If you want to have strategic deterrence capability, all scenarios are kept in mind, even if they are little low probability, in warfare sometimes enemy tries to find low probability scenarios and exploits that. (Remember german blitzkrieg in ww2)
Re:How to Build 300k Airplanes in Five Years
by DeathArrow on Friday May 24, 2024 @03:09AM
(#40463683)
>If you want to have strategic deterrence capability
For strategic detterence capability building lots of ICBMs and missiles is good enough and cheap enough.
I would imagine that the Chinese goal is destroy the island chain that keeps them contained and push them out of Hawaii.
That would be more than enough to allow Chinese full control over that region of the world and give America a shamefully large black eye.
Re:How to Build 300k Airplanes in Five Years
by DeathArrow on Friday May 24, 2024 @03:14AM
(#40463710)
Taiwan is part of that Island Chain.
If a conflict with China comes to pass, it won't be on US or China soil. It'll be a proxy conflict somewhere else.
All the major conflicts since ww2 have been in proxy locations. Korea (US/China), Vietnam (US/Soviet Union), and so on.
"Occupying" a country is fruitless (see pretty much everyone in Afghanistan) and unpopular.
So I don't see Chinese bombers over Seattle or US bombers over Shanghai. In that sort if conflict both sides lose.
Taiwan is the obvious proxy in play. The South China Sea is the other. Both would give China significant geographical advantage. Taiwan is just important enough (making PCs) that the US may intervene. But will the US land troops in Taiwan to fight street battles? Probably not (imo).
Will Chinese troops parachute into LA or US troops parachute into Tibet? Not a chance.
With all this in mind, statistics and behaviors from ww1 and ww2 are somewhat irrelevant.
If there is a US China conflict though, it's more likely to be economic. Supply chains disrupted. Chips in short supply. In that sense domestic production of non-military items becomes paramount (to keep the population appeased.)