[ Post a Response | The SteelNavy.Com Message Board ]
Posted by James N on May 31, 2025, 20:57:11, in reply to "Re: The US is no longer a maritime nation"
When Russia attacked Ukraine I think all of us were sure it would go through the country as fast as crap through a goose, Xi Jinping included.
What experience does the People's Army have with successfully undertaking a sea bourne invasion? When was the last time it actually went to war for that matter? As far as I know it was forty five years ago against Vietnam, a border war; there was no sea to cross, and it certainly wasn't a walkover. China was mauled and didn't achieve all of its aims. None of those vets are still with the Chinese Military. The only other combat experience the ChiComs have ever had was during the Korean War over seventy years ago, for all their individual bravery they got a shellacking and look where Korea stands.
Against determined resistance (from the Taiwanese alone) how is China going to achieve a successful and decisive sea bourne invasion of Formosa within a short time frame? If the initial attack fails and is repulsed it will certainly mean doom for Xi Jinping and possibly the end of mainland communist rule. They are the stakes.
Sea bourne invasions are severely risky, look at the last one of any size with the Falklands War. Britain was supremely lucky it was up against a Third World country under a second rate dictatorship and had the invaluable assistance of the US's intelligence network and its latest munitions, and then it was a close run thing. A handful of very brave pilots flying obsolete a/c eyeball dropping old dumb bombs*, caused serious casualties. This will not be duplicated with a China vs Taiwan conflict. The British had a proud tradition they could fall back on, does communist China? Taiwan is not a third world dictatorship.
If China aggressively invades Taiwan it has to be absolutely confident of victory within a very short time frame, and I think that all depends on the will of the Taiwanese. Will they stand and fight? I don't know but that alone is paramount.
Everyone knows what happened to Mussolini, we all saw on the news Saddam hiding in a hole and then on youtube hustled up the scaffold to be hanged. Kim knows that if he starts a war that no matter what, it is not only the end of his dynasty but also all of his family. Putin is in deep crap, he will never take Kyiv or the rest of it and if he doesn't come out of any peace talks smelling like roses, within a week or so he will be launched out of a sixth story window.
Xi Jinping knows all this and if he can't take Taiwan with his untested military in one swoop he'll be in the same mix. I can't see him going to war, I think China will try to find any other way.
* Many never detonated. 
Previous Message
I have no idea what will or will not please him (nor do I particularly care. I don't waste my life obsessing.) Any ship deals will be done outside of sanctions. That's just an invention of yours. I believe I addressed that in a war with China, there will indeed only be whatever the rest of the world can supply.
However, if Taiwan's sovereignty is worth fighting for (folks seem to feel Ukraine's is) then war is unpleasant and destructive. Folks need to consider this whenever loudly vocalizing opinions on matters. Want an independent Taiwan? That may require a war. And that war may look like this. Adjust your thinking and expectations accordingly. Previous Message
that will please Rump, having to import his navy which with sanctions would be unaffordable, but if you attack CHINA, THERE WILL BE NOTHING TO TRANSPORT TO TH
E US ANYWAY! Previous Message
The article doesn't actually directly say we've lost the capacity to fight oceanic warfare. It talks about how we've lost maritime trade. And it talks about the current peacetime situation.
What it doesn't address is any comparison of naval abilities. There is currently no other nation other than China which has any sort of global navy that rivals ours. In war, "business rules" of maritime trade go out the window. We have the capacity to seize control of maritime trade. It doesn't matter which foreign cartels control what, as long as our navy can compell them in time of war to do our bidding. That, we still retain the ability to do.
That China supplies all their shipping simply makes it all "more interesting." Presumably, if we're having a "big war," it's with China. We will then destroy China's ship yards. We will also then begin destroying China's navy. Outside of a "zone" within the first island chain, we will seize control of international shipping. China will no longer be supplying anything to anybody. All shipping capacities become "fixed" to whatever the rest of the world can supply. Our logistics and these cartels now have a reduced inventory of available ships, and limited ability to increase that. China--if our attacks go right--has almost no remaining ability. (And if our attacks go wrong, we have a nuclear exchange. Tell me how much this article means then...)
If you understand that war is about destruction, and you read this article with the mindset of how to "f" it all up, and force it to work for you, you won't despair quite as much.
Still, anything we can do during peacetime to improve our situation would obviously be great. I am personally very hopeful that we get South Korea building destroyers for us, and Finland and Canada building icebreakers. Previous Message
The US has lost the capability to fight oceanic warfare. We are play-acting in the Pacific, Med, and Gulf. This is astounding. Historically our sea communications were always of the utmost importance until we stopped building merchant ships, and manning them with Americans. The US has forgotten how to organize for survival.
https://www.theatlantic.com/economy/archive/2025/05/american-shipbuilding-decline/682945/?gift=I4z9bpSIcQg4ORf-CqRntmkUmSeo_Y_B0HWoco9PrNY
Responses