It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Might I point out, in a few hours a B-52 can be smothered with the chinese airforce before it even gets to taiwan, also a couple of hours is a long time.
Originally posted by WestPoint23
Devil no one except for very few people at the pentagon know the exact location of U.S. subs. they are probably circling the region just incase of an event like this, so don't claim as if you know their location and what they are doing. Also fighters launched form S.K. Japan and Guam would buy some time till the carriers arrive there.
Originally posted by WestPoint23
The Chinese air force would be decimated by Navy fighters before they ever try to attack a B-52.
Originally posted by devilwasp
Those 2 carrier fleets need to get into position first...are you trying to tell me 1/7th of the US Navy's air power is now situated within several hundred miles of taiwan at all times?
Originally posted by zakattack
I may be mistaken but i think the US has 10 or 11 active aircraft carriers.
Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
I feel as if in case of war, the U.S. can make a wise choice and choose to wage a liberation and then defensive campaign of only Taiwan and never go on the offensive against China. The U.S. cannot afford to conduct an offensive campaign against China.
Originally posted by FredT
Originally posted by zakattack
I may be mistaken but i think the US has 10 or 11 active aircraft carriers.
But given the other commitments elesewhere in the world and the need to return to port periodicaly for routine maintenence, precludes moving more than say 5 tops to the region.
However, 2-3 carriers acting in a defensive role should combined with the Taiwanese AF, and USAF elements operating in a standoff maritime strike role, and subs should be able to handle an invasion fleet. China can destroy the island, and the task force described is not even close to the offensive firepower needed to conduct operations over China itself. Maybe a few strategic ports but thats about it.
However, the PLAN will no doubt have an exciting, but short life.
Originally posted by Broadsword20068
Well, to properly defend Taiwan, I think the U.S. would have to go on the offensive somewhat with China (i.e. destroy their airbases, etc...) but in terms of putting troops on the ground, that could be a problem. I think tp precision-hit such targets though, you'd have to put boots of some type on the ground.
Originally posted by Broadsword20068
Oh, I definitely would not say the U.S. Navy has seriously downgraded its ability to handle enemy naval forces. The size is just smaller now, because it is not up against the Soviet Navy anymore.
As for China, they have a loooooooong way to go in terms of acquiring naval knowledge. Having decent tech ships is one thing, operating them efficiently and knowing how to go into combat is another.
Heck, the British navy I am sure is still a force to be reckoned with, let alone the U.S. Navy. The U.S. Army is a lot smaller too, it still has the ability to inflict tremendous damage to enemy forces.
Originally posted by WestPoint23
The cost what are you talking about? We should increase our DOD spending not decree it. And Comanche was not a failure it was simply replaced by UAV’s who are cheater, stealthy have the same capabilities and don't put anyone at risk. Also I haven't herd any news that Land Warrior is having problems I think they are still on schedule for 2008-2010.
Originally posted by devilwasp
Yes it keeps them occupied BUT can can the US deal with permantly haveing 2 carriers never leaving taiwan?
[quote[
It still doesn't change the fact that leaving your forces bunched up and vulnerable for your enemy to attack is very bad strategy, something which the military commanders wouldn't do.
Might I point out, in a few hours a B-52 can be smothered with the chinese airforce before it even gets to taiwan, also a couple of hours is a long time.
Most of them are in the atlantic.. so would take longer, I was counting the american forces on the western coast, I wasnt takeing into account them sailing from other parts of the world like off the african coast...
They could be in taiwan if they sped away at top speed and loud as hell through the ocean in about 6 days...ish..
Another half a dozen will take days to get someone to sortie , which I doubt they would do, they would probably just all head to taiwan those takeing longer...
Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
You want more defense spending?Then forget about everything else. Defense is hideously expensive. If you're okay with less money in the things we need more, such as social programs, law enforcement, health care, science, etc., then more power to you.
Originally posted by rogue1
Do you think about anything or do you just immediately write in the negative ?
As I have stated previously there would be warning signs, allowing the fleet to deploy.
So you think the Chinese are just going to leave there troops and ships at marshalling pints indefinately.
Oh ok Well that goes against every precaution a marshalling army would take. So your saying the Chinses military leadership is incompetant ?
Gawd, so your assuming that the Chinese would have complete control over Taiwans airspace and several hundred miles beyond, instantaneously. LMAO about that one - I think you're being completely unrealistic.
I am talking about the submarines on patrol in the Pacific and based in Peral Harbour. The US hardly needs to assemble even a sizable fraction of the SSN force to confront the Chinese. A force of 5 SSN's in conjunction with airpower would be more than enough to stop the PLAN.
So what if they're loud, the PLAN hardly has bluewater assets capable of tracking them.