Chinese nationalists, Wumao Propaganda and the Rise of China

[Easo]

Context is important. You are right that the US Navy still has 11 Avenger class mine sweeper in service. However, during the Gulf War, the US Navy depended on surveillance, anti-submarine, mine-countermeasures (MCM) helicopters and aircrafts, and each individual ships sonar and radar. Those minesweepers were outdated as soon as they were launched. Using LCS, which cost 2.5 billion each with maintenance cost of 70 million a year, as countermeasures against weapon that cost a couple of thousand each is indicative of the underlying issue between the development of mine technology and its countermeasures.

Back to China. The good news is that the problem goes both way. If the US has problem with mine countermeasures, the Chinese even more so. Imagine B-52 Stratofortress dropping thousands of sea mines along the Taiwanese Strait.

The USAF Weapons School Commandant went to Barksdale AFB. I told him to go eat some fried #alligator. Instead he went dropping sea mines out of a B-52 Stratofortress! Awesome pics! Thanks to my exec “Boost” for the pics and being his IP for the day!

If the B-52's can drop anything unmolested in the straits then it is already over by that point.

[Kellhound]

I did not say “couldn’t.” I said it would be a waste of resources. Anti-ship missiles would be cheaper and better at hitting moving targets. As for hitting beach heads with cruise missiles, laying a thousand anti-tank and anti-personnel mines would still be cheaper and has the advantage of forcing the invading force to slow down its advance creating a kill zone. This is an effective strategy. Especially since the development of mine technology has leapfrogged the countermeasure (detection and disarming) methods. Never more so than with sea mines. The newest generation of remotely armed and mobile sea mines have made mine sweeper and mine hunting ships obsolete. In fact the US Navy has retired all of its mine sweeper and mine hunting ships.



Could the US absorb the damage from a couple of dozens missiles is the same question as asking could the US absorb losing New York, SF Bay Area, Los Angeles, San Diego, etc. The answer is probably yes, but at what cost. The same with China & Taiwan situation. Could China afford to lose Shanghai (which sits at the Yangtze river estuary), Guangzhou, Tianjin, Shenzhen, etc. to 30-foot wall of water? Both are extreme measures which are meant as deterrent to keep the other side from attacking. Not as a first strike offense.

As an aside, I just noticed that almost every single major cities in China are located next to a major river or on a river estuary, and there are freaking dams everywhere.

- - - Updated - - -



Exactly. It is meant as a deterrent. Not as a first strike offense. The US does not even have to use any of its ICBMs to hit China. A freaking single Ohio class submarine carry almost as many warheads as the entire Chinese arsenal. It has the advantage of being able to surface in the middle of a major Chinese harbor undetected, unleash a full salvo of all its warheads in about a minute, submerge and disappear. The US has 14 of those roaming the world oceans.

Even simple mines are a major issue, especially in confined or coastal areas. The US Navy still has 8 Avenger Class MCMs, which is remarkable for 30 year old wood ships. The LCS has a MCM module, and the Navy is investing heavily in unmanned MCM systems as they are the perfect platform for the dangerous and monotonous task at hand.

“We shouldn’t be afraid of atomic missiles. No matter what kind of war breaks out, conventional or nuclear, we will win… If the imperialists unleash war on us, we may lose more than 300 million people. So what? War is war. The years will pass and we will get to work making more babies than ever before.”
Mao Zedong to Nikita Khrushchev, 1957
The Chinese have an interesting take on casualties, though they are less able to absorb large casualties from the ROC while the US is untouched.

The US would no risk moving an SSBN that close to China unless it was a first strike. An Ohio can carry its full 336 warhead loadout only if all of them are the smaller W76-1/2s and the New START treaty would have to be violated so all 24 tubes were active again. Usually they carry only about 5 warheads in each missile, and only about 5-8 are actually on patrol at any given time. Even if it wanted to, the US does not have enough warheads for the Trident IIs to fill 14 boats with 24 missiles carrying 14 warheads each.

- - - Updated - - -

The mine countermeasures of the Littoral Combat Ships are based on aviation and unmanned surface, semi-submersible and submersible vehicles. They are not independent systems. The mine technology has advanced so far now that using manned mine sweeper and mine hunter ships are dangerous to the ships & crews. BTW, China still depend and manufacture mine sweeper and mine hunter ships.

How effective are mine countermeasures? USS Samuel B. Roberts in 1988 during the Iran-Iraq War nearly sank from First World War-era mine. In 1991, the multi-billion dollar USS Princeton was severely damaged by a pair of Italian made MN103 Manta sea mines costing a couple of thousand dollars a piece. The mine countermeasure technology has advanced considerably since then. However, the mine offense technology has advanced even faster. The imbalance problem occurs because the cost of making the weapon is in the thousands while the countermeasure means cost is measured in the hundred of millions. Probably in the billions when you include the research cost.

- - - Updated - - -

So what kind of sea mine technology does a modern navy has to deal with these days? Today’s systems can be triggered by the magnetic field of a ship, the sound of its propellers or the pressure of its wake. There are remotely activated mines that can lay dormant for a long time, ‘stealthy’ mines fashioned in shapes and materials designed to minimize their sonar profile, ‘smart’ mines that can discern between targets and ‘rising’ mines that fire torpedoes, and even mines which are equipped with sea-to-air missiles to destroy low-flying aircraft. Humans are pretty inventive when it comes to killing each other.

Magnetic mines? WWI. Pressure mines? WWII. Acoustic mines? WWII. Torpedo mines? 1970s.

- - - Updated - - -

If the B-52's can drop anything unmolested in the straits then it is already over by that point.

They can deploy Quickstrike mines about 40 miles away using JDAM-ER kits actually.

[Bluespiderman57]

If the B-52's can drop anything unmolested in the straits then it is already over by that point.

As has been stated a few time in this thread already, the build up required to invade Taiwan would be impossible to keep secret. That would give, if not the US, then Taiwan weeks to mine the straits unmolested. And any attempt by China to forcefully remove the mines could prematurely set off the war.

[Easo]

As has been stated a few time in this thread already, the build up required to invade Taiwan would be impossible to keep secret. That would give, if not the US, then Taiwan weeks to mine the straits unmolested. And any attempt by China to forcefully remove the mines could prematurely set off the war.

Attempting to mine the straits during peacetime is also not the brightest idea, unless you are knowingly going to confrontation. Economic impact on the whole world would be immediate.

They can deploy Quickstrike mines about 40 miles away using JDAM-ER kits actually.

Dueling distance for a jet fighter and still too close to mainland unless China has been "supressed". B-52 can either launch cruise missiles from thousands of km away (which is it's main role anyway), or bomb people in sandals with no AA. It has no place in still contested airspace.

“We shouldn’t be afraid of atomic missiles. No matter what kind of war breaks out, conventional or nuclear, we will win… If the imperialists unleash war on us, we may lose more than 300 million people. So what? War is war. The years will pass and we will get to work making more babies than ever before.”
Mao Zedong to Nikita Khrushchev, 1957
The Chinese have an interesting take on casualties, though they are less able to absorb large casualties from the ROC while the US is untouched.

I had heard about that talk between Mao and Khruschev, the latter one supposedly thought that Mao was an idiot who simply does not understand what nukes are. Which, frankly, would not have been surprising.
Also that take on mass casualties would quickly change in case of nukes falling on coastal cities, though there is zero reason for nuking anyone as of now. As for attack on ROC? Yeah, nothing over there that would inflict enough pain.

[Rasulis]

Also that take on mass casualties would quickly change in case of nukes falling on coastal cities, though there is zero reason for nuking anyone as of now. As for attack on ROC? Yeah, nothing over there that would inflict enough pain.

I disagree with that. I linked the profile of Yangtze river below. Three Gorges and Xiangjiaba are massive gravity dams. Even nukes probably won't dent them. However, Wudongde, Xiluodu and Baihetan are all arch dams. They are vulnerable to cruise missile strikes. If those three failed sequentially, every downstream dams will fail also. Including Three Gorges.

Areas affected will include Hubei, Henan, Hunan, Anhui, Jiangxi, Zhejiang, Fujian, Jiangsu, Shanghi. Total damage estimate around 3.5 - 4.5 trillion USD. The loss of life will be incalculable. Probably upward of 100 million. Around 75% of PLA bases will be gone.

[Easo]

Your whole idea of Taiwan's defense is Taiwan successfully hiting dams instead of military targets and not being intercepted, while also being unstoppable in using anti-ship missiles. Brah, stop. I mean if you wanna see Taiwanese leaders get executed after the war, go ahead, but I don't think they would agree with you.
P.S.
Your also could be surprised how hard it might be to destroy them.

[Rasulis]

Your whole idea of Taiwan's defense is Taiwan successfully hiting dams instead of military targets and not being intercepted, while also being unstoppable in using anti-ship missiles. Brah, stop. I mean if you wanna see Taiwanese leaders get executed after the war, go ahead, but I don't think they would agree with you.
P.S.
Your also could be surprised how hard it might be to destroy them.

It is meant as a deterrent. The same with having nuclear warheads. Something that you hope you will never have to use.

As for how hard it is to destroy a dam, it depends on the type of dam. Roller compacted reinforced gravity concrete dams are near impossible to destroy. Arch and buttress dams are completely within the realm of possibility. Either through a direct strike or air burst explosion on the upstream end of the dam creating a the equivalent of a seismic seiche.

[PC2]

Your whole idea of Taiwan's defense is Taiwan successfully hiting dams instead of military targets and not being intercepted, while also being unstoppable in using anti-ship missiles. Brah, stop. I mean if you wanna see Taiwanese leaders get executed after the war, go ahead, but I don't think they would agree with you.
P.S.
Your also could be surprised how hard it might be to destroy them.

It seems like you don't even want to find solutions and deterrents though. No matter what people come up with you just see the CCP as an unstoppable goliath, no? Or are you critical of Rasulis's idea because it's a distraction from a better idea?

[jonnysensible]

It seems like you don't even want to find solutions and deterrents though. No matter what people come up with you just see the CCP as an unstoppable goliath, no? Or are you critical of Rasulis's idea because it's a distraction from a better idea?

MAD doesnt work if all you can do is destroy a dam. pretty sure dam busting is a war crime too. and if you start doing that your international standing goes to 0.

All available weaponry that survived an initial attack would be aimed at ships crossing the strait anyway.

[PC2]

MAD doesnt work if all you can do is destroy a dam. pretty sure dam busting is a war crime too. and if you start doing that your international standing goes to 0.

All available weaponry that survived an initial attack would be aimed at ships crossing the strait anyway.

So you believe there is no way to stop the CCP from getting what they want? Taiwan just has to let China conquer and then erase Taiwanese society/culture because it would reduce Taiwan's international standing if they fight back against a tyrannical aggressor? Why should they care about their "standing" in that case? If the world doesn't want to stop China from conquering Taiwan then it's not like the world will save their society afterwards. It'll be too late at that point because the CCP does a lot of stuff that isn't easily reversible.

If the CCP ends up killing zero Taiwanese civilians and doesn't destroy any civilian infrastructure at all then I could say a dam attack is unwarranted, but if the CCP kills any civilians and/or destroys any civilian infrastructure then they can't complain when Taiwan does the same thing to them in their war.

[Rasulis]

MAD doesnt work if all you can do is destroy a dam. pretty sure dam busting is a war crime too. and if you start doing that your international standing goes to 0.

All available weaponry that survived an initial attack would be aimed at ships crossing the strait anyway.

Great Britain destroyed Mohne and Eder dams during operation Chastise in WWII. If they had their way, during the operation they would have destroyed another 4 dams - Lister, Ennepe, Sorpe and Diemel. The subsequent flooding destroyed power stations, factories, roads, bridges, and pumping stations for miles around. In addition, gas, electricity, and water supplies were severely interrupted. The casualties from the flooding totaled 1,341.

One of the protocol of the Geneva Convention does prohibit attacking dams, unless the dams are in your own territory to keep them from falling into the enemy's hand. However, Taiwan never signed on to the Geneva Convention. China did though.

[jonnysensible]

Great Britain destroyed Mohne and Eder dams during operation Chastise in WWII. If they had their way, during the operation they would have destroyed another 4 dams - Lister, Ennepe, Sorpe and Diemel. The subsequent flooding destroyed power stations, factories, roads, bridges, and pumping stations for miles around. In addition, gas, electricity, and water supplies were severely interrupted. The casualties from the flooding totaled 1,341.

.

That was total war though.

[Bluespiderman57]

Attempting to mine the straits during peacetime is also not the brightest idea, unless you are knowingly going to confrontation. Economic impact on the whole world would be immediate.

As was stated before, the build up of forces and their purpose for being there would be no secret. The confrontation would already be at Taiwan's door step. So yeah, it would be great idea to do so.

And any economic impact can be used as leverage. Call off the mobilization and mines will be removed. If not, be prepared to send tens, if not hundreds of thousands of your troops to a watery grave. Now Taiwan looks like a weaker nation trying to defend itself, but still willing to negotiate and the blame for the economic impact can be placed on China's shoulders.

That was total war though.

I mean, would this not be? We are talking about the destruction of an entire country here. Thats seems pretty total to me.

[jonnysensible]

I mean, would this not be? We are talking about the destruction of an entire country here. Thats seems pretty total to me.

the weakness is the strait, you would use every available weapon there not toppling dams lol. The whole defense would be on detering and defeating a blockade.

china will use an indirect strategy because that is where it is strong.

Taiwans best weapon is convincing allies if attacked they should economically blast china. half of chinas energy comes from the persian gulf/africa. They should be cut off.

[PC2]

the weakness is the strait, you would use every available weapon there not toppling dams lol. The whole defense would be on detering and defeating a blockade.

No that's just part of the equation. Militaries don't put all their eggs in one basket. They have multi-layered strategies.

china will use an indirect strategy because that is where it is strong.

Taiwan can also come up with effective indirect strategies against China.

Taiwans best weapon is convincing allies if attacked they should economically blast china. half of chinas energy comes from the persian gulf/africa. They should be cut off.

Sure but you don't only use your best weapon, you have different backup weapons and backups of backups, etc. Taiwan's biggest strength is that they have a more liberal democratic society compared to China.

[jonnysensible]

Taiwan's biggest strength is that they have a more liberal democratic society compared to China.

and this helps in an invasion how?

[PC2]

and this helps in an invasion how?

It's because liberal democracies are freer countries that are more innovative and they're better at creating new qualitative advantages over opponents. Similar societies tend to be allies and work together so the West will support Taiwan much more than China. The West is more powerful than China so you shouldn't just assume there is nothing we can do to save Taiwan.

[Edge-]

It's because liberal democracies are freer countries that are more innovative and they're better at creating new qualitative advantages over opponents.

Like what? Be specific, this vague nonsense means literally nothing.

The West is more powerful than China so you shouldn't just assume there is nothing we can do to save Taiwan.

Why are we talking about the west when you said it was Taiwan that had the advantage? Do you think western countries will go to go to war against China for Taiwan?

[Kellhound]

Attempting to mine the straits during peacetime is also not the brightest idea, unless you are knowingly going to confrontation. Economic impact on the whole world would be immediate.



Dueling distance for a jet fighter and still too close to mainland unless China has been "supressed". B-52 can either launch cruise missiles from thousands of km away (which is it's main role anyway), or bomb people in sandals with no AA. It has no place in still contested airspace.



I had heard about that talk between Mao and Khruschev, the latter one supposedly thought that Mao was an idiot who simply does not understand what nukes are. Which, frankly, would not have been surprising.
Also that take on mass casualties would quickly change in case of nukes falling on coastal cities, though there is zero reason for nuking anyone as of now. As for attack on ROC? Yeah, nothing over there that would inflict enough pain.

40 miles (more if launched from altitude) of standoff range is sufficient to mine all of the approaches to ROC beaches while staying well away from PRC SAMs. PLAAF fighters will be too busy with ROC fighters to defeat B-52s not attacking mainland China.

It goes to the mindset of the Chinese, nothing more. There is a point where the cost would exceed the reward, even for China.

- - - Updated - - -

Your whole idea of Taiwan's defense is Taiwan successfully hiting dams instead of military targets and not being intercepted, while also being unstoppable in using anti-ship missiles. Brah, stop. I mean if you wanna see Taiwanese leaders get executed after the war, go ahead, but I don't think they would agree with you.
P.S.
Your also could be surprised how hard it might be to destroy them.

Dams are generally not designed to withstand warheads going off inside of them.

- - - Updated - - -

That was total war though.

The ROC defending against the PRC would be total war.

- - - Updated - - -

Like what? Be specific, this vague nonsense means literally nothing.



Why are we talking about the west when you said it was Taiwan that had the advantage? Do you think western countries will go to go to war against China for Taiwan?

The US likely would. If nothing else, the US should use it as a reason to force China out of the South China Sea and destroy China economically.

[jonnysensible]

The ROC defending against the PRC would be total war.

would be a terrible idea to start banging civilian infrastructure when totally out gunned. And again a complete waste or resources which can be used blasting the strait (or navy docking yards)