Satellite defense

"Ed Kyle" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jan 24, 7:52 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
It'd be China that has to protect a supply line
and invasion force. Taiwan and the US would
be defending a fortress island.

Don't count on it. The US doesn't have forces on Taiwan, it no longer
has a Mutual Defense Treaty with Taiwan, and it officially does not
support Taiwan independence.


I think the Chinese wouldn't succeed in taking
Taiwan. It'd take months of build up to launch
such a large amphibious invasion. Everyone
would have plenty of time to get ready.

China is counting on their missile attacks to
win it for them before the invasion. But the
recent history of depending on air and missile
attacks shows that isn't enough. They have
to land a force.

And much of our forces in the region are
stationed in Japan, China would have to attack
Japan to get at our air forces there. Japan
would have even more to lose than we would
and I doubt they'd stay out. They have a
significant air force. We'd rule the skies
and with it the seas.

And an amphibious operation depends almost
entirely on surprise. In WW2 surprise could be
accomplished. Not today. The Chinese assault
would have to be very quick and work to perfection.
Else they'd get slaughtered. It'd be horrible
for them.


s








China's mainland is about 100 miles from Taiwan. The U.S. is 6,000
miles away. The math on the supply line situation is obvious.

Corregidor was a "fortress" too, but only for a while.

- Ed Kyle

On Jan 25, 6:53 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
China is counting on their missile attacks to
win it for them before the invasion. But the
recent history of depending on air and missile
attacks shows that isn't enough. They have
to land a force.

And much of our forces in the region are
stationed in Japan, China would have to attack
Japan to get at our air forces there. Japan
would have even more to lose than we would
and I doubt they'd stay out. They have a
significant air force. We'd rule the skies
and with it the seas.

And an amphibious operation depends almost
entirely on surprise. In WW2 surprise could be
accomplished. Not today. The Chinese assault
would have to be very quick and work to perfection.
Else they'd get slaughtered. It'd be horrible
for them.

The war would be horrible, yes, for all involved. But
if it committed to an invasion, China, with its billion
souls, could overwhelm a defense if it remained
committed long enough.

As for getting on the island, China could easily use
a ruse. It conducts periodic military exercises in
the area, with big mobilizations of ground, sea, air,
and missile forces. All it would have to do would be
to turn one of those exercises in to a surprise attack
one year. Smother Taiwan with hundreds of missile
and air attacks to decimate Taiwan's air force and
then drop in a few paratroop divisions to hold a
landing beachhead. The U.S. only has 40,000-ish
military in Japan. China could land more than that
on Taiwan in a day or two. The allies landed
about 156,000 in Normandy on D-Day and more
than 600,000 within a couple of weeks.

- Ed Kyle

On Jan 25, 10:31 pm, "Ed Kyle" wrote:
On Jan 25, 6:53 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:



China is counting on their missile attacks to
win it for them before the invasion. But the
recent history of depending on air and missile
attacks shows that isn't enough. They have
to land a force.

And much of our forces in the region are
stationed in Japan, China would have to attack
Japan to get at our air forces there. Japan
would have even more to lose than we would
and I doubt they'd stay out. They have a
significant air force. We'd rule the skies
and with it the seas.

And an amphibious operation depends almost
entirely on surprise. In WW2 surprise could be
accomplished. Not today. The Chinese assault
would have to be very quick and work to perfection.
Else they'd get slaughtered. It'd be horrible
for them.The war would be horrible, yes, for all involved. But
if it committed to an invasion, China, with its billion
souls, could overwhelm a defense if it remained
committed long enough.

As for getting on the island, China could easily use
a ruse. It conducts periodic military exercises in
the area, with big mobilizations of ground, sea, air,
and missile forces. All it would have to do would be
to turn one of those exercises in to a surprise attack
one year. Smother Taiwan with hundreds of missile
and air attacks to decimate Taiwan's air force and
then drop in a few paratroop divisions to hold a
landing beachhead. The U.S. only has 40,000-ish
military in Japan. China could land more than that
on Taiwan in a day or two. The allies landed
about 156,000 in Normandy on D-Day and more
than 600,000 within a couple of weeks.

The Allies also had complete air and naval superiority in the relevant
areas, in addition to experience in amphibious warfare. China can
count on none of the three. For all that the US Army and Marines are
bogged down in Iraq by a bunch of dudes with IEDs, the ability of the
USN to sink ships and the USAF to shoot down airplanes is still
astounding large.

-jake

"Ed Kyle" wrote in news:1169793075.503831.5550
@a75g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:

The war would be horrible, yes, for all involved. But
if it committed to an invasion, China, with its billion
souls, could overwhelm a defense if it remained
committed long enough.

I'm reminded of an old joke about CPR:s secret plan for a war against
Russia: First day 100 million chinese surrender, second day 100 million
chinese surrender, third day 100 million chinese surrender, fourth day
Russia surrenders...

H Tavaila

On 25 Jan 2007 23:53:32 -0800, "Jake McGuire"
wrote:



On Jan 25, 10:31 pm, "Ed Kyle" wrote:
On Jan 25, 6:53 pm, "Jonathan" wrote:



China is counting on their missile attacks to
win it for them before the invasion. But the
recent history of depending on air and missile
attacks shows that isn't enough. They have
to land a force.

And much of our forces in the region are
stationed in Japan, China would have to attack
Japan to get at our air forces there. Japan
would have even more to lose than we would
and I doubt they'd stay out. They have a
significant air force. We'd rule the skies
and with it the seas.

And an amphibious operation depends almost
entirely on surprise. In WW2 surprise could be
accomplished. Not today. The Chinese assault
would have to be very quick and work to perfection.
Else they'd get slaughtered. It'd be horrible
for them.The war would be horrible, yes, for all involved. But
if it committed to an invasion, China, with its billion
souls, could overwhelm a defense if it remained
committed long enough.

As for getting on the island, China could easily use
a ruse. It conducts periodic military exercises in
the area, with big mobilizations of ground, sea, air,
and missile forces. All it would have to do would be
to turn one of those exercises in to a surprise attack
one year. Smother Taiwan with hundreds of missile
and air attacks to decimate Taiwan's air force and
then drop in a few paratroop divisions to hold a
landing beachhead. The U.S. only has 40,000-ish
military in Japan. China could land more than that
on Taiwan in a day or two. The allies landed
about 156,000 in Normandy on D-Day and more
than 600,000 within a couple of weeks.

The Allies also had complete air and naval superiority in the relevant
areas, in addition to experience in amphibious warfare. China can
count on none of the three. For all that the US Army and Marines are
bogged down in Iraq by a bunch of dudes with IEDs, the ability of the
USN to sink ships and the USAF to shoot down airplanes is still
astounding large.

Providing the said ships/subs and aircraft are in the theater of
operations when the fun starts.

On Jan 26, 1:53 am, "Jake McGuire" wrote:
The Allies also had complete air and naval superiority in the relevant
areas, in addition to experience in amphibious warfare. China can
count on none of the three. For all that the US Army and Marines are
bogged down in Iraq by a bunch of dudes with IEDs, the ability of the
USN to sink ships and the USAF to shoot down airplanes is still
astounding large.

China grows richer and more powerful every day compared
to the U.S.. Unless trade or monetary policies change, it
is only a matter of time until it surpasses the U.S. in both
economic and military power. Then the USN and USAF
would have to contemplate a foe with more and better
subs and ships and aircraft and missiles. Like the Allies
at Normandy, China will win the fight long before it actually
attacks. Remember how small and poorly outfitted the
U.S. military was just three or four years before Normandy?

- Ed Kyle

On 26 Jan 2007 14:32:50 -0800, "Ed Kyle" wrote:

On Jan 26, 1:53 am, "Jake McGuire" wrote:
The Allies also had complete air and naval superiority in the relevant
areas, in addition to experience in amphibious warfare. China can
count on none of the three. For all that the US Army and Marines are
bogged down in Iraq by a bunch of dudes with IEDs, the ability of the
USN to sink ships and the USAF to shoot down airplanes is still
astounding large.

China grows richer and more powerful every day compared
to the U.S.. Unless trade or monetary policies change, it
is only a matter of time until it surpasses the U.S. in both
economic and military power. Then the USN and USAF
would have to contemplate a foe with more and better
subs and ships and aircraft and missiles. Like the Allies
at Normandy, China will win the fight long before it actually
attacks. Remember how small and poorly outfitted the
U.S. military was just three or four years before Normandy?

You forgot to include that as the American economy goes down, so there
is less money to pay for the American military. Not much good having
the world stongest military if the economy can't pay to run it.

"Christopher" wrote in message
...

Providing the said ships/subs and aircraft are in the theater of
operations when the fun starts.



I just want to be clear on one point, that the US Navy
.....OWNS THE PACIFIC. There's no competition.


Some of the assets in the region are....

The Fifth Air Force twenty minutes away
in Japan, one of the largest air bases in the world
with some 20,000 Americans stationed there.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...y/usaf/5af.htm


And another wing at Misawa, Japan
http://www.misawa.af.mil/

The Marines have four squadrons in Japan
at the Marine Aircraft Group 12
http://www.1maw.usmc.mil/index.asp?unit='MAG-12'

There's a couple more wings in Korea at the
Seventh Air Force
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...y/usaf/7af.htm

And the 11th Air Force in Alaska
http://www.elmendorf.af.mil/11af/index.asp

And Don't forget the B-52's, B-1's and B-2's in Guam
and Diego Garcia
http://www.andersen.af.mil/
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ego-garcia.htm



I think most people forget about the fact we have
six amphibious assault ships in the Pacific.
Each one is much like an aircraft carrier in scale
as each one is an invasion waiting to happen.


USS Boxer
http://www.boxer.navy.mil/

USS Tarawa
http://www.tarawa.navy.mil/mission.html

USS Essex
http://navysite.de/ships/lhd2.htm

USS Peleliu
http://www.peleliu.navy.mil/index.asp

USS Bonhomme Richard
http://www.lhd6.navy.mil/

USS Iwo Jima
http://www.iwo-jima.navy.mil/



And we've just completed building I think three of thirty
planned Virginia class attack submarines
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/nssn.htm

In addition to another 18 or so attack subs just in
the Pacific Fleet
http://navysite.de/ssn/ssn773.htm


And six pacific carriers of course.
http://www.cvn74.navy.mil/ships&squadrons.html


Plus Japan's air force, I doubt Japan could stay out of it
with China having to attack our forces in Japan to
have a chance. China barely outspends Great Britain.
http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolit...st oftheWorld



Don't worry, be happy.


s

"Christopher" wrote in message
news
On 26 Jan 2007 14:32:50 -0800, "Ed Kyle" wrote:

On Jan 26, 1:53 am, "Jake McGuire" wrote:
The Allies also had complete air and naval superiority in the relevant
areas, in addition to experience in amphibious warfare. China can
count on none of the three. For all that the US Army and Marines are
bogged down in Iraq by a bunch of dudes with IEDs, the ability of the
USN to sink ships and the USAF to shoot down airplanes is still
astounding large.

China grows richer and more powerful every day compared
to the U.S.. Unless trade or monetary policies change, it
is only a matter of time until it surpasses the U.S. in both
economic and military power. Then the USN and USAF
would have to contemplate a foe with more and better
subs and ships and aircraft and missiles. Like the Allies
at Normandy, China will win the fight long before it actually
attacks. Remember how small and poorly outfitted the
U.S. military was just three or four years before Normandy?

You forgot to include that as the American economy goes down, so there
is less money to pay for the American military. Not much good having
the world stongest military if the economy can't pay to run it.


What everyone is forgetting, the only way to afford such a
large military for any length of time is to have the economic
strength a free market democracy creates.

China can only catch up with us if they become...just like us.
A free market democracy.

And once they do, they'll no longer be enemies.
It's the Catch-22 of reality. A society that best mimics
a naturally evolving or adaptive system is the most
competitive and the one that thrives.

The US, like Nature, will always win in the end.


s

On 24 Jan 2007 09:30:53 -0800, "Ed Kyle" wrote:

On Jan 23, 1:10 pm, "frédéric haessig" wrote:
snip

Yes. So much would be at stake that I don't think we would
see ASAT attacks unless a big war was already on, or was
just about to begin. China's main wargaming scenario has
to be Taiwan, where it would need to blind the U.S. for just a
few days. Once they have swarmed onto that island, and
have it surrounded by a gazillion submarines and protected
by a missile screen, the war is over.Wasn't that basically Japan's strategy for WWII?

Surely an exemple to copy

The difference between then and now is that surface fleets
are much more vulnerable today to attack from missiles
and submarines. If China took Taiwan and the U.S. tried
to force a counter-attacking fleet across the Pacific
(half-way across the globe with no cover), it would never
make it. An attack sub hundreds of km distant could
erase a carrier group in a matter of minutes.

How? If you're thinking about the massive swarm of unstoppable
long-range submarine-launched antiship missiles, then no. First
off, those only come from Russian SSGNs, not from any Chinese sub
or from anyone's SSNs. And second, they aren't that unstoppable,
especially when fired on the high-altitude trajectories they need
to reach hundreds of kilometers. Third, no submarine has sensors
that can detect or track a moving target at that sort of range.

The longest-ranged antiship weapon on any Chinese sub is the C-801,
an Exocent knockoff that might reach fifty kilometers. Being tube
launched, the maximum salvo size is six, and half a dozen Exocets
will be hard-pressed to penetrate a CVN's on-board defenses, never
mind the escorts and the CAP. Nor will their ~165kg warheads do
significant damage to a ~100kT ship if one or two do leak through.


Torpedoes are rather more effective, and harder to stop, but the
effective range of even a Mark 48 ADCAP against an evading CVN
would be about 20 km. If the Chinese have Russian export-model
torpedos, they might reach 15 km; their home-grown models are
unlikely to be effective beyond 10 km.

Getting a submarine within ten kilometers of an escorted U.S.
Navy aircraft carrier in wartime, is not a trivial matter. The
Chinese might be able to pull it off once or twice with a bit
of luck; they can't count on pulling it off every time they need
to.


China has been building submarines like crazy for several
years.

China has been building one or two submarines per year for the
past ten years, and apparently plans to continue at that rate.


Its underwater fleet is expected to surpass the U.S. fleet in
a decade or so.

China's underwater fleet *already* surpasses the U.S. fleet in
number of boats. However, eighty percent of them are obsolete
relics. China is not expected to surpass the U.S. in terms of
*modern* submarines until 2035 or so, and that's spotting the
Chinese a fairly lose definition of "modern"


Out of curiosity, where are you getting your information on China's
submarine fleet?


--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
* for success" *
*661-718-0955 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *