The next big US Naval war

[JakeStarkey]

The idiots broke out of the asylum again. China has no desire for military warfare. However, I bet they love playing the economic equivalent.

 

[westwall]

There will never be another big naval war

History says otherwise.

When was the last US ship sunk in combat? When was the last ship on ship naval battle?

Persian Gulf 1988 the US Navy attacked Iranian naval craft in Operation Praying Mantis. It marked the first occasion that US naval forces fired ship to ship missiles. The last US naval vessel sunk i believe is the USS Sarsi back in 1952. We have of course had the USS Stark hit by an Iraqi Exocet but thankfully it didn't sink.

Just remember, After the carnage of WWI the "experts" said there would not be another major war, the experts have also said that aircraft no longer needed guns for air to air combat, that tanks were obsolete, and I can go on and on with experts telling us that "never again" will something happen.

So yes history says you are wrong and your type of thinking is what leads to armies having to relearn how to fight all the time because the experts said it wouldn't happen again. The cost for that mentality is far too much blood and suffering.

 

[westwall]

There will never be another big naval war

oh for god sakes.......

To have a big naval war you need two equivalent powers. Nobody is close to the US. Last big one was US vs Japan. Who else but the US has carrier task forces?

See Operation Praying Mantis above.

 

[westwall]

War with Red China is coming. The question is not if, but when? It will probably start over Taiwan. ~BH

China sees the value of capitalism. There will be no war....too much money to lose

There is a difference with our capitalsm: China has state controlled capitalism, not a free market. Ask any company investing in China: Ask google, ... and many other companies. China has a very controlled form of capitalism, there are no big Chinese non-government controlled companies. Other than that: our investments in China lead to technology theft and theft of intelectual property by Chinese companies. And looking at democratic values and human rights: China is still a dictatorship led by the Chinese military and police. Consider it like a new "Soviet Union", one with loads of money and a huge manpower pool and one that has recently become the 2nd biggest economy in the world.

It goes beyond that. There are two "corportions" in China. NORINCO and Poly Technologies. Both are controlled by their respective armies. NORINCO is the Northern Army of China and Poly Tech is the Southern Army of China. Whenever you buy a product made in China you are actually buying it from the armies involved. No western company owns their plants in China, they are owned by the repective armies as Motorola found out when they wanted to leave but found the factory they had built would be staying behind if they left.

 

[BolshevikHunter]

The idiots broke out of the asylum again. China has no desire for military warfare. However, I bet they love playing the economic equivalent.

When did you get out? ~BH

 

[JakeStarkey]

History says otherwise.

When was the last US ship sunk in combat? When was the last ship on ship naval battle?

Persian Gulf 1988 the US Navy attacked Iranian naval craft in Operation Praying Mantis. It marked the first occasion that US naval forces fired ship to ship missiles. The last US naval vessel sunk i believe is the USS Sarsi back in 1952. We have of course had the USS Stark hit by an Iraqi Exocet but thankfully it didn't sink. Just remember, After the carnage of WWI the "experts" said there would not be another major war, the experts have also said that aircraft no longer needed guns for air to air combat, that tanks were obsolete, and I can go on and on with experts telling us that "never again" will something happen. So yes history says you are wrong and your type of thinking is what leads to armies having to relearn how to fight all the time because the experts said it wouldn't happen again. The cost for that mentality is far too much blood and suffering.

westwall is shifting his argument from big naval war claims to individual engagements. History says you are wrong, westwall. No one can field a fleet against us and survive, and no non-nuclear power can ever sail a fleet against a power that can deliver nuclear weapons.

Please, westwall, consider history.

 

[rightwinger]

War with Red China is coming. The question is not if, but when? It will probably start over Taiwan. ~BH

China sees the value of capitalism. There will be no war....too much money to lose

Wrong buddy, War is money. They also know that if they win, they will truly own us. But if they lose, we will rebuild their Country, and then it will be business as usual. ~BH

They can't win unless they invade us and no country on earth has the capability to invade the US

 

[BolshevikHunter]

China sees the value of capitalism. There will be no war....too much money to lose

Wrong buddy, War is money. They also know that if they win, they will truly own us. But if they lose, we will rebuild their Country, and then it will be business as usual. ~BH

They can't win unless they invade us and no country on earth has the capability to invade the US

I didn't say that I thought they had the capability to invade the U.S. However, Nuking us is a possibility. ~BH

 

[zzzz]

China is building an brown water navy not a blue water navy. their whole focus is control of China sea, the eastern Indian Ocean and far western Pacific basin. They do not seek to push their military power any farther than that at present. Although they are building an aircraft carrier their main focus is on subs. Diesel subs are so quiet they can penetrate our ASW forces protecting our carriers. They are also focusing on missile technology. In the naval war that can occur when the Chinese take Taiwan our carrier task force must stay hidden behind Taiwan and cannot come any closer to stay out of missile and sub range. Even then one of their subs could sneak out and sink a a carrier.

Surface to surface combat between the US and anyone is impossible for the forseeable future. As our naval forces are reduced by budgetary pressures over the next 30 years that impossibility changes to possibility and then probability if other nations decide to commit money to naval forces. I can see other countries anti ship capabilites and sub technology make our navy obselete. If our navy ventures into another area of the world the mission approaches a suicide mission. As a country we cannot maintain a 12 or 13 carrier navy. That will have to be cut in half in the next 20 years because we just cannot afford it. As our preeminance declines other navies become more powerful and the possibility of conflict becomes more realistic.

 

[rightwinger]

oh for god sakes.......

To have a big naval war you need two equivalent powers. Nobody is close to the US. Last big one was US vs Japan. Who else but the US has carrier task forces?

See Operation Praying Mantis above.

Is that really the best you could come up with?

Do you understand what a major naval battle is?

 

[JakeStarkey]

China is building an brown water navy not a blue water navy. their whole focus is control of China sea, the eastern Indian Ocean and far western Pacific basin. They do not seek to push their military power any farther than that at present. Although they are building an aircraft carrier their main focus is on subs. Diesel subs are so quiet they can penetrate our ASW forces protecting our carriers. They are also focusing on missile technology. In the naval war that can occur when the Chinese take Taiwan our carrier task force must stay hidden behind Taiwan and cannot come any closer to stay out of missile and sub range. Even then one of their subs could sneak out and sink a a carrier.

Surface to surface combat between the US and anyone is impossible for the forseeable future. As our naval forces are reduced by budgetary pressures over the next 30 years that impossibility changes to possibility and then probability if other nations decide to commit money to naval forces. I can see other countries anti ship capabilites and sub technology make our navy obselete. If our navy ventures into another area of the world the mission approaches a suicide mission. As a country we cannot maintain a 12 or 13 carrier navy. That will have to be cut in half in the next 20 years because we just cannot afford it. As our preeminance declines other navies become more powerful and the possibility of conflict becomes more realistic.

Those navies, I would think, must have nuclear capable delivery to be successful against the U.S., even 20 to 30 years from now.

 

[Cain]

If China and the United States went to war, I have a feeling a lot more then a Navy would be in use. Although, I do not know if China and the US would ever get into it, doesn't seem beneficial to the Chinese, but I guess it could be. I honestly wonder if a war would get us out of this recession/depression/oppression or whatever we are in currently.

 

[JakeStarkey]

World War II certainly lifted the victors out of the Great Depression. Italy, Germany, and Japan were lifting out of Depression more quickly than China, the USSR, and the Western nations because the fascists and militarists were running their factories at full tilt. I have to laugh when folks knock the worth of government contracts to private business.

 

[BolshevikHunter]

To have a big naval war you need two equivalent powers. Nobody is close to the US. Last big one was US vs Japan. Who else but the US has carrier task forces?

See Operation Praying Mantis above.

Is that really the best you could come up with?

Do you understand what a major naval battle is?

2008? ~BH

Battle off the coast of Abkhazia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[zzzz]

China is building an brown water navy not a blue water navy. their whole focus is control of China sea, the eastern Indian Ocean and far western Pacific basin. They do not seek to push their military power any farther than that at present. Although they are building an aircraft carrier their main focus is on subs. Diesel subs are so quiet they can penetrate our ASW forces protecting our carriers. They are also focusing on missile technology. In the naval war that can occur when the Chinese take Taiwan our carrier task force must stay hidden behind Taiwan and cannot come any closer to stay out of missile and sub range. Even then one of their subs could sneak out and sink a a carrier.

Surface to surface combat between the US and anyone is impossible for the forseeable future. As our naval forces are reduced by budgetary pressures over the next 30 years that impossibility changes to possibility and then probability if other nations decide to commit money to naval forces. I can see other countries anti ship capabilites and sub technology make our navy obselete. If our navy ventures into another area of the world the mission approaches a suicide mission. As a country we cannot maintain a 12 or 13 carrier navy. That will have to be cut in half in the next 20 years because we just cannot afford it. As our preeminance declines other navies become more powerful and the possibility of conflict becomes more realistic.

Those navies, I would think, must have nuclear capable delivery to be successful against the U.S., even 20 to 30 years from now.

Ah the nuclear genie. Using nuclear warheads in a naval battle would only occur as a last ditch effort. Using nukes agains a non-nuclear force would make the user a pariah in the international scene. Using nukes against a nuclear power invites a similar response so both navies would be wiped out. Nukes are most effective as a deterrent and if they are used, they are used in defeat. China has nuclear capability and they have ICBM's capable of reaching the US. Any war we have with China will be constrained to the theater of operations and not the Chinese mainland because they can reach over the Pacific and touch us back. However this thread is about naval combat and I can forsee in 2040 the evening of the field.

 

[JakeStarkey]

zzzz, the heart of your argument is "Nukes are most effective as a deterrent and if they are used, they are used in defeat." Tell that to Japan.

 

[BolshevikHunter]

China is building an brown water navy not a blue water navy. their whole focus is control of China sea, the eastern Indian Ocean and far western Pacific basin. They do not seek to push their military power any farther than that at present. Although they are building an aircraft carrier their main focus is on subs. Diesel subs are so quiet they can penetrate our ASW forces protecting our carriers. They are also focusing on missile technology. In the naval war that can occur when the Chinese take Taiwan our carrier task force must stay hidden behind Taiwan and cannot come any closer to stay out of missile and sub range. Even then one of their subs could sneak out and sink a a carrier.

Surface to surface combat between the US and anyone is impossible for the forseeable future. As our naval forces are reduced by budgetary pressures over the next 30 years that impossibility changes to possibility and then probability if other nations decide to commit money to naval forces. I can see other countries anti ship capabilites and sub technology make our navy obselete. If our navy ventures into another area of the world the mission approaches a suicide mission. As a country we cannot maintain a 12 or 13 carrier navy. That will have to be cut in half in the next 20 years because we just cannot afford it. As our preeminance declines other navies become more powerful and the possibility of conflict becomes more realistic.

Those navies, I would think, must have nuclear capable delivery to be successful against the U.S., even 20 to 30 years from now.

Ah the nuclear genie. Using nuclear warheads in a naval battle would only occur as a last ditch effort. Using nukes agains a non-nuclear force would make the user a pariah in the international scene. Using nukes against a nuclear power invites a similar response so both navies would be wiped out. Nukes are most effective as a deterrent and if they are used, they are used in defeat. China has nuclear capability and they have ICBM's capable of reaching the US. Any war we have with China will be constrained to the theater of operations and not the Chinese mainland because they can reach over the Pacific and touch us back. However this thread is about naval combat and I can forsee in 2040 the evening of the field.

What do you think about a possible mutual agreement to not use Nukes as long as neithers Country is invaded? Say maybe the Taiwan situation being settled with a Naval battle minus Nukes? ~BH

 

[zzzz]

zzzz, the heart of your argument is "Nukes are most effective as a deterrent and if they are used, they are used in defeat." Tell that to Japan.

Different world situation. No one knew about the radioactive fallout back then. Not only that but back in the big one we did not care if civilians were killed. Look at Dresden and the cities we burned to the ground killing kids and women. Even though we have considered the use of nukes since WWII the fallout (political) would have been too much for the administration and the country as a whole. In any future conflict nukes are off the table unless someone uses one against us or a chemical or biological agent is used. I cannot see anyone using a nuke except as a last gasp attempt to avoid total defeat.

 

[zzzz]

Those navies, I would think, must have nuclear capable delivery to be successful against the U.S., even 20 to 30 years from now.

Ah the nuclear genie. Using nuclear warheads in a naval battle would only occur as a last ditch effort. Using nukes agains a non-nuclear force would make the user a pariah in the international scene. Using nukes against a nuclear power invites a similar response so both navies would be wiped out. Nukes are most effective as a deterrent and if they are used, they are used in defeat. China has nuclear capability and they have ICBM's capable of reaching the US. Any war we have with China will be constrained to the theater of operations and not the Chinese mainland because they can reach over the Pacific and touch us back. However this thread is about naval combat and I can forsee in 2040 the evening of the field.

What do you think about a possible mutual agreement to not use Nukes as long as neithers Country is invaded? Say maybe the Taiwan situation being settled with a Naval battle minus Nukes? ~BH

I think there already is a tacit agreement among the world governments that nukes are not going to be used. A battle over Taiwan will be non-nuclear. It would also have a very disturbing result to the American people too. Even though our military is top of the line a war with China stretches our interior lines. China will be operating in their backyard with land based missiles and aircraft. We can only project so much power over the Pacific with refueling aircraft and aircraft carriers. The bases we do have that can reach the theater are far away from the US. In a study by RAND in which everything went the US way we would still lose considerable refueling assets and may not be able to sustain an airwar for more than a day or two because of the losses. And every day that order of battle is geting better for the Chinese. In 10 years they will be in a lot better position to control the battlefield if they choose to go that way.

 

[Trajan]

Xiamen is Chinas largest port city anywhere near Taiwan, its approx. 140 miles as the crow flys.

IF china ever decided to take Taiwan, they would like napoleon and the English channel or Germany ala operation sea-lion in ww2, have to gain control of the sea to safely make landfall and maintain a beachhead.

The Chinese would smother the region with land based air power,hoping to create the air umbrella they would need to make landfall with naval invasion forces.

The Taiwanese would respond by attempting to keep their air battle at least at stasis, and we would deploy as many Carriers as we could while maintaining others at other parts of the world to sppt. them. Since we have 12 and 4 at least are in port on a rotating basis at all times that leaves 8.

I would guess we would be all hands on deck and put 6 in the region ( assuming NOTHING else is going on anywhere else) to buttress Taiwan’s ability to deny air superiority. We would be I suspect ferry in aircraft to Taiwan to replace losses. ( I expect that the japanese would sppt. Taiwan as well).

At some point in time, the Chinese might gain parity, or an advantage which they may feel would be enough to send in the troops, while the air battle over head would go on, there would be every effort to sink as many transports as possible, by ship to ship gunfire and stand off missiles etc. , hence a naval battle. And unless the Chinese had sunk all of our carries or forced us to retire, they would have to support the beachhead via a sea-lane. Naval forces again would then, along with air cover be paramount. Sink the transports or there sppt. and you win.