patrick.net

It is reported that China has close to 100 more warships than the USA and the larger fleet has won pretty much every war in the past 2500 years. Even superior technology almost never defeats superior numbers in naval warfare.

PeopleUnited says

It is reported that China has close to 100 more warships than the USA and the larger fleet has won pretty much every battle in the past 2500 years. Even superior technology almost never defeats superior numbers in naval warfare.

Naval warfare is really obsolete. If we broke out in, real, war with China, or Russia, our navy would be destroyed in a few weeks, and so would theirs.

You are missing the point, even when fleets are decimated, the larger fleet wins the war.

richwicks says

During China's revolution, there were two factions,

Both factions were actually foreign agents: the "Nationalists" were sponsored by banksters from 1911-1914, then sponsored by Soviets from 1922-1927, then again by banksters after 1927. Mao was initially recruited by the Skull-and-Bones branch office in his home province' capital, then after Stalin split from the banksters (and their representative in the USSR, Trotsky, who was from NYC before going to Russia to lead the 1917 revolution there with Lenin slithering from Switzerland), Mao and his "Communists" took the side of Stalin, whereas Chiang leading "Nationalists" took the side of the banksters. Both "revolutions" and "unifications" are essentially bank-frauds on a large scale. Unification proved to be bank-fraud in China as far back as in the original unification by Chin Dynasty around 220BC: enabling the central government to issue grossly under-weight fiat copper coins with metal content less than half of face value (no longer having to compete against copper coins issued by other states). Similar coinage frauds were behind the unification of Ancient Egyptian and Ancient Persian Empires. All bank frauds. "Revolutions" are once again bank frauds: as excuses to mass murder savers so that banksters don't have to pay back their money deposits at the banks. That goes back to at least as far back as Athenian leaders deliberately losing Pelopennesian War to Sparta after their re-hypothecated silver mines ran out, so that Athenian Democracy could be overthrown by the occupying Spartan army so that banksters didn't have to pay back account balances.

HeadSet says

Why invade? Just "quarantine" the island so nothing gets in or out. Jam the airways so no radio or cell phones. The islander would run out of food and fuel.

That move will mean the end of Chyna's exports effectively halving their economy (or worse) and ending decades of double-digit GDP growth so the only way for CCP to stay in power would be to increase terrorization of their own population. Basically they will have to go back to the Mao era methods. Is Taiwan worth it? I don't know. The thing is, the takeover is not guaranteed even then. The assumption is that they could keep the blocade indefinitely, but this is not given.

PeopleUnited says

It is reported that China has close to 100 more warships than the USA and the larger fleet has won pretty much every war in the past 2500 years. Even superior technology almost never defeats superior numbers in naval warfare.

If this was the case simply comandeering all private fishing boats would be enough to defeat any navy in the world. Reductio ad absurdum? Sure is, but you get my point.

richwicks says

our navy would be destroyed in a few weeks, and so would theirs.

By what exactly?

PeopleUnited says

It is reported that China has close to 100 more warships than the USA and the larger fleet has won pretty much every war in the past 2500 years. Even superior technology almost never defeats superior numbers in naval warfare.

Was the Japanese Navy more powerful than the USA Navy in WW2?

Kevin Delamer
Professor of Strategy at US Naval War College (2007–present)

In the early part of the war, it was. From the attack on Pearl Harbor until late 1942, Japan had more aircraft carriers, or after the Battle of Midway, at least parity in aircraft carriers, when compared to the United States. It had more battleships, it had cruisers with better-trained crews, better weapons (particularly torpedoes), and the crews of smaller vessels were generally more proficient.

PeopleUnited says

It is reported that China has close to 100 more warships than the USA and the larger fleet has won pretty much every war in the past 2500 years. Even superior technology almost never defeats superior numbers in naval warfare.

In the 19th century, European colonial fleets usually won against "native" (Indian, Chinese and Ottoman) navies that had larger number of ships, due to far superior technology the former possessed. I don't think China has a snowball's chance in hell taking over Taiwan if the US is willing to defend Taiwan. Surface to surface missiles with conventional warheads fired from the mainland 100+ miles away from the island is not more useful than nuisance as the damage done by each conventional warhead is not much more than a 6" or 8" artillery shell. Even the entire 3000 or so short-range missiles in Chinese possession can only do about as much damage as one afternoon's artillery bombardment in Ukraine. So long as US can prevent Chinese taking air superiority over Taiwan, thereby preventing sustained helicopter assault and strafing, and surface vessels from shelling shore defenses, I don't think Chinese PLA can land or hold onto any significant beach head.

The real issue is whether the US is truly invested in defending Taiwan. Most Taiwanese probably don't want to be part of China under CCP rule; even those voting for KMT instead of DPP are mostly in favor of status-quo choosing KMT as they think KMT is less likely to provoke an invasion, not actually preferring "unification" by CCP. If the banksters would rather prefer to see the Taiwanese killed by the communists thereby unable to withdraw money from banks, then mainland China would be able to take over Taiwan, with the help of some 5th columnists who might (mistakenly) think they'd be better off helping the CCP take-over if a CCP take-over is inevitable. The reality is that CCP, just like any other communist and nazi party, are agents of banksters and are in the business of liquidating people wave after wave, so those 5th-columnists would also be liquidated (after liquidating resisters and before liquidating fellow communist/nazi party members among themselves). After all, the banksters want the looters dead too after the looters deposit their loot in the banks.

Reality says

China would be able to take over Taiwan, with the help of some 5th columnists who might (mistakenly) think they'd be better off helping the CCP take-over if a CCP take-over is inevitable.

I don't think anybody has any illusions about "one country, two systems" bullshit after HK.

Hugh_Mongous says

China would be able to take over Taiwan, with the help of some 5th columnists who might (mistakenly) think they'd be better off helping the CCP take-over if a CCP take-over is inevitable.

I don't think anybody has any illusions about "one country, two systems" bullshit after HK.

Like I said in the sentence before the one you quoted, hardly anyone in Taiwan actually wants to be part of China under CCP rule. However, if the US makes it clear Taiwan is free for the taking by the CCP, the CCP will invade and some 5th columnists might help along the way in the same way as grave diggers in the Nazi concentration camps.

Reality says

However, if the US makes it clear Taiwan is free for the taking by the CCP, the CCP will invade and some 5th columnists might help along the way in the same way as grave diggers in the Nazi concentration camps.

We just saw how US made it clear that Ukraine was free for the taking by the CCCP (the "small incursions" comment, the offer to fly Zelensky out, multiple pronunciation about what US won't do under any circumstances, etc.) and yet here we are: the 5th column was impotent to hand the country over. And it's well known and documented by now that it was substantial and in very high places.

Hugh_Mongous says

We just saw how US made it clear that Ukraine was free for the taking by the CCCP (the "small incursions" comment, the offer to fly Zelensky out, multiple pronunciation about what US won't do under any circumstances, etc.) and yet here we are: the 5th column was impotent to hand the country over. And it's well known and documented by now that it was substantial and in very high places.

So far we are not seeing Russians being ejected from Ukraine, but only the starvation/freezing of Ukrainians, 80+% of donated weapon not arriving on the front line in Ukraine while European allies' weapon/ammo stock being depleted. Ukraine, Baltics, Poland and Romania are all seeing declining population in recent years. They have earned a lot of trade surplus in the past 3 decades through their under-priced hard labor, and put that money in the banks and the pension funds (aka various pyramid schemes dependent on expanding population). They may well be seeing a rug-pull under them soon.

RWSGFY says

PeopleUnited says

It is reported that China has close to 100 more warships than the USA and the larger fleet has won pretty much every war in the past 2500 years. Even superior technology almost never defeats superior numbers in naval warfare.

If this was the case simply comandeering all private fishing boats would be enough to defeat any navy in the world. Reductio ad absurdum? Sure is, but you get my point.

Commandeered fishing boats are oranges. Let’s not be ridiculous and compare Warships (apples) to fishing boats (oranges)! ok RFBGFY?

Hugh_Mongous says

In the early part of the war, it was.

Cherry picking data, but you have proven my point. Japan produced 18 ships during the war. America produced several hundred. The only way Japan could defeat America was if America decided not to fight. We simply were able to outbuild them. In other words the size of our fleet MUCH larger than theirs taking the length of the WAR in its entirety.

Reality says

if the US is willing to defend Taiwan.

Russia may not control Ukraine, but they won the war by simply occupying parts of Ukraine for annexation, thereby sticking a thumb in the eye of the western criminal governments and chiefly Biden crime family.. And the US has proven unwilling to defend the people of Ukraine, especially if the criminals get to continue their money laundering schemes. Taiwan will be easier to defeat if China puts its mind to it. But they would rather do it without firing a shot. They probably won’t need to as the west is collapsing and Taiwan probably will lose the will to fight knowing westerners won’t defend them. Therefore a naval blockade would become effective and the impotent west would turn their eyes away and ignore the people of Taiwan just as they have Donetsk and Crimea.

China can outbuild America and this would give them the advantage (as well as their superior numbers of soldiers) in any prolonged conflict with the west. China could probably even survive nuclear war better than USA, their people are used to living with next to nothing.

Keep in mind, in a war your fleet includes the ships on the water, and all the ships you build and deploy before the war is over and the dominant fleet accepts surrender or defeats the last resistance. That’s why the size of your fleet is so important, you will lose ships. But if you can outbuild your opponent it is almost impossible to lose,

Quality also matters a lot in warfare. That is where the US military has significant advantage. Either through incompetence or deliberate diplomacy gesturing or the likelihood both Putin and Xi are agents of the WEF/Globalist-Cabal themselves (Putin's mistress and kids are living in Switzerland, most of Xi's relatives are living in the US, Canada and Australia), both Chinese military and Russian military have been investing in the wrong kinds of stuff for real fighting for the most obvious war scenarios respectively. For example, missiles and aircraft carriers are both waste of money for taking Taiwan (from Chinese mainland coast, about 150 miles away, which is too far for conventional artillery yet too close for aircraft carriers where there are so many land airbases nearby; missiles without nuclear warheads are little more than nuisance as the rocket and fuel plus precision guidance system are more expensive than what 500-2000lbs of TNT can destroy on land; it takes 10 tons to 100 tons of explosive to kill an enemy soldier, so the 3000 or so surface-to-surface missiles Chinese have that can be fired from their side of the strait to hit Taiwan would only kill 30-300 Taiwanese soldiers out of around 300,000 uniformed defenders). For sustained bombardment supporting landing, a mainland invasion of Taiwan would have to rely on swarms of helicopters. The Biden administration handing over so many Apaches and Blackhawks in Afghanistan (which probably sold them to Chinese military for detailed disection and copying within weeks of getting them) was especially problematic; now beating up Russia to remove that potential threat to China on the northern frontier if it decides to invade Taiwan is even more problematic. Still, swarms of invading helicopters would require air superiority over Taiwan; the US can deny air superiority or achieve for its own over Taiwan (thereby bouncing invading helicopters from China) relatively easily if there is political will.

richwicks says

The world has NEVER recognized Taiwan as an independent state.

I have had so many products over the years, that would beg to differ. They all said made in Taiwan.

Hugh_Mongous says

Reality says

However, if the US makes it clear Taiwan is free for the taking by the CCP, the CCP will invade and some 5th columnists might help along the way in the same way as grave diggers in the Nazi concentration camps.

We just saw how US made it clear that Ukraine was free for the taking by the CCCP (the "small incursions" comment, the offer to fly Zelensky out, multiple pronunciation about what US won't do under any circumstances, etc.) and yet here we are: the 5th column was impotent to hand the country over. And it's well known and documented by now that it was substantial and in very high places.

Ukraine had good relations up until Viktor Yanukovych was thrown out by the US coup. Russia was not about to lose a major military base in Crimea no matter what, since the ONLY reason Crimea was given to Ukraine was because at the time the USSR was thought to be unbreakable and permanent. Nikita Khrushchev did it as a gesture of goodwill. Had it been known that Ukraine would EVER become independent (and they did without Russia going to war with them) it would never have happened.

Crimea has historically been part of the Russian Empire for longer than the United States has existed.

Ukraine could have had quasi independence forever, if the US didn't overthrow it which instigated a civil war. If Ukraine just agreed to remain neutral, didn't start killing Russians in Eastern Ukraine, and wasn't petitioning to be part of NATO, there would be no war.

The US creates turmoil, for fun and profit, and all it costs, it US taxpayer money.

Reality says

So far we are not seeing Russians being ejected from Ukraine,

Yes we are! You think nobody in Donbass left once the bombs started to fall?? That's why Western Ukraine was bombing them after all.