PLA strike strategies in westpac HIC

But not ZERO damage, like what you claim. Plus, They have already have some Himars on Taiwan that can reach your shore without any problem. As long as you can't cut their logistic route, they will always have Himars near your shore. Plus there are Typhoons on Philippine isles that can endanger your ships if you send them to surround Taiwan.
You fail to understand. Sure, if they might be able to hit a few factories. But it will have no effective impact, because China has tens of thousands of factories, and any factories hit will be up and running again within days. Any commander that wastes precious munitions will be sacked for incompetence. The US military would need to utilize all effective fires to destroy Chinese military capabilities, not waste missiles on random factories. The US is at a disadvantage in terms of available fires, strategic depth, and logistics, therefore it cannot waste its available fires on targets that would not impact the military outcome. You simply have no grasp of neither scale nor military strategy.
 

Brainsuker

Junior Member
Registered Member
You fail to understand. Sure, if they might be able to hit a few factories. But it will have no effective impact, because China has tens of thousands of factories, and any factories hit will be up and running again within days. Any commander that wastes precious munitions will be sacked for incompetence. The US military would need to utilize all effective fires to destroy Chinese military capabilities, not waste missiles on random factories. The US is at a disadvantage in terms of available fires, strategic depth, and logistics, therefore it cannot waste its available fires on targets that would not impact the military outcome. You simply have no grasp of neither scale nor military strategy.

But you also fail to understand, those factories need some raw materials which China has to obtain from another countries. Right now US is very active in cutting down those routes, and what about China? stay like a turtle? You don't understand at all about the importance of the Pacific ocean to China.
 

bebops

Junior Member
Registered Member
I have read claims here that China would only have to face forward deployed US aircraft and a single US carrier in the worst case but I think that underestimates the problem. The US would send all their available carrier battlegroups to the Pacific and funnel more aircraft there across the Pacific.

China would have to bomb all the aircraft concentrations in their rear areas, fuel depots, etc.

U.S cannot send all 11 carriers to fight. The max is 5-6 carriers. You have to understand that many of these carriers aren't equipped with naval 5th gen warplanes. China has 400-500 5th gen warships that can do sorties in the 1st and 2nd island chain based on the distance.
 
But you also fail to understand, those factories need some raw materials which China has to obtain from another countries. Right now US is very active in cutting down those routes, and what about China? stay like a turtle? You don't understand at all about the importance of the Pacific ocean to China.
You are wrong again. In terms of critical minerals for the defense industry, not only is China self sufficient but China has amongst the largest reserves in the world. Again you are talking out of your ass without having done any research. In terms of energy, Russia and increased domestic production can more than cover wartime needs. It's like you haven't been following any of the most important relevant developments for the past decade.
 

Brainsuker

Junior Member
Registered Member
U.S cannot send all 11 carriers to fight. The max is 5-6 carriers. You have to understand that many of these carriers aren't equipped with naval 5th gen warplanes. China has 400-500 5th gen warships that can do sorties in the 1st and 2nd island chain based on the distance.
The war between US and China won't finish in only several days. It will goes into the war of attrition. The question is not about how many jet fighters, ships, and missiles that US and China can commit at the beginning of the war, but how long that they can replenish those weapons. With China being surrounded, US can obtain the material way easier than China. Also they can preserve their high tech industries easier than China. Just look at what they're doing right now, the Pivot of China.

You are wrong again. In terms of critical minerals for the defense industry, not only is China self sufficient but China has amongst the largest reserves in the world. Again you are talking out of your ass without having done any research. In terms of energy, Russia and increased domestic production can more than cover wartime needs. It's like you haven't been following any of the most important relevant developments for the past decade.
Oh are you sure? LOL. So what if Russia change their mind? Look at what happen to Iran and Russia Alliance right now. What did Putin said about Israel in his speech when Iran need some help, Israel is the 2nd Russian? He said it, even when Iran is their allies. Even today, Trump do everything he can to separate China and Russia. US is very serious in destroying China. And do you think China can stay ignorant like a turtle?

Chinese ancestors were so wise they create a magnificent Chess like Wei Qi, because it can explain the current China vs US rivalry perfectly. And I explain it here with Wei Qi term. Weapons are not the permanent solution. Because the war will change the weapons drastically. We don't know for sure what weapons that both China and US would have after the war begin. But the concept of war is never change. Just like the rules of Wei Qi chess. about to surround or to be surrounded.
 
Last edited:

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
The US can't help itself in its arrogance so they will just continue to push Russia and China closer together.

As China is ramping up its SSNs the remaining major weakspot in the Chinese Navy will be closed entirely. They are launching three SSNs a year.
In a decade whatever advantage the US Navy still has will totally evaporate I think.
 

tamsen_ikard

Senior Member
Registered Member
The US can't help itself in its arrogance so they will just continue to push Russia and China closer together.

As China is ramping up its SSNs the remaining major weakspot in the Chinese Navy will be closed entirely. They are launching three SSNs a year.
In a decade whatever advantage the US Navy still has will totally evaporate I think.
China doesn't need SSN if they are focusing on dominating the 1st island chain. I think they deliberately focused on getting large number of SSK due to strategic focus, not because they lacked the tech to pursue better SSN.

Is SSN tech more advanced than stealth fighter tech or hypersonic glide vehicle tech? I don't think so. So, if China focused on getting SSN right 20 year ago with much bigger budget and scientific power, they would have gotten superior SSN designs much earlier.

I think SSN is not that useful in the first island chain scenario which is what China focuses on. This is also why China lacks Nuclear carriers. Not because its too advanced. But because China's strategic focus does not require carriers.

They are getting these things now because they feel they have enough dominance in the first island chain to start thinking about projecting power out to broader pacific and Middle-east.
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
Doesn't Vietnam have one of the largest bauxite reserves? I doubt aluminium will be an issue.
Russia has a lot of land to farm soybean, corn, or wheat if China can't produce enough of it.

All can go via land routes.

Iron ore and copper are issues.

The Soviet Union had a perennial shortage of copper. For this reason there was a shortage of voice phone service and most lines were cheaper telegraph lines. Most copper is in the Americas. But the thing is fiber optics and aluminium replaced most uses for it. It is less important than it used to be.

Iron ore consumption should decrease once urbanization peters out. This happened in the US and Japan for example.
 
Last edited:

dingyibvs

Senior Member
That's, if China still has some stamina to continue the war without stopping. But do you believe that they still have any spare energy to continue the war? To destroy 3 countries in the biggest battle of the century, China would have sacrifice a lot of things. Do you think the current number PLA is enough to fight in a total war situation against several countries? So they have to mobilize the people. How many are they? It's depend. But to destroy the three countries, the death toll will be higher than Ukraine.
Of course, and they don't need to be totally destroyed either. They're islands, destroy their navy and offer them generous terms of surrender and it'll be over with. What does it matter to them whether they live under American hegemony or Chinese hegemony? Is the difference worth starving to death for?

Even if they still want to fight, they can't without importing massive quantities of fuel, minerals, and food, which they won't be able to do without a navy. China doesn't need to take Honshu or Luzhon etc., just some smaller peripheral islands as forward bases and it'll be able to neutralize their threat as anything more than a guerrillas/pirates, which is just a nuisance in the grand scheme of things.
 
Top