"In War Over Taiwan, We Lose Every Time"

[peacefan]

Pentagon-adviseur lijkbleek na geheime briefing. “In oorlog om Taiwan verliezen we élke keer”

Toen een nationale veiligheidsadviseur de details van de uiterst geheime ‘Overmatch Brief’ tot zich liet doordringen, trok hij lijkbleek weg. Dit ontluisterende document, waarover ‘The New York Times’ bericht, doorbreekt het Amerikaanse zelfbeeld van militaire onaantastbaarheid: in een oorlog om...

www.hln.be

Pentagon Advisor Turns Pale After Secret Briefing: "In War Over Taiwan, We Lose Every Time"
When a national security advisor absorbed the details of the top-secret "Overmatch Brief," he paled. This shocking document, reported by The New York Times, shatters America's self-image of military invulnerability: in a war over Taiwan, the US would be defeated "time and time again," and its most powerful aircraft carriers would be in danger of sinking to the bottom of the ocean within minutes.

KVE
December 12, 2025, 2:26 PM
Last update: December 12, 2025, 4:59 PM
Pentagon war simulations simulating a Chinese invasion of Taiwan show that Beijing could disable American fighter squadrons, large warships, and even satellite networks before they could be effectively deployed.

The gravity of the situation first truly dawned when a senior national security adviser to President Biden received the briefing in 2021. According to an eyewitness, the official “turned pale” when he realized how hopeless the cards were.

This news comes shortly after Guo Jiakun, a spokesperson for the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, warned the US to “treat the Taiwan issue with the utmost caution.”

© AFP
The report paints a bleak picture of the balance of power and warns that the American superpower is blinded by its own expensive toys. While the Pentagon relies on technologically advanced but prohibitively expensive weapons systems, China has focused on mass-producing cheaper systems.

The result, according to the analysis, is as simple as it is terrifying: Beijing has countless backups and alternatives for every military trump card America thought it possessed.

Pride of the Navy Goes Under
The most painful example is the USS Gerald R. Ford. This most modern aircraft carrier in the world, with a price tag of $13 billion (over €11 billion), is considered the symbol of American power on the oceans. But in the Pentagon's merciless wargames, the ship quickly becomes a sinking grave.

The USS Gerald R. Ford.
The USS Gerald R. Ford. © Photo News
The simulations show that the American fleet is virtually defenseless against China's arsenal of some six hundred hypersonic missiles. Missiles like the YJ-17, proudly paraded in Beijing last year, reach speeds of up to eight times the speed of sound. According to the report, they can destroy American aircraft carriers "in minutes." Yet, the Pentagon plans to build nine more of these behemoths.

"Sobering"
Eric Gomez of the Taiwan Security Monitor participated in one of these simulations. "The US is losing a huge number of ships in the process," he told The Telegraph. "Hundreds of fifth-generation fighter jets, multiple destroyers, aircraft carriers... When we took stock, the atmosphere in the room was sobering. It was an incredibly heavy toll."

© AP
Industry Fails
The core of the problem is structural. The American defense industry continues to focus on increasingly expensive versions of existing weapons. But the war in Ukraine has revealed a new reality: cheap drones and mass production win wars.

Washington is now trying to catch up – Congress has appropriated $1 billion for the production of 340,000 small drones, and Donald Trump has appointed a special "drone czar." But experts warn that America can never win the battle for cost-effectiveness against China, where wages are lower and regulations are more lax.

© Photo News
There's also an unseen threat: the Chinese hacker group Volt Typhoon has reportedly already penetrated deep into America's critical infrastructure. Should things get out of hand, Beijing could potentially cripple American logistics—power, water, communications—before the first shot is fired.

2027: The Year of Truth?
For Chinese leader Xi Jinping, the capture of Taiwan is a “historic inevitability.” He has ordered his military to be combat-ready by 2027. However, analysts believe Xi will only strike if he is certain of a swift, crushing victory; failure would mean the end of his power.

Xi Jinping
Xi Jinping © Corbis via Getty Images
Meanwhile, the US is grappling with its role. Trump takes a business perspective: he compares the US to an insurance company and believes Taiwan should pay for protection. But even his strategy centers on military overmatch: the idea that sheer American superiority should deter China.

The irony of the leaked memo is that it undermines precisely that assumption. The arms race is in full swing, but the US seems to be realizing that it is no longer the undisputed leader, but a giant with feet of clay.

Pete Hegseth
Pete Hegseth ©

How about, instead of relying on aircraft carriers to bail out Taiwan, we use large destroyers equipped with 10K RPM AA guns and hypersonic missiles of their own?
Combined with drones that explicitly send out signals impersonating real US naval assets, we could perhaps tip the balance of power in our favor again?

 

[airplanemechanic]

That's too funny. We are the world superpower. We could kick China's ass in a war and they know it.

 

[kyzr]

"Feet of clay?" $900b a year buys a **** of a lot of clay.

The Dutch OP should focus on the EU's army if he can find it.

So why hasn't China taken Taiwan yet before we move the chip-making factories to the US?

 

[Hafar1014]

Pentagon-adviseur lijkbleek na geheime briefing. “In oorlog om Taiwan verliezen we élke keer”

Toen een nationale veiligheidsadviseur de details van de uiterst geheime ‘Overmatch Brief’ tot zich liet doordringen, trok hij lijkbleek weg. Dit ontluisterende document, waarover ‘The New York Times’ bericht, doorbreekt het Amerikaanse zelfbeeld van militaire onaantastbaarheid: in een oorlog om...

www.hln.be

How about, instead of relying on aircraft carriers to bail out Taiwan, we use large destroyers equipped with 10K RPM AA guns and hypersonic missiles of their own?
Combined with drones that explicitly send out signals impersonating real US naval assets, we could perhaps tip the balance of power in our favor again?

Chinas economy cant support a war and their losses will be huge

 

[Mac-7]

Pentagon-adviseur lijkbleek na geheime briefing. “In oorlog om Taiwan verliezen we élke keer”

Toen een nationale veiligheidsadviseur de details van de uiterst geheime ‘Overmatch Brief’ tot zich liet doordringen, trok hij lijkbleek weg. Dit ontluisterende document, waarover ‘The New York Times’ bericht, doorbreekt het Amerikaanse zelfbeeld van militaire onaantastbaarheid: in een oorlog om...

www.hln.be

How about, instead of relying on aircraft carriers to bail out Taiwan, we use large destroyers equipped with 10K RPM AA guns and hypersonic missiles of their own?
Combined with drones that explicitly send out signals impersonating real US naval assets, we could perhaps tip the balance of power in our favor again?

The new anti ship missiles are a serious threat to our aircraft carriers

So they could not be deployed in restricted waters such as the Taiwan Straights or the Persian Gulf

Hopefully we will be rid of the obama-biden junta DEI admirals before the next war and our carriers will be used intelligently

 

[Stryder50]

Pentagon-adviseur lijkbleek na geheime briefing. “In oorlog om Taiwan verliezen we élke keer”

Toen een nationale veiligheidsadviseur de details van de uiterst geheime ‘Overmatch Brief’ tot zich liet doordringen, trok hij lijkbleek weg. Dit ontluisterende document, waarover ‘The New York Times’ bericht, doorbreekt het Amerikaanse zelfbeeld van militaire onaantastbaarheid: in een oorlog om...

www.hln.be

How about, instead of relying on aircraft carriers to bail out Taiwan, we use large destroyers equipped with 10K RPM AA guns and hypersonic missiles of their own?
Combined with drones that explicitly send out signals impersonating real US naval assets, we could perhaps tip the balance of power in our favor again?

Only if we decide not to use tactical nukes.*

Given the stakes involved with PRChina, I wouldn't rule out use of tac-nukes.

*This assumes we haven't enough conventional forces available to use, along with other special weapons/devices to provide a needed edge.

 

[Stryder50]

The new anti ship missiles are a serious threat to our aircraft carriers

So they could not be deployed in restricted waters such as the Taiwan Straights or the Persian Gulf

Hopefully we will be rid of the obama-biden junta DEI admirals before the next war and our carriers will be used intelligently

Value of aircraft carriers depends upon the operational range of the aircraft they carry~deploy. Also the value of crewed aircraft versus UCAVs, etc. for target reduction.
In initial conflict stages the CV(aircraft carriers) would be held back while other weapons types/systems are used to attrite the PRChina "first strike" weapons systems.
Also, likely long range ballistic missile and cruise missile systems would be used to reduce PRChina shore based weapons basing.

 

[Mac-7]

Value of aircraft carriers depends upon the operational range of the aircraft they carry~deploy. Also the value of crewed aircraft versus UCAVs, etc. for target reduction.
In initial conflict stages the CV(aircraft carriers) would be held back while other weapons types/systems are used to attrite the PRChina "first strike" weapons systems.
Also, likely long range ballistic missile and cruise missile systems would be used to reduce PRChina shore based weapons basing.

I’m not well informed on modern naval warfare

But what I do know is that advanced missiles are a threat to our aircraft carriers

And just like WWII we will lose some of them in a full scale naval war with china

However I am not suggesting defeatism

China’s military for all its bluster is not good

Man for man we are better, and that should make the difference

 

[JoeB131]

That's too funny. We are the world superpower. We could kick China's ass in a war and they know it.

We couldn't subdue Afghanistan and Iraq. What makes you think we could take on China.

The problem is, we invested too much in expensive toys.

China can take out our 13 Billion dollar aircraft carriers with $99,000 hypersonic missiles.

 

[JoeB131]

I’m not well informed on modern naval warfare

But what I do know is that advanced missiles are a threat to our aircraft carriers

And just like WWII we will lose some of them in a full scale naval war with china

However I am not suggesting defeatism

China’s military for all its bluster is not good

Man for man we are better, and that should make the difference

Are we, though?

Wars are won by several factors.

Logistics being the main one, and while we have to provide for forces operating 7000 miles away, China has supply lines of only a few hundred miles.

The Second is morale. For China, Taiwan is a matter of national pride and honor. For Americans, they are fighting for that college education most of them will never get.

Mrs. B131 wanted to watch the parade for the 80th anniversary of the end of WWII. I only watched part of it, but I compare how sharp those PLA troops looked compared to the shuffling, disinterested troops that marched in Trump's Fascist Birthday Parade, and I have to wonder who is going to go into a war over Taiwan with greater enthusiasm.


Here's the difference between WWII and now. In WWII, we were the manufacturing powerhouse. Today, China is. While we blow money on $13 Billion dollar aircraft carriers, the Chinese invest in $99,000 hypersonic missiles to pick them off.

If you want to use WWII as a template, Japan very quickly took Southeast Asia (which was largely unguarded because their European Colonial Masters were busy with the Austrian Mustache Man), the Philippines, Guam, Wake, etc. and it was years before we could take them back.

In a hypothetical war over Taiwan, the Chinese would take Taiwain, how would we take it back? Would we count on Japan and the Philippines to continue the war for years until we were "Ready", whatever that means? Or would they more likely just reach separate peace deals with China to resume trade that is vital to their economies?

China exports 52 Billion a year to the Philippines, a country with a GDP of a mere 500 Billion.

 

[JoeB131]

Only if we decide not to use tactical nukes.*

Given the stakes involved with PRChina, I wouldn't rule out use of tac-nukes.

*This assumes we haven't enough conventional forces available to use, along with other special weapons/devices to provide a needed edge.

Um, okay, what "Stakes" are those?

I mean, seriously, whenever I see some fuckhead talk about "tactical nukes", I seriously want to slap them upside the ******* head for being that level of stupid. China as 100 ICBM ready to launch at America, let's not talk about "Tactical Nukes," okay.

Seriously, if this is about Taiwan, I have to seriously say, Screw Taiwan. This is a bunch of Chinese having an argument over what kind of government they should have, and Taiwan lost that argument in 1949.

Taiwan isn't worth World War III.

And before you give me any shit about "China is EEEEEEEVIL because Cheeto Jesus says so!" um, no. China hasn't launched an aggressive war since 1979.

 

[Mac-7]

Are we, though?

Wars are won by several factors.

Logistics being the main one, and while we have to provide for forces operating 7000 miles away, China has supply lines of only a few hundred miles.

The Second is morale. For China, Taiwan is a matter of national pride and honor. For Americans, they are fighting for that college education most of them will never get.

Mrs. B131 wanted to watch the parade for the 80th anniversary of the end of WWII. I only watched part of it, but I compare how sharp those PLA troops looked compared to the shuffling, disinterested troops that marched in Trump's Fascist Birthday Parade, and I have to wonder who is going to go into a war over Taiwan with greater enthusiasm.


Here's the difference between WWII and now. In WWII, we were the manufacturing powerhouse. Today, China is. While we blow money on $13 Billion dollar aircraft carriers, the Chinese invest in $99,000 hypersonic missiles to pick them off.

If you want to use WWII as a template, Japan very quickly took Southeast Asia (which was largely unguarded because their European Colonial Masters were busy with the Austrian Mustache Man), the Philippines, Guam, Wake, etc. and it was years before we could take them back.

In a hypothetical war over Taiwan, the Chinese would take Taiwain, how would we take it back? Would we count on Japan and the Philippines to continue the war for years until we were "Ready", whatever that means? Or would they more likely just reach separate peace deals with China to resume trade that is vital to their economies?

China exports 52 Billion a year to the Philippines, a country with a GDP of a mere 500 Billion.

As I said, I wont engage in defeatism

I leave that to white monkeys that are shilling for china

China would be fighting Taiwan, the US, Japan, and at the very least cooperation from Australia, the Philippines, and Vietnam

Noticeably missing from the list is South Korea with its new pro communist president

 

[JoeB131]

"Feet of clay?" $900b a year buys a **** of a lot of clay.

The Dutch OP should focus on the EU's army if he can find it.

So why hasn't China taken Taiwan yet before we move the chip-making factories to the US?

You mean the Chip factory we've spent 50 Billion on and has failed?


China hasn't taken Taiwan because there's no reason for them to. China and Taiwan do $100 billion in trade every year.

The only reason why China doesn't squash Taiwan like a bug is because there's no good reason to, as long as Taiwan still claims to be part of China. It's if they ever tried to declare de jure independence instead of de facto independence that there would be a problem.

What people in the West don't get is how China sees these issues. We look at Hong Kong, Taiwan, Tibet, and the Uighers in terms of "Human Rights" and "Freedom". China views them as places where outsiders tried to impose their will on China, often through unequal treaties.

 

[JoeB131]

As I said, I wont engage in defeatism

I leave that to white monkeys that are shilling for china

China would be fighting Taiwan, the US, Japan, and at the very least cooperation from Australia, the Philippines, and Vietnam

Noticeably missing from the list is South Korea with its new pro communist president

You realize most of those countries are kind of useless militarily, right? Meanwhile, China is likely to have Russia and perhaps India on their side.

And most of them won't screw up their cozy trade relationships with China over Taiwan.

Here's an idea, instead of shilling for a war that will be another embarrassment (and we've had plenty of those in the last half century), let's find a way to avoid a war by not pissing off the world's second-largest economy.

Taiwan isn't worth World War III.

 

[Mac-7]

You realize most of those countries are kind of useless militarily, right? Meanwhile, China is likely to have Russia and perhaps India on their side.

And most of them won't screw up their cozy trade relationships with China over Taiwan.

Here's an idea, instead of shilling for a war that will be another embarrassment (and we've had plenty of those in the last half century), let's find a way to avoid a war by not pissing off the world's second-largest economy.

Taiwan isn't worth World War III.

It laughable to think that India would use its military to help china invade Taiwan

Other than a pledge not to take advantage of the conflict for India to push china out of disputed territories that they share

Ditto for Russia. They are fully engaged in Ukraine and have nothing to spare or to gain from a war in the Far East

 

[Stryder50]

You realize most of those countries are kind of useless militarily, right? Meanwhile, China is likely to have Russia and perhaps India on their side.

And most of them won't screw up their cozy trade relationships with China over Taiwan.

Here's an idea, instead of shilling for a war that will be another embarrassment (and we've had plenty of those in the last half century), let's find a way to avoid a war by not pissing off the world's second-largest economy.

Taiwan isn't worth World War III.

It laughable to think that India would use its military to help china invade Taiwan

Other than a pledge not to take advantage of the conflict for India to push china out of disputed territories that they share

Ditto for Russia. They are fully engaged in Ukraine and have nothing to spare or to gain from a war in the Far East

Thank you Chamberlain(JoeB131) for your wisdom.
You really think appeasement will work better than it did 87 years ago ?

 

[Stryder50]

We couldn't subdue Afghanistan and Iraq. What makes you think we could take on China.

The problem is, we invested too much in expensive toys.

China can take out our 13 Billion dollar aircraft carriers with $99,000 hypersonic missiles.

We didn't subdue them because both were proxy conflicts and the US didn't want to expand into either Iran or Pakistan which were the supporters of those we were fighting against in those two nations.

 

[JoeB131]

It laughable to think that India would use its military to help china invade Taiwan

Other than a pledge not to take advantage of the conflict for India to push china out of disputed territories that they share

Ditto for Russia. They are fully engaged in Ukraine and have nothing to spare or to gain from a war in the Far East

World War I started as a dispute between Austria and Serbia over Bosnia.

World War II started over a dispute about Danzig.

Just saying.

 

[Mac-7]

Thank you Chamberlain for your wisdom.
You really think appeasement will work better than it did 87 years ago ?

Never mind what china says

When the chicom dictators lay off the rice wine or expensive imported Scottish whisky and make a sober assessment they will not invade Taiwan unless they are certain they can win

And it remains far from a sure thing now

Nor is it likely to get any better unless the white monkeys sew disillusion in the West

 

[Stryder50]

Um, okay, what "Stakes" are those?

I mean, seriously, whenever I see some fuckhead talk about "tactical nukes", I seriously want to slap them upside the ******* head for being that level of stupid. China as 100 ICBM ready to launch at America, let's not talk about "Tactical Nukes," okay.

Seriously, if this is about Taiwan, I have to seriously say, Screw Taiwan. This is a bunch of Chinese having an argument over what kind of government they should have, and Taiwan lost that argument in 1949.

Taiwan isn't worth World War III.

And before you give me any shit about "China is EEEEEEEVIL because Cheeto Jesus says so!" um, no. China hasn't launched an aggressive war since 1979.

And the USA has about 1000(+) ICBM we can spare out of a larger arsenal that we could launch back at them.