Again, there's zero chance that Trump is going to commit US forces to the defense of Taiwan. The PRC won't attack Guam or Hawaii, or a US warship first - it's too easy for them to surround, choke off, and invade Taiwan without attacking US forces. They have studied Japanese mistakes in WW II, #1 of which was Pearl Harbor.
Elbridge Colby is going to have a hard time implementing a strategy of denial that would bolster Taiwan's defenses. And are we even sure we would want US forces committed, when Taiwan won't spend on its own defense and we're not going to have the ships? But maybe we want to save Japan, the Philippines, S. Korea, Australia.
Today's Defense Post brings news of a massive military command center / bunker being built near Beijing. If 2027 is the goal, they are on schedule, and will have the right leader in the US to make the move. By then, the US might be standing alone in the world, having sucker-punched all of our (former) allies.
You raise a number of interesting points and a big question mark is how committed is the U.S. to Taiwan's defense. If I had to bet, I would say Trump's commitment is not as earnest as perhaps as his predecessors. As for Japan? That one comes with some explicit commitments that are far less ambiguous. And Japan is clearly taking her own national defense seriously.
As for "... sucker-punched all of our (former) allies"??? Really or did he just get fed up with the status quo where "allies" expected the U.S. to continue to shoulder a disproportionate part of the national defense load? How many NATO countries are phoning it in? Trump's rhetoric goes back to his first term. He's simply not delicate about how he sees things. Marginal investments in NATO to meet a 2% target took how long and have been largely been motivated out of fears of what's happening in Uk? Yeah... not seeing the sucker punch as much as Trump tired of the U.S. being suckered.
Canada might spend more on defense now - to defend themselves against US.
Is that what the tariffs and pressure for anschluss are meant to accomplish?
They give several reasons for the tariffs anyways- drugs, balance of trade, and defense spending. incoherent.
I'm skeptical about what % of GDP the USA has actually been spending on defense as defense (procurement, personnel, and training), rather than on its varied operations in the Middle East, Africa etc, and in the past in Iraq and Afghanistan. Take the dedicated procurement and operational spending for that out, and is it as much as Canada, Poland, or Denmark has been spending? We know that readiness suffered during the GWOT, with the Navy as principal victim. There could be some hypocrisy there.
Looks like we're going to have to make sure "we" have the assets for "Operation Enema" aka blow up West Taiwan's major dams. Or at least maximize production of mines and ground-launched ASMs and delivery to Taiwan.
Re the matter of the size of a Navy; is the size of a Navy determined by number of vessels, tonnage of vessels or a ratio of tonnage to number of vessels? Is China preeminent by all those measures? And is there some way to evaluate total projection of lethality potential?
I haven't forgotten her publicly ripping up Trump's speech during the SOTU address, Trump's first impeachment over a phone call or her refusal to accept troops to protect the capital on 1/6/21.
And then there is her husband's uncanny 100% track record of buying and selling stocks when he isn't picking up young men in bars.
And then there is her famous remark about passing legislation to see what's in it.
This woman has been a disaster. Maybe, the next war will be called Nancy's war.
The only good thing I can say about her is that she shived Joe. We will never know what the outcome last November might have been if he had stayed in the race.
The centreline hardpoint of an F-15EX can carry 2.25 tonnes. You should be able to get 2,000 km of range out of a missile weighing 2.25 tonnes and have a warhead of 250 kg. Build a missile tuned to what the F-15EX can carry instead of what can fit into the bomb bay of the F-35. You will have a happier time fighting the Chicoms.
I hope Trump doesn’t “commit US forces” to Taiwan. Is Taiwan worth U.S. blood? Both of my sons are U.S. Navy jet flyers. Taiwan is not worth a pin-prick of their blood…and neither is the Ukraine.
Again, there's zero chance that Trump is going to commit US forces to the defense of Taiwan. The PRC won't attack Guam or Hawaii, or a US warship first - it's too easy for them to surround, choke off, and invade Taiwan without attacking US forces. They have studied Japanese mistakes in WW II, #1 of which was Pearl Harbor.
Elbridge Colby is going to have a hard time implementing a strategy of denial that would bolster Taiwan's defenses. And are we even sure we would want US forces committed, when Taiwan won't spend on its own defense and we're not going to have the ships? But maybe we want to save Japan, the Philippines, S. Korea, Australia.
Today's Defense Post brings news of a massive military command center / bunker being built near Beijing. If 2027 is the goal, they are on schedule, and will have the right leader in the US to make the move. By then, the US might be standing alone in the world, having sucker-punched all of our (former) allies.
Hey, at least we have Canada and Denmark in our corner.
You raise a number of interesting points and a big question mark is how committed is the U.S. to Taiwan's defense. If I had to bet, I would say Trump's commitment is not as earnest as perhaps as his predecessors. As for Japan? That one comes with some explicit commitments that are far less ambiguous. And Japan is clearly taking her own national defense seriously.
As for "... sucker-punched all of our (former) allies"??? Really or did he just get fed up with the status quo where "allies" expected the U.S. to continue to shoulder a disproportionate part of the national defense load? How many NATO countries are phoning it in? Trump's rhetoric goes back to his first term. He's simply not delicate about how he sees things. Marginal investments in NATO to meet a 2% target took how long and have been largely been motivated out of fears of what's happening in Uk? Yeah... not seeing the sucker punch as much as Trump tired of the U.S. being suckered.
Canada might spend more on defense now - to defend themselves against US.
Is that what the tariffs and pressure for anschluss are meant to accomplish?
They give several reasons for the tariffs anyways- drugs, balance of trade, and defense spending. incoherent.
I'm skeptical about what % of GDP the USA has actually been spending on defense as defense (procurement, personnel, and training), rather than on its varied operations in the Middle East, Africa etc, and in the past in Iraq and Afghanistan. Take the dedicated procurement and operational spending for that out, and is it as much as Canada, Poland, or Denmark has been spending? We know that readiness suffered during the GWOT, with the Navy as principal victim. There could be some hypocrisy there.
Not to worry.
The Trudeaus - pere et fil - crippled Canada's armed forces.
Defend against the U.S.? Is this mean that they'll have a vigorous argument while camped out at consoles at CINC NORAD???
Excellent as always.
It's not just Taiwan that will get numb to the presence of the PLA in Taiwanese territory. It's the US and everyone else.
New hulls, political will, and the repair infrastructure to maintain the opstempo.
Naval planning???
Taiwan is China. Full stop.
Taiwan is the capital of China. It's time to admit that's the truth.
Time for Trump to war Taiwan about clinging to its dream of invading the mainland.
Is it just me, or does the "troll" level seem higher than usual here? Asking for a friend...
Looks like we're going to have to make sure "we" have the assets for "Operation Enema" aka blow up West Taiwan's major dams. Or at least maximize production of mines and ground-launched ASMs and delivery to Taiwan.
Re the matter of the size of a Navy; is the size of a Navy determined by number of vessels, tonnage of vessels or a ratio of tonnage to number of vessels? Is China preeminent by all those measures? And is there some way to evaluate total projection of lethality potential?
Sorry Sal, but Nancy gets no pass from me.
I haven't forgotten her publicly ripping up Trump's speech during the SOTU address, Trump's first impeachment over a phone call or her refusal to accept troops to protect the capital on 1/6/21.
And then there is her husband's uncanny 100% track record of buying and selling stocks when he isn't picking up young men in bars.
And then there is her famous remark about passing legislation to see what's in it.
This woman has been a disaster. Maybe, the next war will be called Nancy's war.
The only good thing I can say about her is that she shived Joe. We will never know what the outcome last November might have been if he had stayed in the race.
“Madame Butterfly” effect?
"I hope in the last couple of years we have adjusted our planning to meet a faster timeline."
Hope is not a WINNING strategy, and each day is one day closer to the inevitable sinkex south of Japan.
How does one say"Boil the frog" in Mandarin?
The centreline hardpoint of an F-15EX can carry 2.25 tonnes. You should be able to get 2,000 km of range out of a missile weighing 2.25 tonnes and have a warhead of 250 kg. Build a missile tuned to what the F-15EX can carry instead of what can fit into the bomb bay of the F-35. You will have a happier time fighting the Chicoms.
Is Taiwan worth U.S. blood? Both of my sons are U.S. Navy jet flyers. Taiwan is not worth a pin-prick of their blood…and neither is the Ukraine.
I hope Trump doesn’t “commit US forces” to Taiwan. Is Taiwan worth U.S. blood? Both of my sons are U.S. Navy jet flyers. Taiwan is not worth a pin-prick of their blood…and neither is the Ukraine.