4 ms·

These weapons are intended to eliminate or greatly reduce the main strength of the US which is it’s power projection. These won’t be used against cities but th

These weapons are intended to eliminate or greatly reduce the main strength of the US which is it’s power projection. These won’t be used against cities but they can take out naval groups and any regional bases the US has. If China gets to the point where they can effectively contain US power projection they would be able to operate in their region and much of the Asia Pacific without much of a challenge. Challenging the US blue water capability and thus its power projection with symmetric means is a near fools errand. This is why China is focusing heavily on “carrier killers” and on slow creep of artificial islands that would allow them to project their own power without matching the US in terms of naval assets not to mention naval experience.

yread 5y ago
Do Chinese planners expect to destroy a carrier group (~7000 soldiers) and not trigger a nuclear war?
- nvelty 5y ago
  If China can take out CSGs with pretty much no effective counter measures, will the US be willing to send carriers to support Taiwan during/after a Chinese invasion? It's all a game of brinkmanship - might be time for US/China to dig out the old Cold War doctrines on how to win a conventional war without winning so hard the other side feels the need to start slinging nukes.
- mike-cardwell 5y ago
  I wouldn't expect an attack on a carrier group to necessarily lead to all out nuclear War. Seems more likely it would lead to a similar response, to a similarly sized and themed target, if only to save face and demonstrate that an equal response to such attacks will happen. What's the US going to do? Attack Chinese cities? And then watch their own cities burn?
- dogma1138 5y ago
  The US isn’t insane, it pretty much wrote the book on proportional response there is no way that they would escalate from an attack on a military target to glassing civilian population centers. No US president would issue such an order and even if they would the chiefs of staff would almost most likely disobey it.
  - FartyMcFarter 5y ago
    > No US president would issue such an order I might have believed you some years ago. If the US can elect Trump, it can definitely elect someone who would do that.

yread 5y ago

Do Chinese planners expect to destroy a carrier group (~7000 soldiers) and not trigger a nuclear war?

nvelty 5y ago
If China can take out CSGs with pretty much no effective counter measures, will the US be willing to send carriers to support Taiwan during/after a Chinese invasion? It's all a game of brinkmanship - might be time for US/China to dig out the old Cold War doctrines on how to win a conventional war without winning so hard the other side feels the need to start slinging nukes.
mike-cardwell 5y ago
I wouldn't expect an attack on a carrier group to necessarily lead to all out nuclear War. Seems more likely it would lead to a similar response, to a similarly sized and themed target, if only to save face and demonstrate that an equal response to such attacks will happen. What's the US going to do? Attack Chinese cities? And then watch their own cities burn?
dogma1138 5y ago
The US isn’t insane, it pretty much wrote the book on proportional response there is no way that they would escalate from an attack on a military target to glassing civilian population centers. No US president would issue such an order and even if they would the chiefs of staff would almost most likely disobey it.
- FartyMcFarter 5y ago
  > No US president would issue such an order I might have believed you some years ago. If the US can elect Trump, it can definitely elect someone who would do that.