I find the average Taiwanese probably don’t care as long as they get to live their lives… Especially KMT types.
1 Like
Well, it makes sense if they don’t care.
Peter Zeihan seems to think so. His new book came out this year. I imagine he sourced it well.
It’s no slam dunk:
Limits of ASATs (anti-satellite weapons)
While it has been suggested that a country intercepting the satellites of another country in a conflict, namely between China and the United States, could seriously hinder the latter’s military operations, the ease of shooting down orbiting satellites and their effects on operations has been questioned. Although satellites have been successfully intercepted at low orbiting altitudes, the tracking of military satellites for a length of time could be complicated by defensive measures like inclination changes. Depending on the level of tracking capabilities, the interceptor would have to pre-determine the point of impact while compensating for the satellite’s lateral movement and the time for the interceptor to climb and move; U.S. intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) satellites orbit at about 800 km (500 mi) high and move at 7.5 km/s (4.7 mi/s), so a Chinese Intermediate-range ballistic missile would need to compensate for 1350 km (840 mi) of movement in the three minutes it takes to boost to that altitude. Even if an ISR satellite is knocked out, the U.S. (edit: as well as China and Russia) possesses an extensive array of manned and unmanned ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance/target acquisition) aircraft that could perform missions at standoff ranges from Chinese (edit: or American) land-based air defences . . . .
No, it isn’t. Suffice to say though, they’d have one shot to take over the world and the window of opportunity would be hours…maybe…
Hypersonic anti-aircraft missiles fly 5,000 mph.
Much has been written in the past about the fact that the carrier air wing’s average striking range has shrunk from 900 to 500 nautical miles over the past 25 years while China and Russia have invested in new A2AD systems such as the carrier killing DF-21 missile, designed to keep the super carriers from coming within 1,000 miles of their shores in war time. Future air wings composed of F-35Cs, which have an unrefueled combat range of 630 nautical miles, and Block III FA-18 Hornets, which, with their conformal fuel tanks carrying an additional 3,500 lbs. of fuel, could reach out to 750 miles. However, neither of these alone can bridge the gap imposed by enemy A2AD systems.
So they’re going to win a global land grab with real fast rockets? Highly doubtful. And this kind of activity isn’t done in a dark room.
If China fires a hypersonic missile at a US carrier, they better take all of them out at once (and this includes support ships in the battlegroup).
Because this will unite the US against China very quickly.
So I know for sure they aren’t going to mess around with US ships. They’re not that stupid.
Anyone here willing to say that Xi is not the sort to take a big gamble?
Shouldn’t it be “Taiwan Can Avoid Losing a War”? Putting up a successful defense to the point where your opponent decides to stop attacking isn’t really winning.
Yep- I remember them conquering Siberia, the Chinese Raj in India, taking over the Americas and the Chinese Scramble for Africa.
Yup.
I’d go with “Taiwan Can Avoid Getting Into a War” which is what they’ve been doing successfully.
an officer at Pacific Air Forces (PACAF) confirmed to The War Zone that the flight did take place: “I can confirm that an RC 135W [sic] Rivet Joint aircraft did fly over the northern portion of Taiwan yesterday as part of a routine mission.”
When war comes to you, you’re in a war. That’s how it works.
Is it? Does it? This sittin back onna porch mumbling cryptic idioms is growing old. Got any real content you’d like to share?
2 Likes
I offer what I offer. Take it or leave it.
Notice I don’t go telling you how to post.