You are missing the point. The amount of F-35 deployed near East Asia can't be more than 500. That is all China need to counter. The limitation is the size of the military base.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
J-20 5th Gen Fighter Thread VI
- Thread starter siegecrossbow
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
You are missing the point. The amount of F-35 deployed near East Asia can't be more than 500. That is all China need to counter. The limitation is the size of the military base.
The number of military bases isn't static. During a war they can be expanded, or other areas can be converted or appropriated. Besides, the US also has 11 aircraft carriers.You are missing the point. The amount of F-35 deployed near East Asia can't be more than 500. That is all China need to counter. The limitation is the size of the military base.
The number of military bases isn't static. During a war they can be expanded, or other areas can be converted or appropriated. Besides, the US also has 11 aircraft carriers.
Military bases are not that easily created, and are vulnerable to missile attacks. Besides, the 11 aircraft carriers are targets the more the weaker they make US
They don't have to be created. The US can operate in bases outside their own formal ones so long as they have allies.Military bases are not that easily created, and are vulnerable to missile attacks. Besides, the 11 aircraft carriers are targets the more the weaker they make US
It's difficult to imagine any country being willing to join the US in fighting China besides Japan, unless China somehow decides to go on some kind of crazy rampage. Outside of that possibility, the US could maybe barely count on SK to allow the US to use its own US bases against China, but using SK's own assets against China short of WW3 sounds laughably unlikely. Similarly for Australia, which is additionally held back by economic/business ties with China. Vietnam is not really worth mentioning, and while India may possibly want to get into the fight, its only realistic avenue of attack is over land, which is certain folly for India given that China would not be facing US/Japanese Army or Marine forces which would essentially allow it to deploy the bulk of its land forces to the Indian theater. So in the end it would just be the US and Japan using their planes and ships.Flipside is if there's no drastic alteration in the balance of alliances within the Pacific China also needs to be able to contend with several other countries in addition to the US, and while most of these countries already have outdated fleets that condition is unlikely to persist indefinitely (especially Japan).
You are missing the point. The amount of F-35 deployed near East Asia can't be more than 500. That is all China need to counter. The limitation is the size of the military base.
If we look at a short sharp conflict, then yes, 500 F-35 is a realistic number for China to plan for.
That is probably part of the short term objective for Chinese military capabilities.
But for the longer term goal of being able to win a long protracted conflict, China needs to plan on a lot more F-35s.
If I was asked for my realistic opinion on this it wouldn't hew too far from yours, but militaries have to plan for worst case scenarios. Besides, amongst the US's allies in the region Japan and Australia would end up being the most significant potential contributors to the US cause in a war with China anyways (Taiwan would be no small asset either, assuming it wouldn't have already been retaken by China by the start of a hypothetical conflict). From the sounds of it I'm a lot less bullish about Australia not siding strongly with the US than you are, but the US-China-Australia strategic triangle is one of those evolving situatuons.It's difficult to imagine any country being willing to join the US in fighting China besides Japan, unless China somehow decides to go on some kind of crazy rampage. Outside of that possibility, the US could maybe barely count on SK to allow the US to use its own US bases against China, but using SK's own assets against China short of WW3 sounds laughably unlikely. Similarly for Australia, which is additionally held back by economic/business ties with China. Vietnam is not really worth mentioning, and while India may possibly want to get into the fight, its only realistic avenue of attack is over land, which is certain folly for India given that China would not be facing US/Japanese Army or Marine forces which would essentially allow it to deploy the bulk of its land forces to the Indian theater. So in the end it would just be the US and Japan using their planes and ships.
US and Australia are bound by ANZUS just like US and Japan are similarly allied, but neither treaty stipulates that any treaty member has to come to the aid of a member who initiates a military conflict rather than is being attacked. I have no doubt Australia would be forced to make very difficult decisions if the US ever decided to attack China, say over a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, but it would probably not feel that ANZUS is binding in such a circumstance and would be weighing a different set of priorities, like is defending Taiwan worth ruining a highly profitably economic relationship with China just because the US is insisting?If I was asked for my realistic opinion on this it wouldn't hew too far from yours, but militaries have to plan for worst case scenarios. Besides, amongst the US's allies in the region Japan and Australia would end up being the most significant potential contributors to the US cause in a war with China anyways (Taiwan would be no small asset either, assuming it wouldn't have already been retaken by China by the start of a hypothetical conflict). From the sounds of it I'm a lot less bullish about Australia not siding strongly with the US than you are, but the US-China-Australia strategic triangle is one of those evolving situatuons.
It's difficult to imagine any country being willing to join the US in fighting China besides Japan, unless China somehow decides to go on some kind of crazy rampage. Outside of that possibility, the US could maybe barely count on SK to allow the US to use its own US bases against China, but using SK's own assets against China short of WW3 sounds laughably unlikely. Similarly for Australia, which is additionally held back by economic/business ties with China. Vietnam is not really worth mentioning, and while India may possibly want to get into the fight, its only realistic avenue of attack is over land, which is certain folly for India given that China would not be facing US/Japanese Army or Marine forces which would essentially allow it to deploy the bulk of its land forces to the Indian theater. So in the end it would just be the US and Japan using their planes and ships.
To reiterate, China is very unlikely to go on a rampage like Imperial Japan did when colonial empires were the mark of a *successful* nation. These days it is trade, investments and hi tech companies.
The Communist party nationalist founding myth is based on China being the victim of nasty colonial powers like Imperial Japan or the British Empire flooding China with narcotics.
China is also geographically the same size as a continent spanning USA, and does have lots of unoccupied grasslands for settlement. Plus modern economies are about what urbanised city dwellers can create, which puts less pressure on having lots of land.
If I was asked for my realistic opinion on this it wouldn't hew too far from yours, but militaries have to plan for worst case scenarios. Besides, amongst the US's allies in the region Japan and Australia would end up being the most significant potential contributors to the US cause in a war with China anyways (Taiwan would be no small asset either, assuming it wouldn't have already been retaken by China by the start of a hypothetical conflict). From the sounds of it I'm a lot less bullish about Australia not siding strongly with the US than you are, but the US-China-Australia strategic triangle is one of those evolving situatuons.
Australia has a frigate embedded with the carrier strike group based in Japan. What happens to that frigate if China and the US fight?
Also, in a protracted naval air conflict between the US and China, China loses. But before that happens, a land war in Korea looks like a better option, as China can obtain a victory or stalemate against the US Army in Korea.
So China does need to plan for US, JP, KR and AU
- Status
- Not open for further replies.