No. of Recommendations: 5
I thought I had already addressed the questions (maybe statements?) previously posed to me in this thread (assuming no nukes for simplicity):
Him: You are saying the Russians and Ukrainians can not cross enemy lines, but to what purpose? To destroy the cities. So heavy bombers are needed.
Me: To destroy cities, you have to deliver a pile of high explosives. These can be delivered all at once by "strategic" bomber or over time (as the Israelis seem to be doing with fighters and tanks or by artillery, drone, glide bomb or cruise missile as is common during the Russian-Ukraine war.
Him: The US has huge oceans in between. The aircraft carriers, even at a distance, matter.
True, aircraft carriers are able to project force far from home. The are essentially floating airports to launch planes which then act as mobile artillery, surveillance instruments and vectors to intercept opposing planes. Because of their great value (in cost to build, assets aboard and length of time to replace, they need to be defended by an accompanying flotilla of other warships creating an incredibly expensive task force. The US has airbases across the world, remote refueling capability as well as ships capable of launching cruise missiles. I'm not sure whether what aircraft carriers add to the mix, is worth the price in modern warfare. They were the winning factor against battleships during WWII 80 years ago, but both offensive and defensive weapons have changed a great deal since then.
HIM: The Houthis have done nothing to the US aircraft carriers. We are able to defend them.
The Houthis have not demonstrated the ability to hit warships with their missiles. Certainly not an aircraft carrier defended by a fleet whose primary function is to protect it in an area which is scattered with US airbases. That said, the US hit the Houthis with enough missiles that the Defense Department was concerned that they were running through the resources which might be required to defend Taiwan without accomplishing any change in the Houthis actions.
Him: As for the Russians, that is a much lower bar than we imagined.
The Russians have lost over a million casualties so far during the war with Ukraine, not to mention thousands of armored vehicles and major military assets. Think of the trauma to the US of our losing 58,000 combatants in Vietnam. And yet, they continue to fight.
Him: The US, UK, and Au submarines around Taiwan and elsewhere can move off further. China will send ships into deeper water to defend against their offensive positions against Taiwan. Our longer-range weapons can take out troop carriers in the straits.
Two points: First of all, China and Taiwan have substantial interconnected commercial interests. There is also substantial bi-directional tourism. There is no particular advantage or need for China to invade Taiwan - other than if they are goaded into it by, say, the US.
Secondly, what is obvious to you is certainly obvious to the Chines. Recently, they have been demonstrating unmanned "drone" submarines which can silently sit on the ocean floor waiting to be called upon. There is also what amounts to an inverse-square law of force when it comes to logistics and Taiwan is a hell off a lot closer to mainland China than it is to Hawaii or even Japan. Also consider that, 50 years ago, a far less capable Chinese army whipped our behind on the Korean Peninsula after McArthur underestimated their caution not to cross the Yalu River (I highly recommend reading "The Coldest Winter: America and the Korean War" by David Halberstam.
If push comes to shove, in the absence of nukes, China would prevail.
Him: We are hardly helpless.
I never said we were helpless, but rather that we are squandering a great deal of money on fighting the last big war instead of the next one.
Him: Portrayed as helpless, let's spend more money. I agree, let's. Just do not let the propaganda be facts between all of us as friends. The public is getting a good song and dance. Nonsense as it is and always is.
We have renamed the Department of Defense to the Department of War, just to show how tough we are. We have spent hundreds of millions of dollars trying to blow up the military of the incredibly strong Houthi tribe of Yemen without results. We continue to fund immensely expensive weapon systems just to keep employment in states where defense contractor's lobbyists support election campaigns of Congressmen which shortly afterwards have to be replaced by even more expensive systems - yet, the war of the future may negate their efficacy - yet holding a discussion to that effect is considered blasphemous by those who think throwing more money into the military is the answer.
Jeff
