We’d almost certainly lose a war with China over Taiwan…I’m sure our stockpiles are taking a hit as noted above, but ‘empty bins’ crying over sending aide to Ukraine is just someone pushing a narrative. We wouldn’t lose because we ran out of stingers and artillery during an amphibious campaign, we’d lose because China is roughly 100 miles from Taiwan.
Our logistics train across the Pacific Ocean would be an absolute nightmare, rife for targeting by all kinds of harassment. Traditional escorts as part of a carrier group would be extremely risky against their ballistic missiles, there’s only so many beans and bullets you can jam into a C5, and their fanatical devotion in communist China probably wouldn’t match our morale whether they’re uniformed or civilians facing the loss of cheap shit from Amazon.
So you build a deterrence posture and pivot (especially USMC) towards a decentralized, network-centric organization that would make invading Taiwan very expensive for China…both militarily and economically. Meanwhile you undertake the incredibly slow process of relocating key manufacturing elements out of harms way.
Ultimately you can’t stop them, but certainly slow them down while bleeding them. So long as we don’t end up in a real, official shooting war with China this may ultimately be good for our country as a whole. Pull back on globally distributed, long-lead, lean JIT manufacturing that’s screwing military and business (see Boeing and the 787) alike + reorient your military into a flexible structure that’s more survivable with a missile-heavy near-peer and also appears to work effectively against a communist (ie central control) regime like we are seeing in Ukraine.
TLDR: We won’t be able to stop China but long term the changes it’s forcing may prove beneficial for both the military and economy.