer), Russia, Iran, North Korea and Violent Terrorist Organisation in the article TRADOC LPD discusses the Army of 2030 and its near-peer adversaries

TRADOC LPD discusses the Army of 2030 and its near-peer adversaries

The U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command hosted another Leader Professional Development webinar on June 18, 2024.The webinar, featuring Maj. Gen. Sc...

www.army.mil

So, you tell me whether or not China should see Taiwan as near peer.

I am not sure how your logics work, how are you going to defend Taiwan if you are OUT of the STRAITS? How are you going to DESTROY our cities if you are not in the STRAITS? Why do you think in 1996, 2 carriers were IN THE STRAITS? And now your not even in the straits when we did the recent blockade? Your antiship missiles can fly through mountain ranges? hahahahahahahaha

How? so if I position my carrier in East of Taiwan, they can't cover the ground and air boundary of Taiwan? Is there some sort of forcefield stopping US F-35 or ballistic missile sub to fire from one end of Taiwanese Coast to the other? The width of Taiwan is not 1000 km, it's 120km, a ship ported at Naha in Okinawa can fire a Black II BGM-109 and hit China as it is 840km from Naha to Fuzhou......so yes, how US can strike China without getting into Taiwan Strait indeed? I don't know, don't ask me lol



(Block II Tomahawk have a range of 1600 mile, or 2500 km)

Tomahawk missile - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And who said you need air force and navy to strike China? Oh, Land base Harpoon system or HIMAR must not actually exist then. I mean Ukraine have no ship at all that can fire anti-ship missile into mountain range, ask them how they sink 6 Russian battleship?

Dude, you are funny, so yes, I agree hahahahahahhha

Eh, you were saying you could DESTROY our COASTAL CITIES. Your tone is different now eh. So now you realise your absurdity. Either end of our coast is still 200km from our coast well within ASM and AD cover genius.

Again, go back to the first section, what did I say?

You are dumb and blind and can't understand what I said by 160km is your business, not mine,.

Hey dude, do you have a comprehension problem? Proper logistic is not a WAITING game, you prepare well before the stocks deplete genius. Who the heck waits until their stocks to deplete before producing new shit? LOL. Keep twisting, caught you with your pants down multiple times now.

Oh My God, you are really thick aren't you?

You don't just make stuff out of thin air, it takes times and resource to make anything, while you don't wait until you have your equipment depleted, but the issue is not when you start making those stuff, but rather how fast things is going to used up.

Again, even if you can shorten the time to make a carrier from 4 years to 1. You still can't lose that carrier within that year, becuase once you did you will have it without until the new one is being made. Same with fighter aircraft, same with tanks, same with missile, same with munition and all, and the problem is, YOU ALWAYS USE IT QUICKER than you build them, again, look at Russia, their production rate has increase from 36 tanks build a month to 110 (their claim) but they are still using old T-62 because they lose more than 110 tanks a month, otherwise the new build would have been suffice to replace the loss, but this is not the case here. You can increase your production, you can build them immediately, but if you are expecting a heavy fight, it's not going to work. And that is before any disruption happen to your production capability, which again, US is going to use other asset to close off Middle East and Singapore and China will have issue keeping the production base, again, China need 76 million tons of Aluminium import a year(Go back to my post with that noob @Nuffle talking about China being number 3 aluminium producer in the world), how are you going to get it if the US is shutting off Suez Canal or Malacca Strait and cutting off supply from Africa, and how do you purpose China to challenge it?

You said, you can attack our cities and detroy it. So going by your logic, why arent you attacking Moscow? Or St P? Ukraine is getting invaded as we speak mate, why so chicken? LOL

Again, I can rob a bank, I have a gun at home, does that mean I have to rob it??

What kind of logic are you operating on? Since I can do it, I must?

Who said it was a cake walk, you are the one talking as if US stronk and can destroy our cities and Navy and shit like that. Now you start to realise it aint the case right?

Now to prevent you from veering off course:

1) Explain to me how Taiwan is a near peer?
2) Explain to me how you can destroy our strategic targets when our major military assets are not even near the Fujian coast for the obvious reasons?
3) How is US going to sustain the war when Okinawa is 10 hours away, 650kms away.
4) How is Taiwan going to get supplies when 70% of their food is imported? With only 3 nuke plants, once LNG is cut, they are as good as fked.

Go abck and read all the point, I got nothing more to say

 

[j_hungary]

Without air force cover, the US and British navies could not even reach the coast of Normandy.

Without the air force's continuous bombing of the German mainland, the production of German Tiger and Panther tanks could reach tens of thousands.

huh??

First of all, Naval threat from Germany is mostly from Submarine, something Aircraft can't help.....I mean, when you think of German navy, you don't think about their cruiser Prince Eugen or battle cruiser Scharnhorst, you think about U-Boat............

Second of all, the German were never able to make tens of thousand of tigers and panthers, they don't lack the factory, they lack the resource......

 

[Mero]

Without air force cover, the US and British navies could not even reach the coast of Normandy.

Without the air force's continuous bombing of the German mainland, the production of German Tiger and Panther tanks could reach tens of thousands.

Production of J-20s, J-35s, attack and ballistic subs and missiles/missile defense should vastly increase for China. Those are the areas that win Pacific island and distance wars. Artillery wins land wars such as Russia vs Ukraine.

 

[liuzhengdong]

huh??

First of all, Naval threat from Germany is mostly from Submarine, something Aircraft can't help.....I mean, when you think of German navy, you don't think about their cruiser Prince Eugen or battle cruiser Scharnhorst, you think about U-Boat............

Second of all, the German were never able to make tens of thousand of tigers and panthers, they don't lack the factory, they lack the resource......

Without the cover of the air force, the Allied landing fleet had to withstand thousands of air raids by the German land-based air force, referring to the Pacific War.

German submarines were unable to break through the anti-submarine network of sonar-equipped destroyers and anti-submarine aircraft. From January 1942 to April 1943, German arms industry grew by an average of 5.5 per cent per month and by summer 1943, the systematic attack against German industry by Allied bombers brought the increase in armaments production from May 1943 to March 1944 to a halt.[17] At the ministerial meeting in January 1945, Albert Speer noted that, since the intensification of the bombing began, 35 per cent fewer tanks, 31 per cent fewer aircraft and 42 per cent fewer lorries were produced than planned because of the bombing. The German economy had to switch vast amount of resources away from equipment for the fighting fronts and assign them instead to combat the bombing threat. [18] The intensification of night bombing by the RAF and daylight attacks by the USAAF added to the destruction of a major part of German industries and cities, which caused the Nazi economy to collapse in the winter of 1944–45. By this time, the Allied armies had reached the German border and the strategic campaign became fused with the tactical battles over the front. The air campaign continued until April 1945, when the last strategic bombing missions were flown and it ended upon the German unconditional surrender on 9 May.

 

[j_hungary]

Without the cover of the air force, the Allied landing fleet had to withstand thousands of air raids by the German land-based air force, referring to the Pacific War.

It's completely different, because IJN heavily rely on Naval Aviation, and land base bomber (like Betty Bomber and Judy Bomber) the German don't have Naval Aviation, in fact, the only Carrier the German have is Graf Zeppelin, which was build in 1939 and were never finished.

Ground base aviation have a very bad track record with ship because pilot in the air force don't generally trained with ship borne operation, Ground Base aviation are for Combat Air Patrol and CAS once the landing force landed. Look at how many ship the USAAF killed during the entire WW2..

German submarines were unable to break through the anti-submarine network of sonar-equipped destroyers and anti-submarine aircraft. From January 1942 to April 1943, German arms industry grew by an average of 5.5 per cent per month and by summer 1943, the systematic attack against German industry by Allied bombers brought the increase in armaments production from May 1943 to March 1944 to a halt.[17] At the ministerial meeting in January 1945, Albert Speer noted that, since the intensification of the bombing began, 35 per cent fewer tanks, 31 per cent fewer aircraft and 42 per cent fewer lorries were produced than planned because of the bombing. The German economy had to switch vast amount of resources away from equipment for the fighting fronts and assign them instead to combat the bombing threat. [18] The intensification of night bombing by the RAF and daylight attacks by the USAAF added to the destruction of a major part of German industries and cities, which caused the Nazi economy to collapse in the winter of 1944–45. By this time, the Allied armies had reached the German border and the strategic campaign became fused with the tactical battles over the front. The air campaign continued until April 1945, when the last strategic bombing missions were flown and it ended upon the German unconditional surrender on 9 May.

You do know this is opposite to what you said before, right? And this is basically explaining my point, the reason why German Production decreased is not because Allied Bombing of Germany, but Germany lacked the resource to produce anything.

Once the Allied landed in Western Europe, that is a different game. But the battle itself is not dictated on the Air Force.

 

[100%_Guest]

Even PLA doesn't believe that.

Not to mention US silent service will very likely sink chinese carriers before any such confrontation as they have absolute under sea dominance in open ocean.

Neither in quality nor in quantity Chinese SSN fleet
comes close to USN fleet as of now.

how do you know? as a adviser to Hassanah....she is gone

 

[100%_Guest]

It cannot supercruise and maneuvres like a Turkey.

but it can dive and swin free style. lemon do floats on water. cn should "steal" this tech

 

[liuzhengdong]

It's completely different, because IJN heavily rely on Naval Aviation, and land base bomber (like Betty Bomber and Judy Bomber) the German don't have Naval Aviation, in fact, the only Carrier the German have is Graf Zeppelin, which was build in 1939 and were never finished.

Ground base aviation have a very bad track record with ship because pilot in the air force don't generally trained with ship borne operation, Ground Base aviation are for Combat Air Patrol and CAS once the landing force landed. Look at how many ship the USAAF killed during the entire WW2..




You do know this is opposite to what you said before, right? And this is basically explaining my point, the reason why German Production decreased is not because Allied Bombing of Germany, but Germany lacked the resource to produce anything.

Once the Allied landed in Western Europe, that is a different game. But the battle itself is not dictated on the Air Force.

I'm talking to you about the German land-based air force, not the German naval aviation，Dive bombers can also sink ships，Without the Allied Air Force bombing the German reinforcements, German reinforcements would continue to flow into Normandy.

Please understand this sentence

t the ministerial meeting in January 1945, Albert Speer noted that, since the intensification of the bombing began, 35 per cent fewer tanks, 31 per cent fewer aircraft and 42 per cent fewer lorries were produced than planned because of the bombing. The German economy had to switch vast amount of resources away from equipment for the fighting fronts and assign them instead to combat the bombing threat.

 

[Mero]

The first move China should make is against the dollar. Go to a gold/silver backed Yuan. Get nations to support international trade in gold and silver, not dollars. Don't go cashless, cashless/digital is the agenda of the Anglos. Keep paper money, Chinese invented paper money, that is your invention. Don't replace it for Anglo digital currencies.

If Trump moves against China economically for going to gold and or silver, then threaten to invade Taiwan. Use the Taiwan invasion as a leverage to support other means to defeat the Anglos. Definitely defeat the Anglos. And use a Taiwan invasion as part of that. Not the only thing.

Holy smokes, the above post aged well and it is only two days old.

Trump threatens 100% tariff on the BRIC bloc of nations if they act to undermine US dollar​

MSN

The one thing the US fears is the rejection of the US dollar and also fears the rejection of the Trump plan of the dollar replacement - bitcoin.

If China goes to gold and silver for money, and gets their BRICS nations to support this, it ends the US dollar Empire, and America gets poorer and bankrupt. It would result in a chain reaction if gold and silver go global as money that would crash the US financial empire. This is the nightmare scenario for the US, or else Trump would not be threatening 100% tariffs.

That is why I suggest if China wants to invade Taiwan, use it as leverage after going to a gold backed Yuan. If Trump slaps China with 100% tariffs, then threaten to invade Taiwan if the US does not reduce the tariffs.