3 ms·

A naval war in 2050? I suspect that in 2050 mach 20 missiles are going to be the norm, not the exception, and point defense is essentially... pointless against

A naval war in 2050? I suspect that in 2050 mach 20 missiles are going to be the norm, not the exception, and point defense is essentially... pointless against those. It's already inadequate against today's (~mach 5) supersonic missiles. And china has literally tens of thousands with thousands of kilometers range stationed along their coast. A navy that pokes its head out is not going to last long. China's missile superiority in the (western pacific) region has long been a thorn in the US side, but there's little that can be done given that their territory is there, and the US can at best station some in allied territories nearby or put it on ships, which are easy targets. So you pretty much have to keep your ships hidden at all times, but being hidden they are going to be pretty much useless except as missile platforms.

riffraff 6y ago
what about submarines? It seems likely one of the first moves the US could do is disrupt china's economy by simply blocking their sea routes.
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  The question is, who would that harm more? March 2020 has shown us that disrupting sea routes between two continents hurts everyone.
  - solstice 6y ago
    Right now you are right. But I suspect that a lot of governments are furiously at work right now to figure out to turn back globalization a bit to lower their dependence on products being manufactured far away. So I think that the equation will change to some degree and that in turn lower interdependence of countries and therefore possibly the threshold for conflicts...
  - magicsmoke 6y ago
    Certainly not the US. One of the US's greatest geopolitical advantages is that it actually does have all the natural resources it needs in the America's. That's why calls for isolationist policies can be so enticing, because unlike for most countries dependent on oil or metals from international trade, there's no physical barrier to the US taking the option of turtling up. China would suffocate on its lack of oil as it tries to sip what it can through the straws it has to Russian oil fields on the other end of Eurasia if it ever had international oil shipping barred from it.
enaaem 6y ago
The inherent cost effectiveness of missiles is also a problem for China if they want to invade Taiwan. Taiwan has a large arsenal of anti-ship missiles that can be launched from trucks. Combined with naval mines, they can make an invasion by sea very costly.

riffraff 6y ago

what about submarines? It seems likely one of the first moves the US could do is disrupt china's economy by simply blocking their sea routes.

TeMPOraL 6y ago
The question is, who would that harm more? March 2020 has shown us that disrupting sea routes between two continents hurts everyone.
- solstice 6y ago
  Right now you are right. But I suspect that a lot of governments are furiously at work right now to figure out to turn back globalization a bit to lower their dependence on products being manufactured far away. So I think that the equation will change to some degree and that in turn lower interdependence of countries and therefore possibly the threshold for conflicts...
- magicsmoke 6y ago
  Certainly not the US. One of the US's greatest geopolitical advantages is that it actually does have all the natural resources it needs in the America's. That's why calls for isolationist policies can be so enticing, because unlike for most countries dependent on oil or metals from international trade, there's no physical barrier to the US taking the option of turtling up. China would suffocate on its lack of oil as it tries to sip what it can through the straws it has to Russian oil fields on the other end of Eurasia if it ever had international oil shipping barred from it.

enaaem 6y ago

The inherent cost effectiveness of missiles is also a problem for China if they want to invade Taiwan. Taiwan has a large arsenal of anti-ship missiles that can be launched from trucks. Combined with naval mines, they can make an invasion by sea very costly.