Many blather about World War III. Maybe 10-15 years from now, but in the near future its not in the cards. However I can posit a scenario for a wrenching regional war in the Western Pacific in the near future. Timeline: January 2014 The Democrats lose the Senate in the 2014 elections but the GOP does not garner a supermajority. In the period between the elections and the first of the year the Chinese conclude a secret deal with Obama. Relations between China, Japan, Taiwan, NorK, and South Korean continue to deteriorate. The nations simply loathe one another. Late January 2015, Obama orders the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs to withdraw all US military, naval and air forces from South Korea, Japan (incuding Okinawa) and Taiwan. Congress protests but is unable to stop this process. US forces redeploy to Guam and Hawaii, by mid-May. A Congressional Democrat fears Guam will turn turtle but that does not happen. July 2015. China launches air and naval tacks on Japan and Taiwan. NorK launches a sudden invasion of south Korea, but China does not join that action at this time. China salvos off hundreds of guided missiles. Japan and Taiwan mostly shoot down these missiles but there is some damage. Japan and Taiwan return the favor, with roughly the same effect. The Japanese navy routs the Chinese navy and drives it into port. During the missile attacks, Japanese drone destroy many Chinese fishing vessels and minesweepers. Japanese submarine mine many Chinese harbors and posts notices in all international ports that these ports are now mined until further notice. Foreign-flag vessels (i.e. most o the worlds merchant marine) avoids the area. A Chinese flag container ship is attacked by a mine (modern mines are torpedo launchers) in Shanghai harbor. All ships in the ports of the three nations either stay in port or make an unloaded dash to get out. August 2015. China continues its missile attacks on Taiwan and Japan at a lower volume as pre-war missile stocks are exhausted. Missile attack paces continues at a much slower pace, but as Japanese and Taiwanese missile stocks are depleted they cannot shoot down as many Chinese missiles or counter attack as much as before. NorK attack in South Korea stalls but Seoul is devastated. Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea call for US invertvention, but the US stays rigidly aloof. The US also rejects requests from these nations for missile resupply. September 2015. NorK army collapses from lack of supply and South Korean army begins driving it back over the previous armistice line. China, Japan, and Taiwan expend the last of their stocks of offensive missile on their enemys energy infrastructure and export facilities. Export activities in China, Japan, and Taiwan come to a complete halt and their economies begin to wind down. Late September, China scratches up everything that will float and transports a half-million man amphibious assault on Taiwan. Taiwan is largely out of missile ammunition and is reduced to use of gunfire resistance. The Chinese take horrific casualties but gain a toehold near Taipei. October 2015. China expands its Taiwanese toehold, taking Taipei. South Koreans advance 50 km north of 1953 armistice line. NorK army all but disintegrates. In all five nations, the entire economy is suborned to the war effort. China gets some missile resupply from Russia but the Russians demand payment and offer little credit. November 2015. Pyongyang falls to the South Koreans and Taiwanese resistance collapses. The US remains studiously aloof, and the rest of the world has no capability to do otherwise. December 2105. China annexes Taiwan. China intervenes in NorK as South Koreans. The South Koreans are driven back about 50 km from the Yalu River, but have seen this trick before and have an entrenched line at that point. The Chinese cannot drive the south Koreans back any further but are firm in their control of the rump of NorK. By the first of the year a de facto peace of exhaustion breaks out. Taiwan is eliminated and the economies of China, South Korea, and Japan at a the point of collapse. Food riots break out and an armistice is declared. Territory is redivided on the basis of boots on the ground. January 2016. Vladimir Putin negotiates a more durable peace but it more or less is just an agreement to stop fighting where they stand. The UN ratifies the extermination of Taiwan and it is recognized as a Chinese province. NorK continues to exist but at about a third of its previous size and population. China, Japan, and South Korea sweep their harbors and waterways of mines and begin repairing their International commerce re-commences in the three nations at levels about 5% of what they were a year earlier. February 2016. Obama reveals the price of US neutrality. China forgives $1.5 triilion in US securities. Less publicly, Chinese money floods into Democratic campaign coffers. The war is over. China has punched out Taiwan, and given Japan a bloody nose. Part of the peace deal is Japan gives up its claims to some islands in the South China Sea. By chasing out the Americans, punching out the last remnants of the Kuomintang and saving a slice of NorK, China has asserted dominance in the Western Pacific. Recovery of export facilities will require a year and a half. China immediately applies pressure to Vietnam and the Philippines to resolve the Paracel Island resource area issue to Chinas satisfaction. South Korea has traded one fortified line across the peninsula for another. The NorK irritant is still there. South Korea has suffered massive destruction in the Seoul area and some damage elsewhere. Economic development is set back a decade. Japan has suffered a fair amount of physical damage, mostly on the island of Kyushu. Japan is able to resume exports from Honshu within a few weeks. Outside of those damned islands, most of what Japan has lost is an enormous amount of face. After repairing export operations, Japan always looking for way to stimulate itself out of its 1990s recession - begins a substantial military and naval buildup. This will be a source of tensions with China very quickly. The war results in an international sea change. Everyone realizes that Pax Americana has ended and its every nation for themselves. Germany, Britain, France, Italy, Spain, and Australia (and others) must wrestle with the bold-faced fact that US guarantees are no longer valid. They must see to their own defense but their options are limited due to the heavy costs of their health care and pension machinery. The US is diplomatically humiliated. The Obama administration stabbed three of the worlds larger economies in the back. The US frontier which used to be the coast of China is now the east coast of the Philippines. The Chinese threat moved a thousand kilometers closer to the American heartland. The road to world war has opened.
What happens if Britain has an entente cordiale with Japan to help it in any war with China. It gets the France, Australia and Singapore to help. They sends a escort fleet to Singapore and Australia to support Japan with supplies and protect marchant ships? Say a British minesweeper is fired upon by a Chinese frigates for no reason and the British go to war and are supported by France, Australia, Singapore and New Zealand which also go to war with China. The British send everything they can muster, the French send a dozen ships including their carrier. The British and French attack submarines go to work sinking Chinese ships like it is nobody's business and Tomahawking targets.
Do the British have such an entente in place? Given the current atrophy of the RN would it matter - beyond a couple of subs? The subs could do their thing and still have plausible deniability at the end of the day...unless Obama clued the Chinese in.
It could be possible by 2015 as the British are wanting to base ships in Japan according to RUSI and the Japanese are increasing the port calls to the UK. If the US pulled back from Asian the UK would see it as their chance to reclaim some influence they lost. There is no doubt the UK would be support Japan over China in a war even without US support. The British could send and sustain 3 submarines both the Astute and Trafalgar class, HMS Ocean, HMS Bulwark, 4 Type 45's, 8 Type 23's, 7 minesweepers and 6 RFA ships. So that's 30 ships the UK could send. The French send a couple of submarines, their carrier, 2 AAW frigates, 1 Mistral class ship, a replenishment ship, 5 frigates. With the Singapore navy and some ships from Australia and New Zealand to cover any gaps in capability or numbers. We are talking about a fleet of some 60 ships here, not to be sniffed at.
With all due respect, this scenario is both stupid and ignorant. I will try to sum up why: 1) why would Obama or Bush or Reagan or another retarded 'Murican president sign any kind of "secret deal"....what are the pros? 2)why would China launch an attack against Taiwan and Japan in the same time? Fighting two enemies at the same time is harder, why do not deal with them separately? 3)Japan doesn't have any drones worth mentioning. 4)Who told you that China is not capable of annihilating Japanese navy? Japanese navy is harmless canon fodder, except for the subs. 5)What is the original point of starting a war if ALL China is doing is missile attacks? It is pointless. 6)Now, why would North attack the South? They didn't do that through 60 years. 7)"Taiwan is largely out of missile ammunition and is reduced to use of gunfire resistance. The Chinese take horrific casualties but gain a toehold near Taipei." Oh, get it. So after months of trowing missiles away, they finally do something. You don't value Chinese much, do ya? So...if Taiwan is so low on missile equipment...why not just bomb any fortifications to hell with all their defenders instead of taking "horrific casualties"? Not enough drama or smth? 8 ) "NorK army collapses from lack of supply and South Korean army begins driving it back over the previous armistice line." Yeah, the army of the most militarised country on Earth, which prepared itself for the war on this particular theater for 60 years is going to fail with supplies....on a tiny Korean peninsula? The wettest dream ever! 9)"February 2016. Obama reveals the price of US neutrality. China forgives $1.5 triilion in US securities. Less publicly, Chinese money floods into Democratic campaign coffers. " Ah...so it was all about filfy political agenda. Japan alone costs waaay more than pathetic 1,5 trillion. 10)"China gets some missile resupply from Russia but the Russians demand payment and offer little credit." Who told you, that our equipment is compatible? 11)"January 2016. Vladimir Putin negotiates a more durable peace but it more or less is just an agreement to stop fighting where they stand." Why would he? If selling missiles works so good, it would be foolish to stop the fun.
I will remind all the nay sayers that the greatest mistake you can make is thinking what is will always be. I am a huge fan of George Friedman who says Poland will be one of the most powerful countries in Europe within 50 years and the Poland and Turkey will have a war, along with the US and Japan.
Why do I have a feeling that he is a bubbling self-righteous idiot? Why would Poland become one of the most powerfu (sic!)l countries in Europe? It has: -No resources worth mentioning; -Bad demographic situation; -Situated between two major powers in Europe. So....why?
He is the founder of Stratfor, so not bubbling self righteous idiot. I can't remember why he says Poland will be a major power, but it made sense when he said it. He also says Turkey has the second best military in NATO, apart from maybe the British.
Just as I expected, but with a tiny correction: He is bubbling self-righteous idiot, who sounds legit, when he talks. **************************************************** **************************************************** Place is reserved for his facts and arguments on "why Poland will become a powerhouse one day" He is right on this one. But big and powerful military requires an objective - either conquer smth or defend smth. Since Turkey lacks both, their military is mostly for elites' and population fap purposes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETwCBz_kedU I think Britain will end up controlling Europe again, rather than Poland, but I do see his point.
Yeah, old fart in his wet dreams and/or political agenda. That is what he said: "USA is so great, that it produced so many wealthy countries in it's greatness!!11 Weeeeehaaaa! USA! We need Poland now, so we will give them money for being our whore!" Load of BS. The rise of South Korea and Israel was due to completely different reasons (pretty much along the Japanese way with the former and powerful Jewish communities worldwide in the case of the latter). There is no way for Poland to become rich, except to push Western Europe in common or Germany in particular over the edge and that is not going to happen. Also, we can always shut the pipe and freeze the region to death, economicaly speaking. They are not in position to "counter" anything on serious scale. The moment it becomes a serious problem - it is finished. Enjoy your potential ownership of freaksland. It is not like anyone is against it.
One nation I notice is surprisingly lacking in your little description, and I think this would make all the difference in the world: The Philippines. The US over the last several years has been growing increasingly closer to this nation again. Even to the point of Subic Bay re-opening, and a US Naval presence returning there for the first time in 20 years. And the latest aggressive sounds from China have been aimed right at the Philippines. And one other factor: Most major Japanese SDF bases have a significant US Military presence. So quite literally, an attack upon them is an attack upon US service members. For example, the major base for the Japanese Navy (Yokosuka) is also the home port for the US Seventh Fleet (including the USS George Washington CVN-73). No President can ignore an attack upon Japanese military bases, because they would be attacking the US forces at the same time.
After the IRS thing, I think Obama is capable of any evil. China attacks Taiwan and Japan at the same time because the window of US betrayal (of Taiwan & Japan) might close all too quickly.
Obama maybe evil, even stupid and without a geo political brain, but he wouldn't pull all US forces out of Asia unless it helps his legacy. For me the shift to Asia and out of Europe and the Middle East is what he wants his legacy to be. However if China keeps pushing and Obama keeps doing little or nothing, you maybe correct that he would pull back all US forces for fear of war with China and his legacy. What if one of those Mach 10 missiles China has takes out a US carrier flight deck, will Obame run away or push forward? Libya was a total cockup because of him, Afghanistan has been a waste of time, Bush set the plan for leaving Iraq Obama just followed through, he got his arse handed to him by Putin over Syria, he failed with Iran, he is rubbish. I mean what has Obama don't that is good in foreign policy terms that wasn't planned by Bush? I doubt American would vote another non white person into head office or a woman for that matter given how bad Obama has been. Another Clinton, I do hope not after the total mess Bill left for Bush.
We see on the PF forum a current of neo-isolationism running in the US. US bases in Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea seem to irritate the neo-isolationists more than any others. I'm not sure that pulling the outpost line back to Anderson AFB would satisfy the neo-isolationists.
To most of them, nothing would satisfy them short of disbanding all of the military and selling their equipment so it can be spent on welfare. In addition to sending all those in the military to re-education camps to turn them into real human beings instead of murdering robots.
Don't discount the power of race to turn a mediocre part time law instructor and community organizer into the greatest leader and Messiah of all time. In the domestic politics of the US, nonwhite and or a woman are political pluses since they basically disarm the opposition to make any attack, even one on policy. So for 2016, it will probably be either Hillary or some other black guy. That being said, I don't see even Obama pulling out of the Pacific. First, he doesn't really care about the Pacific and will spend zero time on the issue, and secondly, there is no domestic political reason to do so. So I don't see a scenario in the near future where the US military just up and pulls out of that area. We have too many military, diplomatic, and trade interests to do that. But the Chinese have been getting bolder with Japan and The Philippines. Frankly, I didn't anticipate how aggressive they would become due to our weakness. I think their current goal is intimidation of nearby countries to let them know that China is going to be the dominate player in the region, not the US.
Yeah I remember in one of the foreign policy debates with Romney he said the US military is all powerful and doesn't need more ships or increased capabilities beyond what is already planned. So why doesn't he send this all powerful US fleet into the South China sea and tell China to leave the Philippines alone? The fact is the US fleet is 9% the number of hulls it was by the end of WW2. You have very good upfront capabilities with the carriers, amphibious assault ships, SSN and SSBN, so all the big new items. However are lacking in new Escorts, ASuW and overall numbers. You have the projection sorted, but you wouldn't be able to defend what you protected into the South or East China sea. 2 Carrier groups just isn't cutting it anymore like it did in the early 2000's. Your LCS are rubbish, your 17 frigates are rubbish, your cruisers are starting to come to the end of their planned service life. Your rely to much on carrier based aircraft, what happens if this Chinese missile does take out a carrier flight deck? Your ASuW capability is gone. You have no medium range ASuW corvettes and your submarine numbers are on the way down. I also think you need to look at improving the AEGIS combat system, as the PAAMS system on the Type 45 does seem to be a good deal better. I am not saying the US Navy is finnished, not by a long shot. However you do have same holes you didn't have before. You couldn't fight a two Ocean war that is for sure.
What I find funny is when Liberal says we should cut defence spending, but not the solider, sailors or airmen, just their equipment and training budget. I have heard this argument so many times on here, youtube and facebook. Most Libertarians want the US military to do back to before 1938 and basically be nothing. Atleast they are stupid enough to say we want 3,000,000 people with no training and no equipment. Then the Neo-Cons who just want to increase spending, but not increase capabilities.
My last 2 years on Active Duty were absolute hell. At least 60-75% of our equipment did not work, and our field time was cut to maybe 2 field exercises a year. And in my last field exercise, we actually had to borrow equipment from another unit, because not enough of our stuff worked for us to certify with. It was a freaking disgrace, and it is a good thing that nothing bad happened during that time. And I am sure it is still that way now (2 years later), if not worse. From my experience, this tends to run in cycles, depending on what party holds the White House. Democrats run the military into the ground, cutting back on equipment, maintenance and training. This will go for 4-8 years, then the next Republican spend most of their first 4 years just getting things back up to speed again. Then the cycle repeats itself. Ford-Carter, then Reagan. Bush Sr.-Clinton, then Bush Jr. Now it is Obama then whoever replaces him.
I wouldn't count the US Navy out yet. When it comes to projecting power anywhere in the world, there isn't another Navy that comes close to matching our capabilities. But those are degrading capabilities I admit. I've been hearing that the age of carriers is over ever since the Falklands, and they still rule the seas, however I don't believe that can go on forever. That is the US Navy's big strength and I think a competing power, oh say China for example, recognizes that neutralizing US carrier strength goes a long way to neutralize the ability of the US to project power. I'd like to think the brightest guys in the Pentagon are thinking about those issues, but I'm afraid they may be too busy trying to figure out how to integrate women into combat arms or planning the next Diversity Day.
My two cents; I doubt the Chinese would be too enthusiastic about backstopping Kim. Two years into a major regional war and I doubt they'd be capable of it. But for sure if they did, the first thing they would do would be to liquidate Jong Un and family and replace him with his brother. Also, I think if Obama refused to resupply Japan, Taiwan, or anyone else fighting the Chinese, he would be impeached within days.
I see the biggest problem with our Navy today is the rapidly aging ships. We only have 22 Ticonderoga class cruisers left, they are rapidly nearing their end of active life, and we do not have anything in the works to replace them. These have long been the major missile defense system for our carriers. And not only have we already retired 5 of them (2 already destroyed), but another 7 are scheduled to be retired this year (lowering their numbers to 15). Most people simply do not realize that most of our current Navy dates all the way back to the Reagan Administration. Half of our Tico's were launched during that time period, all 13 Frigates (plus an additional 3 in foreign service - 6 of the 13 to be decommissioned this year), 3 of our 10 aircraft carriers, 12 of our 18 Ohio class submarines, and 19 of our 40 Los Angeles class submarines. In addition, all 8 Whidbey Island class LSDs, 4 of our 8 Wasp class Amphibious ships, and the list just goes on and on and on. China may not have to do anything, because our Navy is rapidly reaching the end of it's lifespan, and nothing is being done to build new ships.
Which is perfectly normal, since with introduction of new generation of military harware it's cost inevitably increases, as do it's lifespan but, as a result, the numbers are decreasing as well. It could be seen on the example of fighter jets. More than 15000 of first generation MiG-15 were built, then 10000 of second generation MiG-21, then only 4000 of third generation MiG-23 and, finally, only 2500 of 4-th generation MiG-29 and Su-27. It doesn't matter that your fleet might be several percent of your WW2 navy. It's capabilities are way above of that anyway. They are not. New ones have a potential to operate F-35c, thus increase in air support at small expence of troop transporting. It is unlikely, that massive landings WW2 style will take place ever.
