China's future at sea? - Page 3

Ghost Dog · 10-11-05, 05:56 PM

to talk about bluffing or not bluffing is a little off the mark. Many assume that if China were to attack taiwan in some way that it would mean instantaneous U.S military response. This may or may not be true. First, the United States would look at its current taiwan policy, whatever that happens to be at the time. Then they would carefully weigh thier military options. Also, dont forget that other countries might have an opinion in the matter. The UN security council might also have an opinion.

Perhaps the next U.S president would prefer a diplomatic approach to dealing with a PLA attack against the ROC.

if military action between the U.S Navy and the PLAN did occur, I could see the United States employing a strategy similar to the Lehman Doctrine of the 1980s by sending multiple carrier groups 'into harms way' to project power directly onto the Chinese mainland.

If I were in command of U.S Naval forces, here is what I would do.

1. dominate the theatre airspace. Using carrier based and land based assets in theatre. I would NOT use any US air units stations in Korea, this would be meant not to threaten the DPRK into doing anything silly.

2. My first strikes would be against the PLAN surface fleet.

3. once there is suitable safety of air and surface operations I could turn my attention to hunting the chinese subs. These would be the toughest to find, therefore waiting till I have more freedom of action in the battlespace makese sense.

4. if PLA forces have not ceased thier hostilities against taiwan or US forces, I would begin conducting airstrikes against military and logistical facilties that support operations against taiwain.

5. I would consider surgical strikes against Beijing but only utilizing stealth aircraft. these strikes would be primarily directed against command and control sites.

6. I would NOT strike against any PLA nuclear forces. I want to send a message to beijing that this conflict is conventional, I am not pursuing regime change or threatening the survial of China as a nation. I dont want to put chinese leaders into a 'use it or lose it' mindset.

thats my two cents.

micky1up · 10-12-05, 04:29 AM

i dont think u have your tactics down right to stop an invasion of taiwan attacking plan naval forces wont stop it the invasion force would be the target to take out,argentina made the same mistake in the falklands campaign they attacked the frigates and destoyers when the should have attacked the troop ships china would have no problem closing the surrounding waters and air space remember we dont have enough info on the fighter capabilitys they have some home grown figthers and bombers that we dont know enough about and as i said i dont think the US public would have the stomach for a protracted war vs china there are alot of unknowns to ponder but the fact remains the bulk of chinese forces are close to the combat area there for they have the advantage

micky1up · 10-12-05, 04:30 AM

i dont think u have your tactics down right to stop an invasion of taiwan attacking plan naval forces wont stop it the invasion force would be the target to take out,argentina made the same mistake in the falklands campaign they attacked the frigates and destoyers when the should have attacked the troop ships china would have no problem closing the surrounding waters and air space remember we dont have enough info on the fighter capabilitys they have some home grown figthers and bombers that we dont know enough about and as i said i dont think the US public would have the stomach for a protracted war vs china there are alot of unknowns to ponder but the fact remains the bulk of chinese forces are close to the combat area there for they have the advantage

bradclark1 · 10-12-05, 03:41 PM

Quote:

5. I would consider surgical strikes against Beijing but only utilizing stealth aircraft. these strikes would be primarily directed against command and control sites.

If that didn't start a possible nuke war I don't know what would.

Ghost Dog · 10-12-05, 04:12 PM

of course im going to attack the troop ships, assuming they havent already dropped off thier cargo or going back to get more.

i figured that was pretty obvious. I would probably have submaries go after the troop ships ahead of my surface group.

my tactics assume that the PLA invasion is a bit of a surprise and that US forces take a few hours or days to reach the battle area.

As for Beijing, I said I would consider it not necessarily do it. of course I realise its risky. though I dont know if striking select targets in the capital would press the chinese for immediatly nuclear release. after all, the point of nuclear weapons is not to use them, its to deter others from using against you.

The americans and soviets thought long and hard about conventional attack and escalation. Lets says its 1989 and war breaks out between the superpowers, and lets also say that the Soviets attack London or Paris with conventional cruise missiles. Would that prompt French or UK nuclear release? I dont think so.

Terrorists attacked New York AND washington but the US certainly didnt respond with nuclear strikes.

I dont believe that if a handfull of key targets were attacked in Beijing that chinese leaders would authorize nuclear use. My first question would be, "If I hit this building in Beijing, will it cripple the nuclear authority of the PLA?" if the answer is yes, I would likely avoid it. I know what youre thinking, dont you want to cripple the PLA ability to authorize nukes? No, I want to keep it intact. I want to make sure they absolute control over thier nukes, so that theyre are no accidental launches or an automatic launch order if a leadership decapitation. I want to keep thier upper command structure intact so that I have someone to sign the cease-fire with.

micky1up · 10-12-05, 05:36 PM

i dont get ur train of thought terroist attacks are completely different from a nation taking action terroist cannot be assumed as a national army navy or air force and another point because taiwan is an obvious target i would expect us and other nation not to be surprised by china doing this so they could be ready to take action during the build up i wouldnt expect china to achieve surprise in attacking taiwan

bradclark1 · 10-12-05, 07:17 PM

Quote:

The americans and soviets thought long and hard about conventional attack and escalation. Lets says its 1989 and war breaks out between the superpowers, and lets also say that the Soviets attack London or Paris with conventional cruise missiles. Would that prompt French or UK nuclear release? I dont think so.

You are talking about asians not europeans. To attack anything in that nations capital would be an embarassment to them, or to any country come to think about it. Also they would not know what those planes are carrying and remember they are stealthy not invisible and it would not be as easy as Iraq to destroy their air defence system.
What are you going to do call them and say that the inbound planes to your capital are going to bomb you but they aren't carrying nukes so don't worry about it?

Quote:

Terrorists attacked New York AND washington but the US certainly didnt respond with nuclear strikes.

I'd say there is a bit of difference between China and a terrorist organization.

There is a world of difference between attacking a 2 bit country and a modernized giant.

PeriscopeDepth · 10-12-05, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black_Dingo

I dont believe that if a handfull of key targets were attacked in Beijing that chinese leaders would authorize nuclear use. My first question would be, "If I hit this building in Beijing, will it cripple the nuclear authority of the PLA?" if the answer is yes, I would likely avoid it. I know what youre thinking, dont you want to cripple the PLA ability to authorize nukes? No, I want to keep it intact. I want to make sure they absolute control over thier nukes, so that theyre are no accidental launches or an automatic launch order if a leadership decapitation. I want to keep thier upper command structure intact so that I have someone to sign the cease-fire with.

You're very optimistic, Mr. Dingo. I think if they went to Beijing with B-2s, it's possible that they might not consider nukes because they wouldn't know until stuff started exploding. If they saw cruise missiles coming Beijing's way, they'd have to assume the worst though.

I think the PRC plans to use nukes against CSGs anyhow.

Ghost Dog · 10-12-05, 09:18 PM

First of all, if you actually knew chinese nuclear policy you would know that they have a stated "No First Use" policy. So, its highly unlikely that they would order a launch the minute they detected something coming to thier capital.

next, I do remember saying that I would use stealth aircraft and not cruise missiles. I envisage that attack to be a one time thing, to hit military command directorate HQ or something to that effect.

Furthermore, I said I would consider it. I was careful to make that distinction.

I have a degree in Asian Studies and a degree in International Relations(and 5 years of miltary service), of course I know the difference between a terrorist attack originating in a failed state country and a precision military attack against a modern industrialised nation. I was trying to say that an attack against one's captial city does not necessitate the use of nuclear weapons.

so, to clarify my point that seems to be irking people: I would carefully examine the possibility of using a surgical stealth strike against a high value target in beijing if the following criteria were met.

1. The target's destruction is critical to the success of my campaign.

2. The chinese have not made statements to counter thier existing nuclear policy. i.e if they say attack our capital and everyone gets it type thing, then we dont do it.

3. There is minimal or no chance the strike will decapitate the nuclear command authority to a degree where autonomous counter-attack is launched. My research has shown that China would CONFIRM that nuclear weapons have been used against it before authorising thier own use.

if all 3 of those conditions are met to my satisfaction, then I would do it. if there was compelling evidence NOT to, certainly I would hold off on attacking assets in thier capital city.

Chinese nuclear policy may change in the future, and many experts have concluded that china is moving from a deterrent nuclear force to a force more suited to actual nuclear warfighting. Quite frightening if true, although I still have my doubts about this one.

10-11-05, 05:56 PM	#1
Ghost Dog Planesman Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Olympus Mons, Mars Posts: 184 Downloads: 115 Uploads: 0	to talk about bluffing or not bluffing is a little off the mark. Many assume that if China were to attack taiwan in some way that it would mean instantaneous U.S military response. This may or may not be true. First, the United States would look at its current taiwan policy, whatever that happens to be at the time. Then they would carefully weigh thier military options. Also, dont forget that other countries might have an opinion in the matter. The UN security council might also have an opinion. Perhaps the next U.S president would prefer a diplomatic approach to dealing with a PLA attack against the ROC. if military action between the U.S Navy and the PLAN did occur, I could see the United States employing a strategy similar to the Lehman Doctrine of the 1980s by sending multiple carrier groups 'into harms way' to project power directly onto the Chinese mainland. If I were in command of U.S Naval forces, here is what I would do. 1. dominate the theatre airspace. Using carrier based and land based assets in theatre. I would NOT use any US air units stations in Korea, this would be meant not to threaten the DPRK into doing anything silly. 2. My first strikes would be against the PLAN surface fleet. 3. once there is suitable safety of air and surface operations I could turn my attention to hunting the chinese subs. These would be the toughest to find, therefore waiting till I have more freedom of action in the battlespace makese sense. 4. if PLA forces have not ceased thier hostilities against taiwan or US forces, I would begin conducting airstrikes against military and logistical facilties that support operations against taiwain. 5. I would consider surgical strikes against Beijing but only utilizing stealth aircraft. these strikes would be primarily directed against command and control sites. 6. I would NOT strike against any PLA nuclear forces. I want to send a message to beijing that this conflict is conventional, I am not pursuing regime change or threatening the survial of China as a nation. I dont want to put chinese leaders into a 'use it or lose it' mindset. thats my two cents.

10-12-05, 04:29 AM	#2
micky1up Captain Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: helensburgh Posts: 525 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	i dont think u have your tactics down right to stop an invasion of taiwan attacking plan naval forces wont stop it the invasion force would be the target to take out,argentina made the same mistake in the falklands campaign they attacked the frigates and destoyers when the should have attacked the troop ships china would have no problem closing the surrounding waters and air space remember we dont have enough info on the fighter capabilitys they have some home grown figthers and bombers that we dont know enough about and as i said i dont think the US public would have the stomach for a protracted war vs china there are alot of unknowns to ponder but the fact remains the bulk of chinese forces are close to the combat area there for they have the advantage

10-12-05, 04:30 AM	#3
micky1up Captain Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: helensburgh Posts: 525 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	i dont think u have your tactics down right to stop an invasion of taiwan attacking plan naval forces wont stop it the invasion force would be the target to take out,argentina made the same mistake in the falklands campaign they attacked the frigates and destoyers when the should have attacked the troop ships china would have no problem closing the surrounding waters and air space remember we dont have enough info on the fighter capabilitys they have some home grown figthers and bombers that we dont know enough about and as i said i dont think the US public would have the stomach for a protracted war vs china there are alot of unknowns to ponder but the fact remains the bulk of chinese forces are close to the combat area there for they have the advantage

10-12-05, 04:12 PM	#5
Ghost Dog Planesman Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Olympus Mons, Mars Posts: 184 Downloads: 115 Uploads: 0	of course im going to attack the troop ships, assuming they havent already dropped off thier cargo or going back to get more. i figured that was pretty obvious. I would probably have submaries go after the troop ships ahead of my surface group. my tactics assume that the PLA invasion is a bit of a surprise and that US forces take a few hours or days to reach the battle area. As for Beijing, I said I would consider it not necessarily do it. of course I realise its risky. though I dont know if striking select targets in the capital would press the chinese for immediatly nuclear release. after all, the point of nuclear weapons is not to use them, its to deter others from using against you. The americans and soviets thought long and hard about conventional attack and escalation. Lets says its 1989 and war breaks out between the superpowers, and lets also say that the Soviets attack London or Paris with conventional cruise missiles. Would that prompt French or UK nuclear release? I dont think so. Terrorists attacked New York AND washington but the US certainly didnt respond with nuclear strikes. I dont believe that if a handfull of key targets were attacked in Beijing that chinese leaders would authorize nuclear use. My first question would be, "If I hit this building in Beijing, will it cripple the nuclear authority of the PLA?" if the answer is yes, I would likely avoid it. I know what youre thinking, dont you want to cripple the PLA ability to authorize nukes? No, I want to keep it intact. I want to make sure they absolute control over thier nukes, so that theyre are no accidental launches or an automatic launch order if a leadership decapitation. I want to keep thier upper command structure intact so that I have someone to sign the cease-fire with.

10-12-05, 05:36 PM	#6
micky1up Captain Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: helensburgh Posts: 525 Downloads: 2 Uploads: 0	i dont get ur train of thought terroist attacks are completely different from a nation taking action terroist cannot be assumed as a national army navy or air force and another point because taiwan is an obvious target i would expect us and other nation not to be surprised by china doing this so they could be ready to take action during the build up i wouldnt expect china to achieve surprise in attacking taiwan

10-12-05, 09:18 PM	#9
Ghost Dog Planesman Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Olympus Mons, Mars Posts: 184 Downloads: 115 Uploads: 0	First of all, if you actually knew chinese nuclear policy you would know that they have a stated "No First Use" policy. So, its highly unlikely that they would order a launch the minute they detected something coming to thier capital. next, I do remember saying that I would use stealth aircraft and not cruise missiles. I envisage that attack to be a one time thing, to hit military command directorate HQ or something to that effect. Furthermore, I said I would consider it. I was careful to make that distinction. I have a degree in Asian Studies and a degree in International Relations(and 5 years of miltary service), of course I know the difference between a terrorist attack originating in a failed state country and a precision military attack against a modern industrialised nation. I was trying to say that an attack against one's captial city does not necessitate the use of nuclear weapons. so, to clarify my point that seems to be irking people: I would carefully examine the possibility of using a surgical stealth strike against a high value target in beijing if the following criteria were met. 1. The target's destruction is critical to the success of my campaign. 2. The chinese have not made statements to counter thier existing nuclear policy. i.e if they say attack our capital and everyone gets it type thing, then we dont do it. 3. There is minimal or no chance the strike will decapitate the nuclear command authority to a degree where autonomous counter-attack is launched. My research has shown that China would CONFIRM that nuclear weapons have been used against it before authorising thier own use. if all 3 of those conditions are met to my satisfaction, then I would do it. if there was compelling evidence NOT to, certainly I would hold off on attacking assets in thier capital city. Chinese nuclear policy may change in the future, and many experts have concluded that china is moving from a deterrent nuclear force to a force more suited to actual nuclear warfighting. Quite frightening if true, although I still have my doubts about this one.