Meanwhile in China

[Homercles 10,206]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

It's a balloon

So you’re saying it’s trivial to shoot one down from 60,000 feet at a precise location that minimizes risk of the impact and maximizes opportunity to recover the debris?  It’s a challenging target given its minimal radar signature, high altitude, slow speed and intent to keep it intact as possible. 
 

You’re entitled to your opinion, but doing it right on the first try was impressive to me.  There are other articles on The Drive/Warzone site that discuss in detail why you don’t just zip up there and riddle it with bullets.  But you do you, maybe next time you can go knock it out. 

[BabaYaga 15,632]

1 minute ago, Homercles said:

It’s a challenging target given its minimal radar signature, high altitude, slow speed and intent to keep it intact as possible. 

God help us then when we face off against 5th generation aircraft from hostile nations that can both operate at similar altitudes, posses offensive capabilities, and have state of the art countermeasures.  All this article talks about with any level of complexity is timing

[Homercles 10,206]

Then do what I suggested and read this: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/why-shooting-down-chinas-spy-balloon-over-the-u-s-is-more-complicated-than-it-seems

 

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12,301]

2 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

God help us then when we face off against 5th generation aircraft from hostile nations that can both operate at similar altitudes, posses offensive capabilities, and have state of the art countermeasures.  All this article talks about with any level of complexity is timing

Your point would make a lot of sense if we did something wrong with the balloon. But, here we are.

[atomheartbevo 90,682]

1 hour ago, Homercles said:

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. 

China is China’s biggest barrier to taking Taiwan.   They don’t have the infrastructure or training for large-scale amphibious assaults, and aren’t even close to it.  Cruise ships are shitty transports in contested waters with lots of top-tier anti-shipping missiles and torpedoes.  100 miles of open water is tough to do with slow-moving ships full of soldiers headed for small beaches.

But let’s talk about preventing it in the first place.

US, European Union, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are China’s biggest trading partners.

The US and EU alone take in over a trillion dollars (US) in Chinese exports.  The next 3-4 are worth half a trillion combined.

China attacks Taiwan, we apply sanctions and stop American, Japanese, South Korean, and European countries from trading with them.  China’s economy collapses.  Hundreds and hundreds of millions of Chinese are out-of-work, and there maybe food issues in the mix if we shut down agriculture exports to China as well.  Two million Chinese soldiers can’t keep well over half a billion out-of-work pissed-off Chinese out of the streets and fed.

Even the US, Japan, and South Korea alone shutting off trade with China would kill their economy (and they are facing a demographic collapse as well).   Hell, just the US yanking our $600 billion in Chinese imports and a few hundred billion more in imports could probably tip their economy over.  COVID fucked with them, but we were still sending them money and food and materials, and they were still producing exports.  That goes away in an attack on Taiwan.

And India, Vietnam, etc. will all be very happy to apply the screws to China and try and take their manufacturing business (Western, Japanese, and South Korean).

Edited February 7, 2023 by atomheartbevo

[Bevo 13,929]

14 minutes ago, Homercles said:

So you’re saying it’s trivial to shoot one down from 60,000 feet at a precise location that minimizes risk of the impact and maximizes opportunity to recover the debris?  It’s a challenging target given its minimal radar signature, high altitude, slow speed and intent to keep it intact as possible. 
 

You’re entitled to your opinion, but doing it right on the first try was impressive to me.  There are other articles on The Drive/Warzone site that discuss in detail why you don’t just zip up there and riddle it with bullets.  But you do you, maybe next time you can go knock it out. 

Did we even try a pin prick attack?

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,743]

I've always thought Taiwan was more of a talking point for Chinese leaders than actually caring to invade it. Would they like Taiwan to come back? Sure. Are they willing to risk their power in order to do so? No.

Less risky to spend the next 20-30 years convincing the Taiwan youth that China ain't so bad. 

[BabaYaga 15,632]

13 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

Your point would make a lot of sense if we did something wrong with the balloon. But, here we are.

Who's saying anything was done wrong - I'm just questioning the swooning over a trillion dollar jet's ability to handle the routine.

[Bevo 13,929]

1 minute ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I've always thought Taiwan was more of a talking point for Chinese leaders than actually caring to invade it. Would they like Taiwan to come back? Sure. Are they willing to risk their power in order to do so? No.

Less risky to spend the next 20-30 years convincing the Taiwan youth that China ain't so bad. 

As of late, they have been invading Taiwanese air space and territorial waters weekly. There are problems at home and war is a great way to get the public off of internal issues. The leadership in China has and will continue to be active in regaining lost territories. Military assessments seem to think China will try to take over Taiwan within a couple of years. 

[Schulz2.0 29,302]

Some of you are insanely over rating the strength and reach of the Chinese navy.

[Chad Fuck 18,166]

16 minutes ago, Bevo said:

As of late, they have been invading Taiwanese air space and territorial waters weekly. There are problems at home and war is a great way to get the public off of internal issues. The leadership in China has and will continue to be active in regaining lost territories. Military assessments seem to think China will try to take over Taiwan within a couple of years. 

That's what that one general said.  I wouldn't attribute that to a general view of the military without more datapoints (i.e., more generals/admirals saying the same).  Generals who study war their whole lives can go kooky wishing it into existence.  

To me, the real problem is someone like Xi believing his own bullshit.  That is, rattling swords re Taiwan because its politically expedient at home, then having his sycophantic (and perhaps kooky war daydreaming) generals pump him full of, "yeah, we could actually pull this off."  Ukraine is the perfect example of this scenario.  Hopefully Ukraine has disabused Xi of such a notion.  But to me, that's the real threat:  Xi getting out over his skis.  

[Trey3216 15,453]

On 2/5/2023 at 10:06 PM, KeysPhoneWallet said:

Re that empty bins article, China would be facing munition shortages after 6 months as well, that’s how these things go. You burn through everything then figure out a real supply chain later. The us would repurpose resources that aren’t better now and works develop an increased ammo supply line

IF we had an all out war with China, every auto factory in the US would be re-purposed to build munitions, just as they were in the 30's and 40's.  We wouldn't be selling new F-150's, because we wouldn't have microchips to put in them, so turn the factories into munition factories, howitzer factories, missile body factories, etc.  

 

People glossing over the productive power of the US, even with much of our production being overseas, don't remember what the US is capable of and willing to do when faced with an economic and existential threat such as Taiwan being taken by China.  

[BabaYaga 15,632]

5 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

IF we had an all out war with China, every auto factory in the US would be re-purposed to build munitions, just as they were in the 30's and 40's.  We wouldn't be selling new F-150's, because we wouldn't have microchips to put in them, so turn the factories into munition factories, howitzer factories, missile body factories, etc.  

 

People glossing over the productive power of the US, even with much of our production being overseas, don't remember what the US is capable of and willing to do when faced with an economic and existential threat such as Taiwan being taken by China.  

That works for "dumb" munitions - everything guided has chip dependencies on Taiwan

[Nicole44 22,326]

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

China is China’s biggest barrier to taking Taiwan.   They don’t have the infrastructure or training for large-scale amphibious assaults, and aren’t even close to it.  Cruise ships are shitty transports in contested waters with lots of top-tier anti-shipping missiles and torpedoes.  100 miles of open water is tough to do with slow-moving ships full of soldiers headed for small beaches.

But let’s talk about preventing it in the first place.

US, European Union, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are China’s biggest trading partners.

The US and EU alone take in over a trillion dollars (US) in Chinese exports.  The next 3-4 are worth half a trillion combined.

China attacks Taiwan, we apply sanctions and stop American, Japanese, South Korean, and European countries from trading with them.  China’s economy collapses.  Hundreds and hundreds of millions of Chinese are out-of-work, and there maybe food issues in the mix if we shut down agriculture exports to China as well.  Two million Chinese soldiers can’t keep well over half a billion out-of-work pissed-off Chinese out of the streets and fed.

Even the US, Japan, and South Korea alone shutting off trade with China would kill their economy (and they are facing a demographic collapse as well).   Hell, just the US yanking our $600 billion in Chinese imports and a few hundred billion more in imports could probably tip their economy over.  COVID fucked with them, but we were still sending them money and food and materials, and they were still producing exports.  That goes away in an attack on Taiwan.

And India, Vietnam, etc. will all be very happy to apply the screws to China and try and take their manufacturing business (Western, Japanese, and South Korean).

Question: Aren’t we applying similar sanctions to Russia? Assuming we are all lockstep like you posted, how long would it take for China to really suffer and “collapse?” I ask because I’d like to see the same happen to Russia but they are still fighting and invading and killing with what appears to be no end in sight. How long does it take in theory? I know this is more apples to oranges type of deal in a way, but at this point, I’d have hoped to see Putin’s head on a platter and their abilities to continue significantly weaken. Maybe that’s happening but from the outside it doesn’t seem like it. 

[Trey3216 15,453]

4 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

That works for "dumb" munitions - everything guided has chip dependencies on Taiwan

True.  But TSMC has manufacturing here as well.  I'm certain as sin that the DoD has some "first in line" claims on those production capabilities. 

Basically, everything that would be needed for a war effort would be produced, and nothing else.  "Sorry bout your new fridge with a video screen that went out, no replacement chips available".  

 

 

[atomheartbevo 90,682]

1 hour ago, Bevo said:

As of late, they have been invading Taiwanese air space and territorial waters weekly. There are problems at home and war is a great way to get the public off of internal issues. The leadership in China has and will continue to be active in regaining lost territories.

Putting hundreds of millions of the public out of work due to sanctions is a great way of getting the public to increase the internal issues. Take their mind off of internal issues by…..increasing the internal issues 

1 hour ago, Bevo said:

Military assessments seem to think China will try to take over Taiwan within a couple of years. 

The military gets more money when they can convince people they need it for something that probably won’t happen. Also, like @Chad Fuck said, old generals can get a little crazy looking into their crystal balls.  A lot do them could not accept the fact that Russia started losing in the fashion in which they did, because the Soviet Union/Russia that they spent decades of their lives preparing to fight was not the Russia that stalled out in a 40-mile convoy outside of Kyiv.

[BabaYaga 15,632]

8 minutes ago, Trey3216 said:

True.  But TSMC has manufacturing here as well.  I'm certain as sin that the DoD has some "first in line" claims on those production capabilities. 

Basically, everything that would be needed for a war effort would be produced, and nothing else.  "Sorry bout your new fridge with a video screen that went out, no replacement chips available".  

 

 

Very, limited production here.  Not nearly enough to sustain prolonged conflict

[Trey3216 15,453]

2 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

Very, limited production here.  Not nearly enough to sustain prolonged conflict

That could very well be true.  It could also be that we "have limited production here because we don't want anyone to know what the true capabilities are due to national security".   Some new capabilities are 4 years into a 10 year build up.  I imagine the "critical use" timeline is shorter than that.  I imagine the TSMC factories here have some unknowns, and that the US military has some unknown stockpiles as well.  There's still an amount of "need to know basis" on these subjects, because China sure as shit doesn't need to know, but they damn well better have their bet hedged because we sure as shit do.  

[atomheartbevo 90,682]

13 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Question: Aren’t we applying similar sanctions to Russia? Assuming we are all lockstep like you posted, how long would it take for China to really suffer and “collapse?” I ask because I’d like to see the same happen to Russia but they are still fighting and invading and killing with what appears to be no end in sight. How long does it take in theory? I know this is more apples to oranges type of deal in a way, but at this point, I’d have hoped to see Putin’s head on a platter and their abilities to continue significantly weaken. Maybe that’s happening but from the outside it doesn’t seem like it. 

Russia doesn’t have 1.4 billion people to keep satisfied like China does, they have 140 million people, and unlike the Chinese they don’t have hundreds of millions of people who rely on both imports as well as exports to the rest of the world.  Russia’s exports were fairly basic and revolved around oil and gas and things like lumber and food, and the people working on those things will still be working on them, unlike say millions of Chinese who can no longer make and ship iPhones.   It’s not going to hurt the typical Russian if their Lada doesn’t have airbags because of a lack of microchips, since the vodka will deaden the pain from bouncing their heads off of the steering wheel or dashboard  

And there’s some irony with the fact that if China hammered Taiwan, they’d be harming Chinese factories that rely on Taiwanese imports.

As for Russia - Iran, Belarus, and North Korea can only do so much. We’ve seen shortages of artillery shells and barrels. We’ve seen the cruise missile salvos slow down in intensity.  Russia only has so many convicts and rurals they can feed into the line before they have to start hitting the large cities hard, made worse by the 700,000 that fled.  

With that said, the Chinese have to be nervous at the economic firepower being leveled at Russia.  

[BabaYaga 15,632]

1 minute ago, Trey3216 said:

That could very well be true.  It could also be that we "have limited production here because we don't want anyone to know what the true capabilities are due to national security".   Some new capabilities are 4 years into a 10 year build up.  I imagine the "critical use" timeline is shorter than that.  I imagine the TSMC factories here have some unknowns, and that the US military has some unknown stockpiles as well.  There's still an amount of "need to know basis" on these subjects, because China sure as shit doesn't need to know, but they damn well better have their bet hedged because we sure as shit do.  

Maybe?

Possibly?

Hell of a big risk and you could say the same for China

Here's the bigger problem:  the people.  I used Operation Paperclip earlier because the example bears out.  After WWII we had some people.  We had some production.  We had some ideas.  What we needed were the minds of those that had done it.  Taiwan is no different.  The minds there are in such demand that are decades beyond anything we have here or in China.  Neither China nor the US will level the island as the needed production facilities are so precious, but even more are the limited number of those that grasp the totality of what production really looks like and how to facilitate it at scale.  

[BabaYaga 15,632]

5 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Russia doesn’t have 1.4 billion people to keep satisfied like China does, they have 140 million people, and unlike the Chinese they don’t have hundreds of millions of people who rely on both imports as well as exports to the rest of the world.  Russia’s exports were fairly basic and revolved around oil and gas and things like lumber and food, and the people working on those things will still be working on them, unlike say millions of Chinese who can no longer make and ship iPhones.   It’s not going to hurt the typical Russian if their Lada doesn’t have airbags because of a lack of microchips, since the vodka will deaden the pain from bouncing their heads off of the steering wheel or dashboard  

And there’s some irony with the fact that if China hammered Taiwan, they’d be harming Chinese factories that rely on Taiwanese imports.

As for Russia - Iran, Belarus, and North Korea can only do so much. We’ve seen shortages of artillery shells and barrels. We’ve seen the cruise missile salvos slow down in intensity.  Russia only has so many convicts and rurals they can feed into the line before they have to start hitting the large cities hard, made worse by the 700,000 that fled.  

With that said, the Chinese have to be nervous at the economic firepower being leveled at Russia.  

China is committing genocide on certain demographics and welding others into their rooms as part of their zero-tolerance policies.  The Chinese politburo are akin to a Mafia-esq cartel.  I would question whether they lack the resolve to resort back to full authoritarian.  The only country with a more egregious track record for sacrificing their citizens than the Russians are the Chinese.  

But your point about hammering Taiwan is correct.  Both sides need it to stay intact as the dependencies on production impact both equally.  

[Nicole44 22,326]

7 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Russia doesn’t have 1.4 billion people to keep satisfied like China does, they have 140 million people, and unlike the Chinese they don’t have hundreds of millions of people who rely on both imports as well as exports to the rest of the world.  Russia’s exports were fairly basic and revolved around oil and gas and things like lumber and food, and the people working on those things will still be working on them, unlike say millions of Chinese who can no longer make and ship iPhones.   It’s not going to hurt the typical Russian if their Lada doesn’t have airbags because of a lack of microchips, since the vodka will deaden the pain from bouncing their heads off of the steering wheel or dashboard  

And there’s some irony with the fact that if China hammered Taiwan, they’d be harming Chinese factories that rely on Taiwanese imports.

As for Russia - Iran, Belarus, and North Korea can only do so much. We’ve seen shortages of artillery shells and barrels. We’ve seen the cruise missile salvos slow down in intensity.  Russia only has so many convicts and rurals they can feed into the line before they have to start hitting the large cities hard, made worse by the 700,000 that fled.  

With that said, the Chinese have to be nervous at the economic firepower being leveled at Russia.  

Thanks! What if we sent our own balloons to China filled with containers of vodka? Like wave after wave of balloons? 😀

I’m more concerned with the US/Canada’s ability to detect their balloons. I think they did learn a little about our warning systems/ability to detect them by sending them. I think that’s why they did and why the sent them on the routes that they sent them on. I know the Japanese employed balloons during WW2 (shit we are all reading up on the damn balloons because up until now most of us didn’t know much about balloons at all or that four other balloons had crossed at different points in the last few years.) if they wanted they could, in theory, weaponize them. But I guess it does make me a little nervous…how long did it take for our systems to detect their balloon? Before or after it was over the US/Canada? I guess that’s the worrisome element for me. Like there is a medium between hysteria and apathy…but I just don’t trust a fucking thing China does. 

[Horn of Gabriel 1,886]

48 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Thanks! What if we sent our own balloons to China filled with containers of vodka? Like wave after wave of balloons? 😀

I’m more concerned with the US/Canada’s ability to detect their balloons. I think they did learn a little about our warning systems/ability to detect them by sending them. I think that’s why they did and why the sent them on the routes that they sent them on. I know the Japanese employed balloons during WW2 (shit we are all reading up on the damn balloons because up until now most of us didn’t know much about balloons at all or that four other balloons had crossed at different points in the last few years.) if they wanted they could, in theory, weaponize them. But I guess it does make me a little nervous…how long did it take for our systems to detect their balloon? Before or after it was over the US/Canada? I guess that’s the worrisome element for me. Like there is a medium between hysteria and apathy…but I just don’t trust a fucking thing China does. 

We can detect them.  We just never regarded it as a threat because of a combination of:

• We assumed they could get equal to better intelligence out of satellite surveillance so why care
• The public wasn't awake to the threat so nbd
• We lack a symmetrical response...we just spent around $2M shooting down a $100K ballon.  We can afford it so whatever but before the public cared I'm sure that no general wants to get dragged in front of the HASC to answer questions about "herp derp ballon"
• We lacked imagination about the threat...these are a serious problem, they could be a delivery vehicle for an EMP.  This isn't Clancy-novel level shit, it would be an easy, non-attributable way to fuck the US in the ass if you put a ballon with a EMP-tuned low yield nuke device at 150K ft over the Eastern seaboard.  We'd lose multiple millions of lives in the ensuing chaos and power outages.  Now imagine 5000 of these balloons launched in the span of a few days and you have to shoot them all down...while China is making their crossing to Taiwan.

Now that we're awake to this we'll plan for it better...and China will find another vector we're unconscious about.  Hopefully we have some smart people in the intel community sitting around gaming all this out to protect us, because the current news doesn't exactly make me brim with confidence.

[Chad Fuck 18,166]

19 minutes ago, Nicole44 said:

Thanks! What if we sent our own balloons to China filled with containers of vodka? Like wave after wave of balloons? 😀

I’m more concerned with the US/Canada’s ability to detect their balloons. I think they did learn a little about our warning systems/ability to detect them by sending them. I think that’s why they did and why the sent them on the routes that they sent them on. I know the Japanese employed balloons during WW2 (shit we are all reading up on the damn balloons because up until now most of us didn’t know much about balloons at all or that four other balloons had crossed at different points in the last few years.) if they wanted they could, in theory, weaponize them. But I guess it does make me a little nervous…how long did it take for our systems to detect their balloon? Before or after it was over the US/Canada? I guess that’s the worrisome element for me. Like there is a medium between hysteria and apathy…but I just don’t trust a fucking thing China does. 

You need to dial it way back and get some perspective here.

First, the world has been using weather balloons for a long time.  Using them to spy is not a new idea either.  Every major player has done it.  So there's nothing particularly new or ground breaking here.  

Second, we're pretty fucking good at monitoring the worlds' airspace.  Between ourselves and Canada, we've been very good at monitoring our North American airspace for a long time.  I suspect we knew this balloon was headed our way as soon as it left China.  They didn't learn much bout our warning/detection that they didn't already know.  What they did learn was whatever we chose to divulge.  But I suspect it's more on the "jack shit" edge of the spectrum.  Just because you personally, or Jimmy Joe up in Montana,  aren't aware of our capabilities doesn't mean we don't have them, nor that the Chinese don't already know about them as well.  

Third, when you talk about "sending up our own balloons,"  I don't think you understand which way the wind blows over the Pacific  Because that's at play here.  But to the larger picture of spying on China from the air, we've been doing that since there WAS a communist China.  We've been violating our enemies' air space for a long, long time in many and varied ways.  Like since immediately after WWII.  Once again, this is not new.  Old men have been writing books about their aviation hi jinx over China for a long while.  You should check it out.  Start here for a synopsis of these types of things:  

I

In short, this is more of a diplomatic blip than a technical and/or military one.  You'll notice no one who really matters in defense talking head land is saying much about it.  There's lots we do that we don't want to bring attention to, so we aren't making a big deal of this, rather the Internet did.  Basically, the biggest issue here is the Chinese fucking up their diplomacy with us for no discernible benefit to them besides, "Har har!  We used 200 year old technology on you!"  The only reason this is a thing at all is because in the past, it could be blown off and didn't hit the news cycle.  Now that Jim bob can get a giant telescopic lens on amazon (probably from China), and take pics and blast them all over the internet, the government is in a position to have to talk about stuff that they'd rather not because it just leads to more uncomfortable questions like, "When was the last time we did something like this to China?"  They don't want to have to say, "How about every damn day of the world?"  

Your healthy distrust of the CCP is something we both share, however.  

[Horn of Gabriel 1,886]

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

Russia doesn’t have 1.4 billion people to keep satisfied like China does, they have 140 million people, and unlike the Chinese they don’t have hundreds of millions of people who rely on both imports as well as exports to the rest of the world.  Russia’s exports were fairly basic and revolved around oil and gas and things like lumber and food, and the people working on those things will still be working on them, unlike say millions of Chinese who can no longer make and ship iPhones.   It’s not going to hurt the typical Russian if their Lada doesn’t have airbags because of a lack of microchips, since the vodka will deaden the pain from bouncing their heads off of the steering wheel or dashboard  

And there’s some irony with the fact that if China hammered Taiwan, they’d be harming Chinese factories that rely on Taiwanese imports.

As for Russia - Iran, Belarus, and North Korea can only do so much. We’ve seen shortages of artillery shells and barrels. We’ve seen the cruise missile salvos slow down in intensity.  Russia only has so many convicts and rurals they can feed into the line before they have to start hitting the large cities hard, made worse by the 700,000 that fled.  

With that said, the Chinese have to be nervous at the economic firepower being leveled at Russia.  

Everything you write here would be relevant if China were not a dictatorship, which they are.  This is the same country that during the Great Leap Forward allowed some 50M+ people to starve to death, and tortured and killed another 2-3M people to keep the population in line.  And that was on a population base much smaller than now.  Will things be different now?  Maybe?  Their government is not afraid of their people, the other way around.  Xi is gonna do what Xi wants.  His bigger fear is trying for Taiwan and losing, because that's how dictators get deposed or killed.  He'll go if he feels like he can get it, and doesn't give 2 fucks about the losses.

[Parliament 14,620]

3 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

China is China’s biggest barrier to taking Taiwan.   They don’t have the infrastructure or training for large-scale amphibious assaults, and aren’t even close to it.  Cruise ships are shitty transports in contested waters with lots of top-tier anti-shipping missiles and torpedoes.  100 miles of open water is tough to do with slow-moving ships full of soldiers headed for small beaches.

But let’s talk about preventing it in the first place.

US, European Union, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are China’s biggest trading partners.

The US and EU alone take in over a trillion dollars (US) in Chinese exports.  The next 3-4 are worth half a trillion combined.

China attacks Taiwan, we apply sanctions and stop American, Japanese, South Korean, and European countries from trading with them.  China’s economy collapses.  Hundreds and hundreds of millions of Chinese are out-of-work, and there maybe food issues in the mix if we shut down agriculture exports to China as well.  Two million Chinese soldiers can’t keep well over half a billion out-of-work pissed-off Chinese out of the streets and fed.

Even the US, Japan, and South Korea alone shutting off trade with China would kill their economy (and they are facing a demographic collapse as well).   Hell, just the US yanking our $600 billion in Chinese imports and a few hundred billion more in imports could probably tip their economy over.  COVID fucked with them, but we were still sending them money and food and materials, and they were still producing exports.  That goes away in an attack on Taiwan.

And India, Vietnam, etc. will all be very happy to apply the screws to China and try and take their manufacturing business (Western, Japanese, and South Korean).

In a war we'd sink every oil tanker going to China.  Theyd hafta SWIM to Taiwan.

[Nicole44 22,326]

 

We should just send a fleet of rabbits over there. They'd be overrun with them and their economy would grind to a halt. I've seen Monty Python and I KNOW that rabbits aren't harmless. 

[BabaYaga 15,632]

1 hour ago, Nicole44 said:

 

We should just send a fleet of rabbits over there. They'd be overrun with them and their economy would grind to a halt. I've seen Monty Python and I KNOW that rabbits aren't harmless. 

Cats & birds

Old story of a Mongol war party sacking a Chinese fortified city by asking for every 1K cats and 1K swallows in the city being delivered to them in exchange for clemency.  They then attached rags to the cats/bird tails, set them on fire and turned them back into the city.  They all "went home", setting the city on fire, creating a distraction, and allowing the Mongols to take the city with minimal casualties.  

Fire kitty

[Horn of Gabriel 1,886]

5 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

China is China’s biggest barrier to taking Taiwan.   They don’t have the infrastructure or training for large-scale amphibious assaults, and aren’t even close to it.  Cruise ships are shitty transports in contested waters with lots of top-tier anti-shipping missiles and torpedoes.  100 miles of open water is tough to do with slow-moving ships full of soldiers headed for small beaches.

But let’s talk about preventing it in the first place.

US, European Union, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan are China’s biggest trading partners.

The US and EU alone take in over a trillion dollars (US) in Chinese exports.  The next 3-4 are worth half a trillion combined.

China attacks Taiwan, we apply sanctions and stop American, Japanese, South Korean, and European countries from trading with them.  China’s economy collapses.  Hundreds and hundreds of millions of Chinese are out-of-work, and there maybe food issues in the mix if we shut down agriculture exports to China as well.  Two million Chinese soldiers can’t keep well over half a billion out-of-work pissed-off Chinese out of the streets and fed.

Even the US, Japan, and South Korea alone shutting off trade with China would kill their economy (and they are facing a demographic collapse as well).   Hell, just the US yanking our $600 billion in Chinese imports and a few hundred billion more in imports could probably tip their economy over.  COVID fucked with them, but we were still sending them money and food and materials, and they were still producing exports.  That goes away in an attack on Taiwan.

And India, Vietnam, etc. will all be very happy to apply the screws to China and try and take their manufacturing business (Western, Japanese, and South Korean).

You're correct, however China is rapidly closing this gap.  They've recently been actively training for beach landings and deployment using roll-on/roll-off (RO-RO) ships.  To your point, 100 miles is a lot and those waters will be contested.  But China knows that, and they're dealing with that too.  Specifically they've massively expanded their land based offensive ballistic and cruise missile capabilities for both anti-ship and land attack.  From the link:

Quote

In recent years, China has developed land-based ballistic missiles armed with homing anti-ship munitions, specifically the DF-21 and DF-26. If China can preserve what strategist Christian Brose calls “kill chains” — linking land-based ballistic missiles to satellite information about ship locations — it will have good prospects of sinking naval ships with these weapons.

To be sure, Beijing will need terminal sensors on those weapons, since ships will often change direction, making their locations uncertain by up to 10 kilometers over the course of a roughly 10-minute missile flight. (More precisely, ballistic flight would take about six minutes to cover a range of 600 kilometers, fourteen minutes to cover 3,000, or something in between for a range in between.) Attaining those sensors seems within the realm of the possible.

In this scenario, it assumed that China would use 100 to 200 such missiles against U.S. ships (even if the PLA does not have this number of missiles with anti-ship capabilities now, it could quite soon). If each missile wound up penetrating defenses even just 25% of the time, that math implies 25 to 50 hits on ships, depending on how many missiles are fired — or 12 to 25 ship losses, if we assume two hits per ship
are needed to sink it. (Historically, in the latter decades of the 20th century, two to four hits were typically needed depending on the ship’s size.) There would be a similar range of ship losses if assuming just 100 incoming missiles but varying the probability of penetrating defenses between 25% and 50%.

Now you might say our anti-satellite, EW, jamming, and cyber capabilities make that issue moot and break the kill chain.  You willing to bet 10,000+ sailors' lives on that?  I don't think Biden or the Navy will be, and for that reason the SCS and Taiwan straight will be relegated to subs only and our carrier strike groups will be held at standoff range beyond the first island chain.  We'll need 3-4 of them minimum and all the associated logistics that go along with that.

At the same time, Guam and Okinawa will also be saturated by those missiles.  We don't have enough anti-cruise and anti-ballistic missile defense to make up for the sheer numbers that China can throw out today, let alone tomorrow.  If China gets serious, Guam and our other major Pacific bases will get cratered.  This is why our recent news with the Philippines to open new and reopen old bases there is critically important to spread our assets.  We can't keep all our planes hot seated, fueled and ready to take off on a moment's notice 24/7, so the AF is going to lose a shit ton on the ground.  A recent wargame found that ~90% of the AF's ~300 planes lost were destroyed on the ground.  We also tended to lose around 2 aircraft carriers and about a dozen ships in total.  That sounds unfathomable, unthinkable.  Our USAF and USN are too good right?  I'm sure the French had similar thoughts about the Maginot line.

OTOH, China has issues too.  First they lack experience in amphibious landings, and that's really hard.  We paid for our learnings up to Normandy in blood.  The PLAN, PLAF, PLARF, and PLA haven't demonstrated combined warfare (yet).  Their top-down culture is risk averse.

Pros for China:

• Homecourt advantage
• Nationalistic fervor
• Easier supply chains
• Asymmetric advantages in missiles, potentially cyber
• Quiet diesel subs good for cross-straight and near costal fights
• AA/AD in SCS
• Enough nukes to hold us to MAD

Cons for China:

• Technology disadvantage vs. US/allies
• Economic considerations of fighting one of their top 2 trading partners (this goes both ways)
• Lack of experience in amphibious landings
• Taiwan's geography works against them once they land (few viable beaches/ports to land at, lots of mountains and choke points make it defensible inland)
• Time - the longer it takes the worse for China once things go hot

Pros for US:

• Overall much stronger military, better training and more professional
• Technology advantage in stealth, standoff weapons, anti-missile defense (although #'s limited), anti-sub warfare, space, and others
• Blue water Navy

Cons for US:

• Military is currently spread around the world
• US population isn't bought into the need to defend Taiwan or spend our lives on another war in Asia
• Could go nuclear
• Long supply chains make sustainment really hard
• Relatively low supplies of anti-ship standoff range missiles like LRASM, which forces the USN to either put subs or carrier groups at risk
• Unlike Ukraine, Taiwan cannot realistically be resupplied once the conflict starts because we cannot guarantee air superiority due to mainland China's missile reach and proximity
• Limited basing options in AsiaPac make juicy targets for Chinese missiles + our antimissile defense is nowhere near enough to deal with their #'s

If you really want to geek on this stuff, read the output of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) unclassified wargame "The First Battle of the Next War - Wargaming a Chinese Invasion of Taiwan" released in January 2023.  It's a sobering look at what we face.  The bottom line: in most scenarios Taiwan is able to sustain as an independent democracy.  The bad news: we lose a lot of lives and materials and our military is severely degraded for years to come (as is China's).

[atomheartbevo 90,682]

5 hours ago, BabaYaga said:

China is committing genocide on certain demographics and welding others into their rooms as part of their zero-tolerance policies.  The Chinese politburo are akin to a Mafia-esq cartel.  I would question whether they lack the resolve to resort back to full authoritarian.  The only country with a more egregious track record for sacrificing their citizens than the Russians are the Chinese.  

They might sacrifice their citizens, but they won’t sacrifice their economy.  Throughout history, when large countries that are run through dictatorships or monarchy or some other form of government where the people have little say, have their economy zoom into the shitter or some other form of instability that gets the people in the streets, that usually leads to leadership and other changes.  In the relevant examples for $200 category, we have Russia in the 1910s (Russian monarchy had ruled for centuries), the Chinese monarchy in the 1910s (which had lasted for over 2,000 years), the Soviet Union in the 1980s (which had lasted for most of the century).  Get people in the streets, institutions collapse.  

4 hours ago, Horn of Gabriel said:

Everything you write here would be relevant if China were not a dictatorship, which they are.  This is the same country that during the Great Leap Forward allowed some 50M+ people to starve to death, and tortured and killed another 2-3M people to keep the population in line.  And that was on a population base much smaller than now.  Will things be different now?  Maybe?  Their government is not afraid of their people, the other way around.  Xi is gonna do what Xi wants.  His bigger fear is trying for Taiwan and losing, because that's how dictators get deposed or killed.  He'll go if he feels like he can get it, and doesn't give 2 fucks about the losses.

If he goes for Taiwan, his economy is destroyed by the US/Japan/South Korea, and to a lesser extent by India, Vietnam, etc.  The US alone could destroy their economy, but Japan and South Korea will be right there with us, as will most of the EU.  India, Vietnam, etc. will be wooing Western/Korean/Japanese companies that will be banned from operating inside of China.

There is nobody like the US to fill the gap if we exit China’s economy   Nobody.   And when American countries are forced to pull out of China, that won’t be affecting just exports to the US, but worldwide.   People are going to get their iPhones and iPads and laptops and desktops and gaming consoles from somebody and it’ll be India (which is actually ramping up iPhone production and increasing their offerings) or Vietnam or any number of smaller nations happy to take it on with the help of the US, Japan, South Korea, etc. 

And China’s one-child policy, coupled with their tradition of the child taking care of the parents, has put them on a collision course with population issues that could be worse than Russia’s.  A war that collapses their economy will make that much worse.

 

[Parliament 14,620]

8 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

 

And China’s one-child policy, coupled with their tradition of the child taking care of the parents, has put them on a collision course with population issues that could be worse than Russia’s.  

 

And female infanticide.

[atomheartbevo 90,682]

does anybody here think the government is just going to honestly tell us whether they can or cannot detect such objects?  

[Nicole44 22,326]

8 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

does anybody here think the government is just going to honestly tell us whether they can or cannot detect such objects?  

 

[TwiceHorn 32,109]

12 hours ago, BabaYaga said:

God help us then when we face off against 5th generation aircraft from hostile nations that can both operate at similar altitudes, posses offensive capabilities, and have state of the art countermeasures.  All this article talks about with any level of complexity is timing

I think the point is that those are the threats we are best prepared for, not small, slow-moving things that don't require a multi-million dollar missile to take out.

[BamaATL 16,593]

10 hours ago, Trey3216 said:

IF we had an all out war with China, every auto factory in the US would be re-purposed to build munitions, just as they were in the 30's and 40's.  We wouldn't be selling new F-150's, because we wouldn't have microchips to put in them, so turn the factories into munition factories, howitzer factories, missile body factories, etc.  

 

People glossing over the productive power of the US, even with much of our production being overseas, don't remember what the US is capable of and willing to do when faced with an economic and existential threat such as Taiwan being taken by China.  

Whenever people question the economic might of the USA, I remember two important things, both that happened 80 plus years ago but nonetheless are always worth remembering.  

1.  Prior to WWII, we didn't have an air force to speak, truth be told not much at all beyond civil and mail planes.  Once it became apparent to the Roosevelt administration that it was going to be inevitable we were going to be in it, manufacturing started.   That isn't impressive, nor is it insane.  What's insane, is that in essence, the plan was that we would build so many bombers that we would blot the sky.  It quite literally wouldn't matter how many the Germans or the Japanese shot down, we would just keep on coming.  Now what is crazy, is that in any other country in the world, even today, that would literally be laughed out the room as idea.  But the real crazy part is that is was done.

2.  At the same time, while we did have a Navy, by the end of the war, we built so much that the rest of the world's Navy combined wasn't as large.  

 

Both of those things, at the same time, out of a depression. 

[TwiceHorn 32,109]

5 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

Whenever people question the economic might of the USA, I remember two important things, both that happened 80 plus years ago but nonetheless are always worth remembering.  

1.  Prior to WWII, we didn't have an air force to speak, truth be told not much at all beyond civil and mail planes.  Once it became apparent to the Roosevelt administration that it was going to be inevitable we were going to be in it, manufacturing started.   That isn't impressive, nor is it insane.  What's insane, is that in essence, the plan was that we would build so many bombers that we would blot the sky.  It quite literally wouldn't matter how many the Germans or the Japanese shot down, we would just keep on coming.  Now what is crazy, is that in any other country in the world, even today, that would literally be laughed out the room as idea.  But the real crazy part is that is was done.

2.  At the same time, while we did have a Navy, by the end of the war, we built so much that the rest of the world's Navy combined wasn't as large.  

 

Both of those things, at the same time, out of a depression. 

We were woefully prepared for WWII, no question and USA, Inc. answered the call.  I wonder, though, about current timeframes versus then.

And, to be perfectly blunt, I'm not sure our corporate environment has the right kind of attitude these days.  War is a powerful motivator, though.

[BamaATL 16,593]

21 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

We were woefully prepared for WWII, no question and USA, Inc. answered the call.  I wonder, though, about current timeframes versus then.

And, to be perfectly blunt, I'm not sure our corporate environment has the right kind of attitude these days.  War is a powerful motivator, though.

So what you are saying, is that despite having more than double the population, infinitely better technology, access to more resources, a more educated work force, quite literally dozens fold more facilities than at that time, the USA would struggle to meet this sort of challenge because of our corporate attitude.  

Well I guess that's a thought.  

[wild_turkey 3,300]

Would China be invading Taiwan for the sake of reclaiming a former territory that they believe is rightfully theirs (like Russia and Ukraine) or for the sake of controlling the world’s semiconductor manufacturing?

If it’s the latter, it seems there will be a major problem with China successfully operating and maintaining the fabs once they take control. Is it expected that China would have the expertise to do this on their own, or that enough of the Taiwanese workforce would survive the conflict and be forced to continue working under Chinese occupation?

[atomheartbevo 90,682]

24 minutes ago, wild_turkey said:

If it’s the latter, it seems there will be a major problem with China successfully operating and maintaining the fabs once they take control. Is it expected that China would have the expertise to do this on their own, or that enough of the Taiwanese workforce would survive the conflict and be forced to continue working under Chinese occupation?

If they take control of the fabs, who is going to buy from them?  Iran?  Russia?  North Korea?

[Nicole44 22,326]

50 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

If they take control of the fabs, who is going to buy from them?  Iran?  Russia?  North Korea?

The quasi axis of evil! 

[HiggyBaby 2,621]

SIAP but good read on the whole fleet of balloons china has been using


https://apple.news/AKCtFoqLwSs6uRBtQ2f6-BA

[KYHorn 17,637]

21 hours ago, Homercles said:

So you’re saying it’s trivial to shoot one down from 60,000 feet at a precise location that minimizes risk of the impact and maximizes opportunity to recover the debris?  It’s a challenging target given its minimal radar signature, high altitude, slow speed and intent to keep it intact as possible. 
 

You’re entitled to your opinion, but doing it right on the first try was impressive to me.  There are other articles on The Drive/Warzone site that discuss in detail why you don’t just zip up there and riddle it with bullets.  But you do you, maybe next time you can go knock it out. 

 

20 hours ago, Bevo said:

Did we even try a pin prick attack?

All of y'all minimizing the agility of Chinese balloons do so at your own peril.

 

[Trey3216 15,453]

7 hours ago, wild_turkey said:

Would China be invading Taiwan for the sake of reclaiming a former territory that they believe is rightfully theirs (like Russia and Ukraine) or for the sake of controlling the world’s semiconductor manufacturing?

If it’s the latter, it seems there will be a major problem with China successfully operating and maintaining the fabs once they take control. Is it expected that China would have the expertise to do this on their own, or that enough of the Taiwanese workforce would survive the conflict and be forced to continue working under Chinese occupation?

Yes

[FartingMonk 3,630]

We should start building giant magnifying glasses to burn holes in these balloons

[Armybrat 41,450]

21 hours ago, BabaYaga said:

That works for "dumb" munitions - everything guided has chip dependencies on Taiwan

Scavenge chips from all the refrigerators & X-Boxes ….. kinda like the scrap metal drives in WW2.

[Horn of Gabriel 1,886]

15 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

If he goes for Taiwan, his economy is destroyed by the US/Japan/South Korea, and to a lesser extent by India, Vietnam, etc.  The US alone could destroy their economy, but Japan and South Korea will be right there with us, as will most of the EU.  India, Vietnam, etc. will be wooing Western/Korean/Japanese companies that will be banned from operating inside of China.

There is nobody like the US to fill the gap if we exit China’s economy   Nobody.   And when American countries are forced to pull out of China, that won’t be affecting just exports to the US, but worldwide.   People are going to get their iPhones and iPads and laptops and desktops and gaming consoles from somebody and it’ll be India (which is actually ramping up iPhone production and increasing their offerings) or Vietnam or any number of smaller nations happy to take it on with the help of the US, Japan, South Korea, etc. 

Maybe in the long term.  In the short term they are precariously close to being able to take the island and then figure they're too big to fail and will deal w/ the repercussions down the road.  The world depends on Chinese manufacturing and supply chains way more than Russia; it was realatively easy to remove Russia from the global economy but it will do as major damage to the US if we shut down all trade with China also.  Go through your house and see how much shit is made in China.  It's everywhere and changing those supply chains to India or reshoring them to the US is a decade-long thing, not a flip the switch.  In the meantime, voters are going to punish the party in power when they see a 40%+ price increase on daily goods to account for that re-shoring, as well as shortages.

Also don't count on the EU for shit.  They'll buckle.

Quote

And China’s one-child policy, coupled with their tradition of the child taking care of the parents, has put them on a collision course with population issues that could be worse than Russia’s.  A war that collapses their economy will make that much worse.

Agree, again, long term.  China has a window for about 7-10 years now before they hit the rough patch there, and they have some homeport military advantages, AND the US population isn't bought into the need for the war.  That could be enough to nudge Xi into action.

[BabaYaga 15,632]

11 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

I think the point is that those are the threats we are best prepared for, not small, slow-moving things that don't require a multi-million dollar missile to take out.

Which is kind of the point.  Fluff pieces swooning over what is essentially a stationary target with a fighter we sunk more than a trillion into doesn't really move the needle in my opinion.  

[Chet Steadman 940]

Paging @Stannis for some good naval talk

[BabaYaga 15,632]

16 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

Scavenge chips from all the refrigerators & X-Boxes ….. kinda like the scrap metal drives in WW2.

It would be brutal.  Take a long, hard look at your phone.  It might be the last one you have for a decade +

You think the isolation from Covid was bad, can you imagine what it would do to millions to have all their social media/communications/browsing taken away from them.

[SquishMitten 10,497]

10 hours ago, wild_turkey said:

Would China be invading Taiwan for the sake of reclaiming a former territory that they believe is rightfully theirs (like Russia and Ukraine) or for the sake of controlling the world’s semiconductor manufacturing?

If it’s the latter, it seems there will be a major problem with China successfully operating and maintaining the fabs once they take control. Is it expected that China would have the expertise to do this on their own, or that enough of the Taiwanese workforce would survive the conflict and be forced to continue working under Chinese occupation?

This is why Operation Paperclip has been mentioned multiple times.