३ ऑगस्ट, २०२४

"Taiwan must be 'mentally prepared' for a Trump victory in November — and the scrutiny that will come with that..."

"... said Mei Fu-hsing, director of the Taiwan Security Analysis Center, a New York-based research center. 'If [Trump] is reelected, he will certainly demand Taiwan to significantly increase its own defense spending and be more proactive in preparing for war,' Mei said. Improved training is a key way for Taiwan to show it is taking military readiness seriously, analysts say. But new programs have continued to face shortages of funding, instructors and equipment, leading to regular complaints from attendees about the quality of instruction, according to reservists as well as official statements acknowledging setbacks. 'It was a complete waste of time,' said Vincent Tsao, a 30-year-old scuba diving instructor who spent most of his five days of reservist training last week sitting idly inside being taught by retired soldiers who openly acknowledged they weren’t prepared to lead the program."

From "Taiwan is readying citizens for a Chinese invasion. It’s not going well. The government extended mandatory military service and revamped reservist training in an effort to make Beijing think twice. But it’s already falling short" (WaPo).

१११ टिप्पण्या:

Peachy म्हणाले...

"One China" policy = the corrupt democrat Biden left's policy as pay-back for all of the massive financial support the Chinese communists give to American Corruptocrats.

Peachy म्हणाले...

The corrupt American left are happy to throw a sovereign nation under the bus. over their petty vile greed.

May the left rot in hell.

Achilles म्हणाले...

If you want peace you prepare for war.

Everyone knows that.

n.n म्हणाले...

Mei Fu-hsing wants to share/shift responsibility to Americans. That's not how people act in good faith. What would HR say about this equitable and inclusive derangement?

n.n म्हणाले...

Free the Uyghurs, emigration reform in Tibet, climate change, too. Protest!

Kakistocracy म्हणाले...

A world leader would understand the geopolitical relevance of Europe and Taiwan.

Trump’s public utterances are calculated to appeal to the lowest common denominator in the MAGA voter base. It can be hard to determine where his malice and corruption end and sheer ignorance begins. He is a bull in a china shop who simply doesn’t care about the consequences of his words. He wants votes and the collateral damage caused by his comments is simply irrelevant to him. It’s not that he actively wants to harm Taiwan (or Ukraine). It’s that he really doesn’t care about them and the harm really doesn’t matter to him.

Of course he is equally indifferent to the welfare of the United States and doesn’t care about the harm he might cause to the American people. He craves power, money and immunity from prosecution. Nothing else matters.

Peachy म्हणाले...

The war Machine Demcoratics have no problem with the Chi-Com invasion of Taiwan.

Bob Boyd म्हणाले...

Daddy's home.

Dave Begley म्हणाले...

The whole world depends on Taiwan for semiconductors. We will help, but their first duty is to provide for their own defense.

Sally327 म्हणाले...

It there any scenario whereby Taiwan successfully defends itself against China? I'm not war gamer but it seems highly unlikely.

Bob Boyd म्हणाले...

Seems like they're trying to spin this against Trump, but basically it says Taiwan needs US help preparing for war, they haven't been getting it and they're hoping that will change if Trump is President again.

Leland म्हणाले...

Trump’s not yet President again, and already our “allies” are realizing they won’t continue to get a free ride and will need to carry their share of the burden for defense.

KJE म्हणाले...

Everyone makes fun of preppers and survivalists up until the point when it’s time to band together and actually be survivalists. It doesn’t help that the Tiwanese government has not acknowledged its dependence on the outside for its sovereignty.

Political Junkie म्हणाले...

DJT has his shortcomings, which Rich dutifully chronicles. The AA highlighted portion does show "trust fund baby syndrome" in all its bewildering glory. Why should Taiwan defend it self with vigor when Big Daddy Warbucks (USA) will defend it.

Wince म्हणाले...

Blogger Rich said...
A world leader would understand the geopolitical relevance of Europe and Taiwan.

Rich really doesn't close the circle on explaining how Trump holding allies' feet to the fire is a bad thing for them or us when it comes to them providing for their national self defense.

Rich simply leaps to "Orange Man bad" (see above).

Peachy म्हणाले...

Kamala(D) will more than likely win in Nov.

Taiwan is screwed.

Narr म्हणाले...

A ChiCom invasion of Taiwan would be a disaster for all parties. The mainland and the island are in a symbiotic relationship that currently profits both, a relationship that will be impossible to restore even if the Reds win clearly and cleanly (which seems unlikely to me).

But leaders in the grip of personal ambition and/or ideological delusion have been known to do stupid things.

john mosby म्हणाले...

Taiwan and commie China are still linked economically in so many ways.

The Chicom military has been forced to be an economic player for many years. First just to have the resources to operate; then, for the personal wealth of the flag officers.

Any PLA general or PLAN admiral who made war on Taiwan would be killing his own golden goose.

Same for civilian Chicom officials and their families.

If Xi gave the order to invade Taiwan, he would find himself out of office, and maybe talking with his honorable ancestors.

Whatever loyalty enforcement plans he has in place wouldnt work if the guys holding the guns don’t benefit.

JSM

Kate म्हणाले...

Trump is a bull in a China shop?

That could've been a witty comment.

Sebastian म्हणाले...

"Taiwan is readying citizens for a Chinese invasion. It’s not going well"

So they don't care all that much? Combination of US-induced moral hazard, the sense that if China does attack defense will be pointless, and that worst-case takeover will reduce them to ordinary Chinese citizens--oppressive but tolerable for most people.

Besides semiconductors, what is Taiwan to us? Worth how many lives and $$?

Why is TSMC where it is anyway? Did the US sign off on it, or did the deep state even encourage it as a kind of tripwire for geopolitical purposes?

mccullough म्हणाले...

Make Taiwan Great Again

Political Junkie म्हणाले...

Taiwan's new motto - Make Anticommunism Great Again.

Yancey Ward म्हणाले...

Why prepare to defend yourself if you can get the US military to defend you?

tim maguire म्हणाले...

Achilles said...
If you want peace you prepare for war.

Everyone knows that.


Except Einstein, who was a surprisingly stupid man outside of the sciences.

If electing Trump is what it takes to get Taiwan to take its own defence seriously, then that’s another reason to vote for Trump.

traditionalguy म्हणाले...

There is an important chip mfg industry on Formosa. Unless the last typhoon blew it away. But this has long been a big issue since JFK used Quemoy and Matsu ‘s defense preparations as an issue in 1960.

imTay म्हणाले...

Doublethink quiz:

How is a Chinese invasion of its own province different than the “anti terrorism operation” that Kiev undertook against Donbas?

Remember that both provinces are internationally recognized as part of the “invading” country.

n.n म्हणाले...

Taiwan will not stand alone, but they must stand. Foreign policy doesn't follow the lady and gentlemen protocol.

Fred Drinkwater म्हणाले...

What a perverted article. But not the first time.

President Trump: NATO countries must meet their treaty obligations. U.S. media: Trump wants to abandon NATO because Russia!

Candidate Trump: Taiwan needs to put more local effort into their own defense. U.S. Media: Trump is tempting PRC to invade!

The Post, and U.S. Media / elites in general, don't give a tinker's dam for NATO, Taiwan, or anything but keeping their Democrat funded rice bowl full.

Jamie म्हणाले...

Rich, I truly don't understand why you believe that Trump's stated aim - and since he's already been president, we can safely call it a policy, I think, and one that demonstrably worked - of countries' contributing meaningfully to their own defense as a requirement of receiving US support is irresponsible.

To the extent that I can puzzle it out you seem to be saying that Trump's policy emboldens China. Is that it? Wouldn't it make more sense that a more militarily prepared Taiwan would tamp down China's boldness?

Or is it that Taiwan's attempts to become more militarily prepared are a provocation to China? In which case, can you really argue that China waits for provocation in order to act? Remember the balloon?

cb म्हणाले...

Surely the OPLANs targeting 'Three Gorges Dam' should Taiwan be invaded makes China 'hesitate'.

narciso म्हणाले...

The president who totally compromised by china and harris is not any less so

loudogblog म्हणाले...

You can't expect to have a country if you're not willing to do the work to keep it.

doctrev म्हणाले...

Ironically, Taiwan isn't going to help itself with a military buildup. The Chinese simply cannot even impose a blockade if the USN is around the island and active. And if they can break the carriers, no amount of Taiwanese defense will be sufficient.

Really, the smartest thing to do is end support of Ukraine and reassign forces in the Middle East. That is not going to happen, though.

Rabel म्हणाले...

"Lai also faces fierce pushback from the Beijing-friendly Kuomintang, which controls the legislature..."

Five minutes of reading shows that calling the modern day Kuomintang party "Beijing-friendly" is WTF level nonsense.

John henry म्हणाले...

Maybe my quemoy/matsu comment in the other thread was on topic after all!

John Henry

rhhardin म्हणाले...

Taiwan doesn't have to beat China, just make it too expensive for winning to be worthwhile. The more they spend on defense, the costlier it is to start a war. At the moment the US is paying that defense cost.

John henry म्हणाले...

China doesn't need to sink one of our carriers. They might even be better off not sinking one.

All they need to do is put 1-2 small to medium size missiles on the flight deck.

That would stop anything other than choppers and harriers from using the ship. Maybe even them too.

John Henry

Big Mike म्हणाले...

Bob Boyd said...

Seems like they're trying to spin this against Trump, but basically it says Taiwan needs US help preparing for war, they haven't been getting it and they're hoping that will change if Trump is President again


+ 1

doctrev म्हणाले...

John henry said...
China doesn't need to sink one of our carriers. They might even be better off not sinking one.

All they need to do is put 1-2 small to medium size missiles on the flight deck.

That would stop anything other than choppers and harriers from using the ship. Maybe even them too.

John Henry

8/3/24, 12:59 PM

Yup. Merely being able to get missiles past the escorts will result in a captain pulling the entire group out of the Strait. I actually think any of the current captains might face a mutiny if they persist in staying while the ship gets hammered by warning missiles.

Otoh, the Chinese ALSO learned the lessons of Pearl Harbor. I don't think they're going to let carriers survive if the war goes hot, especially when America cannot replace them.

Bill, Republic of Texas म्हणाले...

". 'If [Trump] is reelected, he will certainly demand Taiwan to significantly increase its own defense spending and be more proactive in preparing for war,' Mei said."

Trump is a monster.

Narr म्हणाले...

The China-Taiwan relationship has strong parallels to that between Germany and Switzerland in WWII.

narciso म्हणाले...

The kmt has forgotten than xi is their enemy

effinayright म्हणाले...

"John henry said...
"China doesn't need to sink one of our carriers. They might even be better off not sinking one. All they need to do is put 1-2 small to medium size missiles on the flight deck.

That would stop anything other than choppers and harriers from using the ship. Maybe even them too."

>>>>>That ALL is doing a lot of heavy lifting.

Drago म्हणाले...

The ChiComs completely own the Biden Crime family (how many diamonds and other gifts along with crack and underage hookers and cash routed to biden grandchildrem did they give them?) which is why Taiwan was never pressured by Joey Dementia's handlers to improve Taiwan's defensive capabilities. So here we are.....stolen elections that result in installed corrupted leadership has consequences.

Drago म्हणाले...

"The China-Taiwan relationship has strong parallels to that between Germany and Switzerland in WWII."

So did the ChiCom - Hong Kong relationship....but in the end leftists/commies/democraticals cant help themselves. They will always destroy the goose that lays the golden eggs.

Leland म्हणाले...

Blogger Rich said...
A world leader would understand the geopolitical relevance of Europe and Taiwan.


If Europe and Taiwan need world leaders to coddle them, then they are no longer relevant. They are relevant when they stand up for themselves and ask others to stand with them.

effinayright म्हणाले...

imTay said...
Doublethink quiz:

How is a Chinese invasion of its own province different than the “anti terrorism operation” that Kiev undertook against Donbas?

Remember that both provinces are internationally recognized as part of the “invading” country.

****************

What's yer point.

I can recall our own history, where the American colonies were internationally recognized as part of Great Britain. I guess you would have been a Tory back then.

Using that example:

Does Taiwan not have the right to declare itself an independent country?

Do the Ukrainians, painfully joined to The Russian Empires, then annexed by the USSR, then killed by the Salinists who starved them to death by the millions, then given back their control over Crimea by Khrushchev in 1954, then broke free when the USSR ceased to exist...have no valid rights to their independence?

What mystical bond are you invoking here....is it anything like Lebensraum?

Face it: irredentism is sooooo lame....and passeé...........

Drago म्हणाले...

LLR-democratical Rich: "A world leader would understand the geopolitical relevance of Europe and Taiwan"

Our current leadership's weakness and failure allowed the russkis into Ukraine...after previously letting the russkis into Crimea...and have helped make Taiwan a more tempting target for the ChiComs...after being paid directly by the ChiComs and Putin's pals.

Josephbleau म्हणाले...

China saw Hong Kong as a rich capitalist trading gem and they lusted after the wealth. But by taking it they will destroy it by killing initiative with waves of party overhead, like communism does. China does not do rogue capitalism.

China sees Taiwan as a rich capitalist manufacturer, they lust after its GDP, if they conquer by war, there will be no industry left. TSMC will not start back up after a war. AMSL holdings in Holland won’t provide 3 nm uv chip machines for a while, and China has not been able to steal the design and make it work yet.

China’s only hope is to scare Taiwan so much they give up and welcome China in, then China has a skilled intact workforce and existing plants, that would be ok for a while, but will decay and not innovate. In China, billion dollar tech lords end up in the camps.

And if China invades who will buy their electric cars and such, Sudan? Apple and Tesla, and everyone else will pull out.

So the idea of getting Taiwan to be stronger helps democracy by making Taiwan resistant to giving up, from the sound of the article, Taiwan’s reserve military is a clusterf and needs a lot of shaking up and training anyway.

Original Mike म्हणाले...

"The whole world depends on Taiwan for semiconductors."

A war over Taiwan will result in a global depression.

We had a comment section a few days ago about tariffs "vs" free trade. Taiwan's dominance in semiconductors demonstrates the problem of free trade which only takes into account short term economics. It leaves us very vulnerable in the case of hostilities.

Freeish trade is good, but free trade to the exclusion of national security is incredibly short sighted.

Iman म्हणाले...

A world leader would not sell access to his office to friend OR the enemy. Grifters like Biden and the mentally challenged Harris never got the memo.

bob म्हणाले...

Europe and Taiwan have long since been war-torn countries. They are quite the opposite. They are among the richest countries on the planet. Why do they feel somehow cheated or put out to have to pay for their own defense? I just don't understand. Grow up, please. We can't keep paying your bills. If you don't care enough for your countries to defend it, then why should we?

Michael K म्हणाले...

amie said...

Rich, I truly don't understand why you believe that Trump's stated aim - and since he's already been president, we can safely call it a policy, I think, and one that demonstrably worked - of countries' contributing meaningfully to their own defense as a requirement of receiving US support is irresponsible.


Don't ask. Just look up the DNC page "Instructions for trolls."

Rusty म्हणाले...

John henry said...
"China doesn't need to sink one of our carriers. They might even be better off not sinking one."

The whole point of having a big boat with airplanes on it is to keep the bad guys from sinking the big boat.
First the Chinese have to find the big boat. Then the Chinese have to get close to the big boat. Then the Chinese have to have the ability to disable the big boat. All the time the Chinese are doing this the big boat and all the accompanying smaller boats are working hard to keep the Chinese from damaging any of the boats. While all this is going on there will be other carrier task forces in the area. Lets not forget the submarines that come into play.
The United States is very, very good at doing carrier task forces. We are also very very good at doing submnarines. The Chinese have yet to master the art of carrier task forces.

John henry म्हणाले...

Effinay,

All does do some heavy lifting there. A lot of people think China needs to sink one of our carriers. That is probably pretty hard to do.

My point is that even if relatively unsinkable, carriers are relatively fragile. It would not take much to put the catapult out of commission. A direct hit with even a small missile would do it.

The ship would be unable to launch planesfor weeks until it could be repaired. Is there even anywhere outside Newport news that could do it?

China knows from satellite imagery within a few feet where the carrier is. The group could maybe defend against a few missiles. Could it stop 100-150? Only 2-3 need to get through.


John Henry

Bushman of the Kohlrabi म्हणाले...

Regardless of what Taiwan thinks about their situation, China is hoping for a Kamala win.

John henry म्हणाले...

Narr,

Except that Switzerland had 2 defensive advantaged

1 geography makes Switzerland hard to invade, relatively easy to defend. (easy compared to Hong Kong or Taiwan)

2 the Swiss spent, and continued to spend until recently huge amounts on defense. Including a trained and armed reserve of almost every Swiss man.

John Henry

Rocco म्हणाले...

@Jaime...

Rich’s Althouse postings are calculated to appeal to the lowest common denominator in the TDS voter base. It can be hard to determine where his malice and incoherence end and sheer ignorance begins. He is a bullshitter in a china shop who simply doesn’t care about the coherence of his words. He loves to hate Trump and the vague incoherence in his comments is simply irrelevant to him. It’s not that he actively wants to state a clear position on Taiwan (or Ukraine). It’s that he really doesn’t care about them and the disjointedness really doesn’t matter to him.

Bill, Republic of Texas म्हणाले...

effinayright said...

Does Taiwan not have the right to declare itself an independent country?"

-------

Did the Confederate States have that right? The US didn't think so and fought to prevent it.

Does Donbas have that right? The US doesn't think so and is bankrolling the fight to prevent it.

Did Kosovo have that right? The US thought so and fought to make it happen.

Anyone can can declare independence, the key is can they make it stick.

Kirk Parker म्हणाले...

Rusty apparently had never heard of hypersonic antiship missiles.

Whereas effinayright and imTay are arguing over the empty stall decades after the horse left the barn. (The real time to have done something about the one-China policy was when the People's Republic wanted into the UN -- *that's* when we really had some leverage.)

Dixcus म्हणाले...

Effinayright wondered: "Does Taiwan not have the right to declare itself an independent country?"

Some of our Southern states here in the US tried that. How'd that work out?

You see we live in a country that we cannot leave, or else they'll try to kill us.

We're free, you see. This is how freedom is defined. We are prisoners here, of our own device.

We can check out any time we want. We just can't ever leave.

Narayanan म्हणाले...

You can't expect to have a country if you're not willing to do the work to keep it.
=================
here is to hoping Americans hear you loud and clear Brother

narciso म्हणाले...

actually biden knew it in 97, by his own admission

the Russians were not keen on this notion, this is something Phil Short makes clear in his bio of Putin, now I understand why countries in Eastern Europe were eager for it, but thats a different tale,

Michael K म्हणाले...

Rusty, the US was very good at carrier warfare in 1945. Then came the Cold War and MSD as a doctrine. Then we got into "small wars" that we never seemed to win. Partly that was related to MSD. Then the Cold War ended and Bill Clinton sold us out to China. Part of that was " outsourcing " our industrial base that built 15 Essex Class carriers in a year. Now, our Navy has not built a useful ship since Obama came along. Plus,of course, the Democrats have been sold to China.

Narr म्हणाले...

@John henry--

Taiwan has the defensive advantage of being an island. A mountainous island. And whether they have the same system of arming every adult male as the Swiss or not, I assume they have rigged their important high-tech installations for demolition if the balloon goes up.

The ChiComs may decide that having another few dozen million subjects is worth the effort it will take and the destruction it will entail--they are idealists of a sort after all--but I think the chances are slim.

The parallels are there, if the details differ.

Mr Wibble म्हणाले...

China knows from satellite imagery within a few feet where the carrier is.

This is not true. Satellite imagery is useful, but the ocean is huge and picking out an aircraft carrier is difficult even in the best of times. In a war, where the carrier doesn't want to be found, where Chinese satellites will be valid targets, and where the US will be actively engaged in deception operations, it's going to be very difficult to quickly find them, and even more so to target them.

The group could maybe defend against a few missiles. Could it stop 100-150? Only 2-3 need to get through.

Missile reserves aren't infinite. Scraping together 100-150 such missiles is going to be difficult even for China, and will likely force them to prioritize it over other targets such as missile destroyers or shipping. And, even if you were successful, you'll still have to deal with the 10 other carriers the U.S. can bring to bear.

effinayright म्हणाले...

Dixcus said...
Effinayright wondered: "Does Taiwan not have the right to declare itself an independent country?"

Some of our Southern states here in the US tried that. How'd that work out?

>>>>>>>>>>>>Buffoon. Those states joined the United States by their own accord. Taiwan has never been an official part of the Mainland.

You see we live in a country that we cannot leave, or else they'll try to kill us.

>>>>>>>>>>>> You are a veritable Suitcase full of Feathers. The airports are filled with people leaving this country each day.

>>>>>>>>>>>>And how many decades has it been----over 15, I think---since anyone in this country been slaim for advocating secession?

We're free, you see. This is how freedom is defined. We are prisoners here, of our own device.

We can check out any time we want. We just can't ever leave.

>>>>>>>>>>>>Your lyrics-fu is very strong. Maybe you and JoeB should write a song around them

narciso म्हणाले...

well china has not been keen on say east turkistan, or tibet or other places that are geographically contiguous, they have ambitions on kashmir, across the pakistani border,

Original Mike म्हणाले...

"I assume [Taiwan has] rigged their important high-tech installations for demolition if the balloon goes up."

Like I said, global depression.

doctrev म्हणाले...

Mr Wibble said...

Missile reserves aren't infinite. Scraping together 100-150 such missiles is going to be difficult even for China, and will likely force them to prioritize it over other targets such as missile destroyers or shipping. And, even if you were successful, you'll still have to deal with the 10 other carriers the U.S. can bring to bear.

8/3/24, 4:31 PM

Even assuming that the neocons aren't doing their usual disastrous lowballing of Chinese industrial potential, how many missile destroyers do you think a carrier group can lose before it becomes extremely vulnerable?

And even assuming China destroys only one carrier in this manner instead of the two currently near the theatre, that is the end for power projection. Russia and Iran can't wait to turn the boats in their lakes into graveyards.

Dr Weevil म्हणाले...

Sally327 (10:13am):
"I[s] there any scenario whereby Taiwan successfully defends itself against China?"

I can think of a few possibilities, besides Kirk Parker's hypersonic missiles (3:50pm):

1. Drones. Ukraine has figured out how to build and use drones in higher quantities (tens of thousands) and qualities than their much larger neighbor. Taiwan could probably do so, too.

2. Mines. They wouldn't have to float where they could be swept, just lie on the bottom of the straits (less than 500 ft deep) until activated, then float up to blow up whatever's above them.

3. Most intriguing, EMPs. We all know that an electromagnetic pulse weapon exploded hundreds of miles in the air over (e.g.) Nebraska could fry all the electronics across a thousand miles or more, causing just about every mechanical device other than antique cars and Amish buggies to stop working. I think there must be an altitude at which an EMP would fry all electronics in a radius of 30 miles. If the Taiwan Straits (80 miles across at the narrowest) were filled with Chinese invasion ships, what would happen if 3 or 4 30-mile-radius EMPs were set off in a line from north to south that fried all electronics in the western three-quarters of the straits? Wouldn't that cause every ship in the invasion fleet to start drifting helplessly with the current, its weapons useless? Wouldn't Xi have to call out sail-powered fishing boats to rescue the crews?

Sean म्हणाले...

The position on Taiwan will continue in the new administration as it has for many years. The true position of the US will not be clear. The president will make strong statements about defending Taiwan and then the State Department and diplomatic corps will immediately walk them back.

Kirk Parker म्हणाले...

Weevil,

1. The hypersonic anti-ship missiles are about Chinese disabling the US carriers, not the Taiwanese defending themselves.

2. Regarding EMP's, are you talking about that kind of precision range based on actual knowledge, or just on speculation? I ask because I don't have any specific knowledge of EMP capabilities, but I do know what a spectacularly huge range of EMP resistance exists across the broad range of electronic equipment.

Dr Weevil म्हणाले...

Parker:
1. If hypersonic missiles are a good way to sink ships, and China can only invade Taiwan by ship, they would obviously be an effective means of defense for Taiwan.

2. My understanding is that EMP is line-of-sight, so the higher up the blast occurs, the further it goes. It doesn't matter how strong or weak the blast, the curvature of the earth protects objects beyond a specific distance.

MikeD म्हणाले...

The basis for the entire article, and this thread, seems to take some lefty academic at a grifter's NGO as actually factual. Didn't Covid dissuade us from trusting the self titled "experts"?

Aught Severn म्हणाले...

Yup. Merely being able to get missiles past the escorts will result in a captain pulling the entire group out of the Strait. I actually think any of the current captains might face a mutiny if they persist in staying while the ship gets hammered by warning missiles.

I doubt carriers will be anywhere near the strait. They will be close enough for their planes to reach, and no closer. Maybe far enough away for sorties to require tanker support.

That strait is going to be a no-man's land of mines, missiles, bodies, and wrecks. Air superiority will not exist for either side and so much RF energy will be directed in that area that you would probably be able to cook a frozen pizza... meaning anything on or above the surface will either have ordinance heading towards it or will shortly have ordinance heading towards it regardless of time of day. The mines will keep subsurface craft away.

Short of a large, pre-emptive nuclear strike by China (which would not result in her achieving her strategic goals), the battle of the Tawain Straits is going to be a vicious, bloody affair for all involved.

narciso म्हणाले...

we work around the premise of the story

Wayne Wilson म्हणाले...

Pedo joe and his crackhead son have already sold Taiwan out .After the first week of Jan 2025 ,hunter will be living the rich life. Pedo joe ,maybe not.

Narr म्हणाले...

No argument about global economic disaster if it comes to war, Original Mike. That's a given.

China's wellbeing is much more tied to overseas trade than the USA's. They have to import foodstuffs or starve. The USA could lose lots of ships and still ensure that China's imports cease.

Whatever the case, the 2024 window of opportunity to invade Taiwan is going to expire in a few months at most. I can't decide whether that makes it more likely or less, given the US political situation.

Darkisland म्हणाले...

Blogger Mr Wibble said...

This is not true. Satellite imagery is useful, but the ocean is huge and picking out an aircraft carrier is difficult even in the best of times.

Pretty much every inch of the Pacific Ocean is under pretty much real time (an hour or two) observation. That is a lot of square miles to evaluate. I work with high speed industrial vision systems that can, for example, inspect glass vials for particulates (and distinguish them from bubbles) down to a few dozen microns at speeds of 3-400 vials per minute. https://www.syntegon.com/solutions/pharma/automated-visual-inspection/

It seems to me that the same software could quickly (as in milliseconds) analyze a square mile or two of ocean looking for aircraft carriers and their groups. It seems to me that it would be trivial to distinguish, by silohuette if nothing else, a carrier from a tanker or large container ship.

Carriers can go 45-50 miles an hour but seldom do so once spotted, it would be easy to keep in sight. There is not really much in the way of jamming or other electronics that could interfere with line of sight vision.

They don't need to be big missiles. Remember, you don't need to sink the carrier or even put a hole in the flight deck. All you need to do is knock out the catapult and/or arresting gear systems. And you don't even need to break the catapult, just bend it a bit.

Someone mentioned how good our carriers are. They are pretty good offensively. But we have not had an enemy test them since WWII.

We do a lot of training and war gaming, of course. I live a mile from the main gate of the old Roosevelt Roads Naval Station and was associated with it from 71 until it closed in 04. It was home of the Atlantic Fleet Weapons Range which continuously ran war games. For more than 30 years, the mantra regarding the war games and training exercises was "The carrier always wins." With the corollary "Even when the carrier loses, it still wins." Everyone knew the games were rigged. If a carrier ever lost in an exercise, people in high places would start asking what good are they? And we can't have that, can we?

Carriers are great for projecting power but they are fragile. They have never, since WWII been tested against a serious opponent.

Impressive as Hell though. You will never know how impressive until you see the JFK approaching alongside at 35 miles per hour. (We would be struggling to maintain 15 or so).

John Henry

Ralph L म्हणाले...

Pretty much every inch of the Pacific Ocean is under pretty much real time (an hour or two) observation

By what? Things (UAVs) have changed since I was an Air Staff contractor in '92, but not that much.

effinayright म्हणाले...

If after fifty years of studying EMP our warships are not protected against it, we are well and truly fucked.

Anyone know the facts here?

Darkisland म्हणाले...

Satellites, Ralph.

John Henry

Mark म्हणाले...

If Red China invades Taiwan, isolationist America First Donald Trump won't do a damn thing about it if he is president.

Peachy म्हणाले...

Mark - you're deluded. Did you miss the left's unison "One China" policy? It feeds Taiwan to the wolves.

Biden-Kamala are why China is on the brink of invasion. NOT Trump - you moron.

Peachy म्हणाले...

Mark - you're deluded. Did you miss the left's unison "One China" policy? It feeds Taiwan to the wolves.

Biden-Kamala are why China is on the brink of invasion. NOT Trump - you moron.

Peachy म्हणाले...

China never threatened Taiwan while Trump was president.

Tho - to you leftists - Trump is still president.

Peachy म्हणाले...

FU Google Blogger Soviets.

Dr.Bunkypotatohead म्हणाले...

Kamala will save them.

Peachy म्हणाले...

Kamala will not save Taiwan. The news media will make every excuse under the sun...lie.
poor Taiwan - getting what it deserves. A good smother from the Chinese Communists. US will look away.

Readering म्हणाले...

Taiwanese military wastes money on expensive hardware that will not survive the initial onslought. That said, only the US and its allies plus the Empire of Japan have had any experience with large scale, long distance amphibious operations in the modern era. If Taiwan can be properly prepared, it should be able to defeat a first time attempt by PLA Navy.

Kirk Parker म्हणाले...

Dr Weevil,

(#2) Ah, that makes sense. The wicked article makes it sound like explosions at lower altitudes are less well characterized, mostly because the majority of tests were conducted at very high altitudes, but that relates mostly to intensity and not coverage which, as you say, is essentially line of sight.


(#1) Certainly works in both directions but: China at least claims to have some, and we sort of think they do, does Taiwan have any?

Sprezzatura म्हणाले...

Trump will give Taiwan to China, EZPZ. Everybody knows that. Duh!

Trump is a POS.

Sprezzatura म्हणाले...

Trump supporters are deranged.

TDS.

Sad!

Sprezzatura म्हणाले...

What kinda dude sticks his dick in a porn star (while he already has a wife with a fresh kid) where the porn star hates the dick insertion?

That dude is a POS. I know it's hard for many folks here (like Meade) to grasp that.

Sad!! You are losers.

Bruce Hayden म्हणाले...

“China knows from satellite imagery within a few feet where the carrier is.”

“Was”

They can shoot missiles at where te carrier task force was, but that can change quickly. Our carriers can all probably exceed 35 knots. Their escorts were designed to keep up. Hypersonic missiles have minimal maneuverability. Anything hypersonic has that problem. That’s why a SR 71 took entire states to turn in. Launch hypersonic missiles, and the US will know almost immediately (from their own satellites, as well as long range radar), and the entire carrier task force will change direction and sprint away at flank speed. Subsonic missiles maneuver just fine, and can change direction to follow the carrier, but it is that much easier to shoot the missiles down. Yes, carriers can be taken out with mass attacks, overwhelming their defenses, but it’s not going to be easy. But even an unsuccessful attack might be operationally successful by pushing the task force furger out.

Bruce Hayden म्हणाले...

“What kinda dude sticks his dick in a porn star (while he already has a wife with a fresh kid) where the porn star hates the dick insertion?”

Pretty pathetic. He probably didn’t. She didn’t remember even the year. On the flip side, Harris got where she did in CA politics by banging the much older, married, Willie Brown, for many years, and her husband fathered a kid on his nanny, also while married.

Oso Negro म्हणाले...

Blogger Sprezzatura said...
What kinda dude sticks his dick in a porn star (while he already has a wife with a fresh kid) where the porn star hates the dick insertion?

That dude is a POS. I know it's hard for many folks here (like Meade) to grasp that.

Sad!! You are losers.


I just want to say that I appreciate you hooting and flinging feces. This blog often has intelligent commentary, it's refreshing to see someone get down to the primate level.

Bruce Hayden म्हणाले...

A true invasion of Taiwan is not really feasible right now by the PRC. It would have to be of a magnitude of D Day, but without a flotilla of tens of thousands of landing craft, hundreds of warships with guns ranging from 5” to 16”, with destroyers almost grounding themselves offshore, so they could use their 5” guns against shore fortifications, as well as the experience of multiple previous amphibious invasions and almost complete air dominance. It would be across a more treacherous straight, and without the relatively easy access of the beaches into the interior. Instead, they would have narrow, rocky beaches, leading into narrow valleys, with well entrenched artillery in the heights above.

As others have noted, it would be financially ruinous to the PRC, with their interdependence with Taiwan. The only real reason for such an invasion would be to bring the country together, to overcome rising internal dissension, partially as a result of their rapidly shrinking middle class. A decade ago, it might have been justified, in eliminating their excess male population, resulting from female infanticide, from their ill conceived, but brutally implemented, One Child policy. But their population has peaked, and is starting to crash, expected to be half what it is now in 50 years or so.

Rusty म्हणाले...

People seem to forget how untested Chinas military is. They also don't understand how wildly inefficient Chinas military is. China, with superior forces, couldn't successfully defeat an Indian force that was much smaller and less heavily armed. So far Chinas navy has engaged the littoral forces of the Phillipines and Vietnam. In the case of Taiwan an invasion would trigger the support of the USA, South Korea, Japan and Austrailia.

stlcdr म्हणाले...

Side note, a lot of Craftsman tools are made in Taiwan. They now seem to be back to a very high quality.

This is something - if they are trying to lead in quality manufacturing - that Taiwan itself would want to protect.

Narayanan म्हणाले...

any lessons to be learned from HonorVerse ships fighting theories?

Narayanan म्हणाले...

Taiwan has never been an part of the Mainland.
=================
is this true historically? why are they both called cchinese?

Peachy म्हणाले...

Sprez..
"One China" policy is democrat. You fail to understand reality.

Peachy म्हणाले...

"One China" policy is leftist democrat - and is a nice wink and nod the the Chi Coms... to go ahead and do what they want.

Trump is not a supporter of "One China" . "One china" is leftist democrat. Period.

mikee म्हणाले...

"In the case of Taiwan an invasion would trigger the support of the USA, South Korea, Japan and Austrailia."

Would it, though? Not with Biden in office, I'd bet. Not with Harris in office, I'd bet.

Peachy म्हणाले...

China never threatened to invade Taiwan when Trump was president -

Under weak Leftist US Soros Rule - the world's corrupt leaders get the green light for war.
The war machine US left are fine with it.

Narr म्हणाले...

Taiwan was only inhabited by Han Chinese in the 17th Century, after -Europeans- had wrested control of the island from the indigenes, and needed laborers.

Before that it was considered to be pretty worthless.

Readering म्हणाले...

Before the 17th Century Manhattan was considered to be pretty wothless.

Richard म्हणाले...

Due to terrain and fighting on the defense, even in losing, Taiwan will use up an enormous portion of China's military. Whatever they can get to the mainland will be gravy. And there will not be as much as a functioning cigarette machine left.
Wonder if the soldiers have told the politicians.

Narr म्हणाले...

"Before the 17th Century Manhattan was considered to be pretty wothless."

Dynamic, future-oriented thinking--is there anything it can't do?