9 ms·

> China dominates the shipbuilding industry[1] and can easily rebuild whatever ships they lose while the US will be dependent on South Korea and Japan to rebuil

> China dominates the shipbuilding industry[1] and can easily rebuild whatever ships they lose while the US will be dependent on South Korea and Japan to rebuild whatever they lose. US builds military ships themself. Also, this will be very asymmetrical war: missiles which can destroy ship costs XM vs XXXM for military ship cost.

klooney 1y ago
> US builds military ships themself. Not recently...
- riku_iki 1y ago
  Why do you think so? AFAIK, all navy ships are build in USA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arleigh_Burke-class_de...
- chrisco255 1y ago
  Military ships are still built here. However, our loss of the commercial sector here means there's less talent and factories to tap into in the event of a total war scenario.
Teever 1y ago
I get the impression from your comment that you did not read the first source that I linked above. If you only read one of the many links that I provided please read this one: https://selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/CSIS%20Simulation%20Results.pdf https://selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites... The key takeaway is that the United States does not have the stockpiles of munitions necessary to engage in a long-term conflict with China nor does it have the industrial capacity to scale up production in a timely fashion. Additionally, American shipbuilding capacity has completely atrophied both from a decline of infrastructure and even worse a startling decline in blue-collar institutional knowledge. It has become so dire that the US Navy is looking to outsource ship production to South Korea. It should be obvious at this point that China dominates in mass-production and they'll absolutely be able to out-produce the US in both ships and missiles in a long term conflict.
- riku_iki 1y ago
  > The key takeaway is that the United States does not have the stockpiles of munitions necessary to engage in a long-term conflict with China I think this is missleading conclusion, my reading of the link is that it says that in 4 week of active phase, US stockpile will deplete, it doesn't assess what damage China will receive, will it have enough ships/airplanes after US activated thousands of munitions, and will it rebuild them faster than US will restock missiles inventory (99% not). > US Navy is looking to outsource ship production to South Korea. could you provide citation?
  - Teever 1y ago
    Here's a recent story about the outsourcing of ship production to South Korea[0] I recommend that you take a look at this document[1] to get a better picture of the shortcomings of US munitions stockpiles and manufacturing capacity. I'm not sure why you think that China, a nation renowned for their mass manufacturing capacity would be unable to rebuild equipment lost in a war over Taiwan. China absolutely dominates in steel production[2] and aluminum production[3] and no one compares to them in electronics manufacturing and assembly. They completely own the solar panel and battery markets and it seems that no one can compete with their electric cars. While America keeps chipping away at its own soft power, institutions and manufacturing capacity China is building the juggernaut industrial capacity necessary to dominate their region. [0] https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/08/business/us-south-korea-military-shipbuilding-deal-intl-hnk-ml https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/08/business/us-south-korea-milit... [1] https://www.csis.org/analysis/empty-bins-wartime-environment-challenge-us-defense-industrial-base https://www.csis.org/analysis/empty-bins-wartime-environment... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_steel_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_steel_pro... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_aluminium_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_aluminium...
    - riku_iki 1y ago
      > Here's a recent story about the outsourcing of ship production to South Korea[0] its not for production but maintenance. Your link explicitly states that current law doesn't allow to produce Navy ships outside of US. Furthermore, Koreans can't produce military ships for US simply because they can't produce such ships for themselves domestically, their newest destroyers have Korean hull, but propulsion, electronics, radars, many armaments are American: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sejong_the_Great-class_destroyer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sejong_the_Great-class_destroy... > I'm not sure why you think that China, a nation renowned for their mass manufacturing capacity would be unable to rebuild equipment lost I explained, it will be asymmetrical war: US will be targeting ships which cost way more than missiles cost. Each of 4k tomahawk will target targets 10-100x cost of actual tomahawk (airplanes, power plants, docked ships). Also, your previous report ignores old harpoon inventory, which if deployed in Taiwan will create denial zone for Chinese navy.

klooney 1y ago

> US builds military ships themself. Not recently...

riku_iki 1y ago
Why do you think so? AFAIK, all navy ships are build in USA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arleigh_Burke-class_de...
chrisco255 1y ago
Military ships are still built here. However, our loss of the commercial sector here means there's less talent and factories to tap into in the event of a total war scenario.

Teever 1y ago

I get the impression from your comment that you did not read the first source that I linked above. If you only read one of the many links that I provided please read this one: https://selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/CSIS%20Simulation%20Results.pdf https://selectcommitteeontheccp.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites... The key takeaway is that the United States does not have the stockpiles of munitions necessary to engage in a long-term conflict with China nor does it have the industrial capacity to scale up production in a timely fashion. Additionally, American shipbuilding capacity has completely atrophied both from a decline of infrastructure and even worse a startling decline in blue-collar institutional knowledge. It has become so dire that the US Navy is looking to outsource ship production to South Korea. It should be obvious at this point that China dominates in mass-production and they'll absolutely be able to out-produce the US in both ships and missiles in a long term conflict.

riku_iki 1y ago
> The key takeaway is that the United States does not have the stockpiles of munitions necessary to engage in a long-term conflict with China I think this is missleading conclusion, my reading of the link is that it says that in 4 week of active phase, US stockpile will deplete, it doesn't assess what damage China will receive, will it have enough ships/airplanes after US activated thousands of munitions, and will it rebuild them faster than US will restock missiles inventory (99% not). > US Navy is looking to outsource ship production to South Korea. could you provide citation?
- Teever 1y ago
  Here's a recent story about the outsourcing of ship production to South Korea[0] I recommend that you take a look at this document[1] to get a better picture of the shortcomings of US munitions stockpiles and manufacturing capacity. I'm not sure why you think that China, a nation renowned for their mass manufacturing capacity would be unable to rebuild equipment lost in a war over Taiwan. China absolutely dominates in steel production[2] and aluminum production[3] and no one compares to them in electronics manufacturing and assembly. They completely own the solar panel and battery markets and it seems that no one can compete with their electric cars. While America keeps chipping away at its own soft power, institutions and manufacturing capacity China is building the juggernaut industrial capacity necessary to dominate their region. [0] https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/08/business/us-south-korea-military-shipbuilding-deal-intl-hnk-ml https://www.cnn.com/2025/04/08/business/us-south-korea-milit... [1] https://www.csis.org/analysis/empty-bins-wartime-environment-challenge-us-defense-industrial-base https://www.csis.org/analysis/empty-bins-wartime-environment... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_steel_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_steel_pro... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_aluminium_production https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_aluminium...
  - riku_iki 1y ago
    > Here's a recent story about the outsourcing of ship production to South Korea[0] its not for production but maintenance. Your link explicitly states that current law doesn't allow to produce Navy ships outside of US. Furthermore, Koreans can't produce military ships for US simply because they can't produce such ships for themselves domestically, their newest destroyers have Korean hull, but propulsion, electronics, radars, many armaments are American: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sejong_the_Great-class_destroyer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sejong_the_Great-class_destroy... > I'm not sure why you think that China, a nation renowned for their mass manufacturing capacity would be unable to rebuild equipment lost I explained, it will be asymmetrical war: US will be targeting ships which cost way more than missiles cost. Each of 4k tomahawk will target targets 10-100x cost of actual tomahawk (airplanes, power plants, docked ships). Also, your previous report ignores old harpoon inventory, which if deployed in Taiwan will create denial zone for Chinese navy.