USN fearful of PLAN subs

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
I don't understand, why is there no way for USN to send more than two CBGs? US has carriers permanently stationed in japan. It has near future plans to homeport a carrier in guam. And it could/would send more. Sure it'd take lots of time to do it, but better to be safe than sorry. Each time china does a major exercise near taiwan they send at least two carriers. In a case of a war they would opt for a lethal strike, using as much force at once as possible. That also explains why you can't really just mask the attack as an exercise...

Also, while a missile attack can be launched with virtually no warning, and while an air attack could be mounted with enough surprise that it catches taiwanese somewhat off guard, assembling the navy and ground forces for an actual invasion would take a long time and give taiwan/us a good warning.
I wonder if it'd take days before even an airdropped invasion force is tried, after first missile strikes.
 
MIGleader

MIGleader

Banned Idiot
not if you invite the russians to help you attach taiwan. the plan is already building up near taiwan. just keep it up for a few more years , and you can attack. this is getting gay. were supposed to be talking about chinese subs and the US's fear of them. china wouldn't attack taiwan till it declars independence, and Us wouldn't help taiwan if it did.
 
T

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
I agree there, the best way to 'mask' such an invasion is to have the resources for it ready 24/7/365, for years. Sure, it's mighty costy to upkeep but IF your plan IS to invade in some sensible time period, it'd be worth it. That pretty much means having some 10 000 troops ready at all time (for the first wave), which is doable for a country like china. China doesn't have enough dedicated landing craft for more than that anyway, at the present. Trouble there might be with political implications, but i'm guessing west has too much invested in china's economy to try to set terms where china can and where it cant have the forces anchored and waiting.

Lots has been said already bout USN fear of chinese subs... i guess there's nothing to add for now. When someone does add something, maybe i'll reply. :)
 
tphuang

tphuang

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
Totoro said:
Even though it's really impossible to guess what would US govt do in such a hypothetical situation years from now i'd say it's safe to assume there would not be any half hearted attempts. US would A) stay out of it completely military aid wise, B) strike chinese assets with cruise missiles and similar stand off weapons or C) mount a major attack on chinese assets, with intent to pretty much decimate PLAAF and PLAN, as well as chinas military industry.

Sending just one cbg and launching attacks from it at chinese forces would be rather risky. I seriously doubt US would do that. IF US does send its forces to defend taiwan it would be a much larger and potent force. I'm talking hundreds of USAAF planes being redirected to airports in range of the combat theatre, i'm talking at least 3 and probably more cbgs. Of course, the whole point would be to coordinate a major blow to china, so such an US force would need weeks to assemble, come in position and strike. Weeks from first missile/air strikes on taiwan, of course. China too couldn't really mount a successful ground forces invasion in a matter of days without alarming the neighbours.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure America would not attack targets deep inside China. If they do, i'm pretty sure there will be nuclear retaliation. I doubt America would risk that. attack the cost military stations with ballistic missiles and ship yards, most likely, but I think it will stop there.

As for Taiwan, it will most likely last a week in any invasion from China. This is not according to me. This is according to Taiwanese newspapers. They said they will last a maximum of 7 days by themselves.
 
MIGleader

MIGleader

Banned Idiot
Us cant just send ballistic missles to the taiwan area. plus the wouldn't do that. they are supposed to be on defence only. doing such a thing would temp the chinese to nuke the 7th fleet.
 
BKulan

BKulan

New Member
as for naval detection, should China spend money on a sonar system like the US did against USSR?

If so then how. should they make a huge cable network or stick with a cheaper system that is more prone to signal jamming.

if cable alternative then US will know about it's existence but can't do much about it in a short time but if second alternative then they might not know about it at first but is instead vulnerable.

building such a system would make it a lot easier for PLAN to fight any navy in it's waters but it costs a lot of money and isn't 100% reliable
 
T

Totoro

Major
VIP Professional
I just don't see any nukes being used. Any. Ever. It is WAY too risky, to escalate into a nuclear exchange. I mean, the invasion itself is risky, and this is all speculation if it'd happen and how... but if you use just one nuke, even a tactical one, that opens the door to retaliaton with other nukes and step by step... well, you get the idea. :D

I'm not saying US would necessarily be striking deep into china but pretty much whatever is in range of their cruise missiles would be fair game for them. Radar stations, communication nodes, headquarters, airfields and harbours, you can bet they'd be attacked. If china has success with fighting the US and causes them to suffer heavy losses, that'd only anger US and make them comitt stronger forces. Factories and other china's economy targets would likely be attacked then. Again, i don't believe anyone would risk using a nuke, in any situation.
 
bd popeye

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
This has become an interesting thread to read. Well done by all!!

First off if there was any real confrontation in the Taiwain straights the US would send at least three CSG(Carrier strike group) along with additional surface combantants. The USS Kitty Hawk from Japan would be the first on the seen. The other two would storie from the west coast of the US or the western Pacific.

MIGleader seems to think that in a confrontation if the US suffered major losses the US would retreat because of public outcry. I would just like to know what you base this idea on? Thank you.
 
tphuang

tphuang

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
bd popeye said:
This has become an interesting thread to read. Well done by all!!

First off if there was any real confrontation in the Taiwain straights the US would send at least three CSG(Carrier strike group) along with additional surface combantants. The USS Kitty Hawk from Japan would be the first on the seen. The other two would storie from the west coast of the US or the western Pacific.

MIGleader seems to think that in a confrontation if the US suffered major losses the US would retreat because of public outcry. I would just like to know what you base this idea on? Thank you.
Click to expand...
I don't even understand why US would be willing to suffer any kind of major loss for Taiwan. It's not like Taiwan is important to US.
 
FriedRiceNSpice

FriedRiceNSpice

Major
In Vietnam war, over 70,000 Americans died and US still didn't pull out. It wasn't until the US saw how corrupt and evil the South Vietnamese regime was before the US finally decided to pull out. In Korean war, over 50,000 Americans died and the US didn't give up. The US will not retreat just because they have suffered losses.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top