5 ms·

There is zero chance of China invading the US or vice versa. But this issue isn't about a ground war in either place, it's about a war in some 3rd place. It's

There is zero chance of China invading the US or vice versa. But this issue isn't about a ground war in either place, it's about a war in some 3rd place. It's not about "home country". The US doesn't need carrier groups to defend home country. It needs them to project power into other parts of the world. Take Taiwan. If China invades there that represents a significant dilemma for the US. On balance, they'll likely make a token response, then fade away. Places where the US has enjoyed power (like the South China Sea) might be harder to protect. Does the US have the stomach for wars in Taiwan, Japan or Australia?

throwup238 2y ago
> There is zero chance of China invading the US or vice versa. But this issue isn't about a ground war in either place, it's about a war in some 3rd place. Agreed > It needs them to project power into other parts of the world. China can barely project power in its own backyard while the US has nearly a century of experience projecting around the world, with eleven carrier groups to China's two. Assuming they all get destroyed by hypersonic missiles within the first few months, the US still has military bases all over the world. As far as I know, China has zero military presence in the Western hemisphere except some surveillance balloons. China may have a short term advantage in production and cost but the US has the advantage in every other area of logistics relevant to a military. > Take Taiwan. If China invades there that represents a significant dilemma for the US. On balance, they'll likely make a token response, then fade away. Places where the US has enjoyed power (like the South China Sea) might be harder to protect. Absolutely but it'd be a pyrrhic victory worth little except as domestic propaganda. If the US does help defend Taiwan, the invading Chinese fleet will likely be massacred. There's little room to hide in the 80 mile wide Taiwan strait against modern anti-ship and anti-aircraft weapons. China's only real advantage will likely be air power, which doesn't win wars without lots of boots on the ground. > Does the US have the stomach for wars in Taiwan, Japan or Australia? I'm not sure about Taiwan, but I don't think we'd let Japan or Australia slip into war without assistance. (but what do I know? :-))
- bluGill 2y ago
  > China can barely project power in its own backyard while the US has nearly a century of experience projecting around the world, with eleven carrier groups to China's two Today. China is clearly building up their ability. In a few years the situation will look different which is the real worry. Also China may not need to be as big - China isn't patrolling the ocean like the US and so it is their 2 carrier groups near Taiwan against whatever the US can afford to send
- kragen 2y ago
  destroying taiwan would permanently cripple the supply chain for the us, japanese, and australian military. in iraq and armenia we saw what happens when a conventional industrial-age military banking on tonnage of explosives faces off against one with precision-guided weaponry, and since your comment we've seen it again in lebanon circumstantial evidence suggests that, like the usa, china has extensive military presence in western hemisphere telephony and networking equipment
ywvcbk 2y ago
The hypothetical war in Taiwan would likely be almost entirely naval/aerial so yeah the question is if US has enough political will. Don’t think artillery shells will be a huge factor and even on paper the Chinese navy (and probably the air force) doesn’t even come even remotely close to US (yet). Actual invasions of Japan and Australia are even harder to imagine. How would that even work? And why?
- Ekaros 2y ago
  China-Taiwan situations is technically still a civil war. Internal conflict to "China". Like war between Confederacy and Federation forces. It is unlikely that China will invade Japan and certainly not Australia. I find it extremely more likely that USA will invade Mexico with some fake pretence like war on drugs.
- zmgsabst 2y ago
  Artillery and particularly guided artillery like Excaliber rounds are highly effective at resisting landings. In the most recent US wargame, China succeeded in occupying parts of Taiwan which would make artillery even more important — as attacks from the mountain regions towards Chinese occupation would keep them from establishing a secure foothold.
  - fpoling 2y ago
    Excaliber became ineffective in Ukraine after Russia deployed effective jamming.
  - ywvcbk 2y ago
    War games can be very deceptive though. Back in 2019/20, 2 separate studies ( Polish and US) expected that it would only take Russia 4-5 days to get to Warsaw with Polish units sent to the border suffering 60-80% casualties. To be fair NATO wasn’t taking really taking defense that seriously back and maybe they had a point, although considering what happened in Ukraine that seem like a very unlikely outcome (unless Britain/France/Germany decided to stay out and not risk their air forces ..) I guess overestimating your opponents is usually better than the opposite. OTH had Britain/France not made that mistake in the 30s much of WW2 could have been prevented.
justin66 2y ago
The recent incarnation of isolationism in American politics might manifest if the US had the wrong leadership during an invasion of Taiwan or, I guess, Australia. Defending Japan is a reflex action. We have bases and troops there, as well as a mutual defense treaty.

throwup238 2y ago

> There is zero chance of China invading the US or vice versa. But this issue isn't about a ground war in either place, it's about a war in some 3rd place. Agreed > It needs them to project power into other parts of the world. China can barely project power in its own backyard while the US has nearly a century of experience projecting around the world, with eleven carrier groups to China's two. Assuming they all get destroyed by hypersonic missiles within the first few months, the US still has military bases all over the world. As far as I know, China has zero military presence in the Western hemisphere except some surveillance balloons. China may have a short term advantage in production and cost but the US has the advantage in every other area of logistics relevant to a military. > Take Taiwan. If China invades there that represents a significant dilemma for the US. On balance, they'll likely make a token response, then fade away. Places where the US has enjoyed power (like the South China Sea) might be harder to protect. Absolutely but it'd be a pyrrhic victory worth little except as domestic propaganda. If the US does help defend Taiwan, the invading Chinese fleet will likely be massacred. There's little room to hide in the 80 mile wide Taiwan strait against modern anti-ship and anti-aircraft weapons. China's only real advantage will likely be air power, which doesn't win wars without lots of boots on the ground. > Does the US have the stomach for wars in Taiwan, Japan or Australia? I'm not sure about Taiwan, but I don't think we'd let Japan or Australia slip into war without assistance. (but what do I know? :-))

bluGill 2y ago
> China can barely project power in its own backyard while the US has nearly a century of experience projecting around the world, with eleven carrier groups to China's two Today. China is clearly building up their ability. In a few years the situation will look different which is the real worry. Also China may not need to be as big - China isn't patrolling the ocean like the US and so it is their 2 carrier groups near Taiwan against whatever the US can afford to send
kragen 2y ago
destroying taiwan would permanently cripple the supply chain for the us, japanese, and australian military. in iraq and armenia we saw what happens when a conventional industrial-age military banking on tonnage of explosives faces off against one with precision-guided weaponry, and since your comment we've seen it again in lebanon circumstantial evidence suggests that, like the usa, china has extensive military presence in western hemisphere telephony and networking equipment

ywvcbk 2y ago

The hypothetical war in Taiwan would likely be almost entirely naval/aerial so yeah the question is if US has enough political will. Don’t think artillery shells will be a huge factor and even on paper the Chinese navy (and probably the air force) doesn’t even come even remotely close to US (yet). Actual invasions of Japan and Australia are even harder to imagine. How would that even work? And why?

Ekaros 2y ago
China-Taiwan situations is technically still a civil war. Internal conflict to "China". Like war between Confederacy and Federation forces. It is unlikely that China will invade Japan and certainly not Australia. I find it extremely more likely that USA will invade Mexico with some fake pretence like war on drugs.
zmgsabst 2y ago
Artillery and particularly guided artillery like Excaliber rounds are highly effective at resisting landings. In the most recent US wargame, China succeeded in occupying parts of Taiwan which would make artillery even more important — as attacks from the mountain regions towards Chinese occupation would keep them from establishing a secure foothold.
- fpoling 2y ago
  Excaliber became ineffective in Ukraine after Russia deployed effective jamming.
- ywvcbk 2y ago
  War games can be very deceptive though. Back in 2019/20, 2 separate studies ( Polish and US) expected that it would only take Russia 4-5 days to get to Warsaw with Polish units sent to the border suffering 60-80% casualties. To be fair NATO wasn’t taking really taking defense that seriously back and maybe they had a point, although considering what happened in Ukraine that seem like a very unlikely outcome (unless Britain/France/Germany decided to stay out and not risk their air forces ..) I guess overestimating your opponents is usually better than the opposite. OTH had Britain/France not made that mistake in the 30s much of WW2 could have been prevented.

justin66 2y ago

The recent incarnation of isolationism in American politics might manifest if the US had the wrong leadership during an invasion of Taiwan or, I guess, Australia. Defending Japan is a reflex action. We have bases and troops there, as well as a mutual defense treaty.