F-22 will see no more orders, VH-71 cancelled

[KrazyHorse]

This is where you are wrong. No, given the immense cost you mentioned above, the US would seek a war in which the point was for China to back off its campaign as too costly at that point. The idea that we would seek to "humble" China is a load of bull****.

This demonstrates how completely divorced from reality you are.

The US has poured a trillion ****ing dollars into Iraq, but wouldn't be willing to put more into a conflict which could actually seriously affect the world balance of power?

Grow up, dude. Once the missiles started flying they would not stop until the US was satisfied that it wouldn't have to fight the same war again in 10 years' time.

Really, so then why wouldn't the Chinese, knowing there is no such thing as a limited war with them seeking to take Taiwan, not simply decapitate our forces in the east and those of Taiwain by using force to destroy Taiwans military on the ground and our forward forces in the east, as well as any support assets (such as Space assets) in one swift wuick motion, using ANY weapons at their disposal, something you said was unlikely?

If somebody can translate this into English I would appreciate it.

I'll attempt to answer this insofar as I can interpret it at all.

1) The ONLY REASON China would even start a war over Taiwan is that they SERIOUSLY misjudged either the political will of the US to protect Taiwan from overt aggression OR their relative military strength

2) The only "swift wuick" weapon available to China I can think of is nuclear (used on carrier groups once they're in range, plus against airfields on Taiwan, SK(?) and Japan(??). If this is what you mean then it involves a second, much more serious misjudgment by the Chinese. One that the people of China had damn well better hope will not be made.

[KrazyHorse]

Get your story straight, either this is a limited war where the gloves don't come off all the way, or it is one in which the gloves come off.

I have no idea what the **** post of mine you think you're referring to.

[GePap]

The US mission re: Taiwan is simply to defend Taiwan. That is different from beating CHina. Maybe you can;t understand the distinction, but it is there.

I haven't seen any serious treatises on a cross-straits war in which the US response is to "humble China" or in which the US takes ANY steps to significantly alter the balance of power in the straits significantly, which is what it would take to actually prevent a possible follow-up Chinese attempt in 10 years. I haven't seen anything in US policy, military spending, or force positioning to support such an idea either. I fail to see why I should give a **** about what you think on the matter, vs. what more focused analysts think, or from what can read in the press.

If you don't agree, fine. We are not likely to ever see that scenerio play out, so it remains academic at best, though I do not doubt that if such a scenerio did play out, I would be right and you wrong.

[Krill]

[Serb]

Assuming we don't eliminate non-discretionary spending the only way to pay for it would be to go back to debt monetization at that point since the Chinese would most likely not buy our debt.

So the US has to accept a slightly higher interest rate on its debt?

Come on now. Losing China as a creditor would NOT force the US into debt monetization. Don't be ridiculous.

Muahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa....

What a load of naive crap.
GePaP, you are just wasting your time with these guys. They don't have a ****ing clue. But still, they are calling you ridiculous.

Muahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa....

[Whoha]

he's actually calling me ridiculous there. We may well be able to find creditors for US debt, and will certainly be in a better position regarding not having to pay a large chunk of our debt/servicing on that debt. But I don't count on that.

[Serb]

If we're talking bomb-trucks than the F-16 is just as good, from a cost-benefit POV. If we're talking CAS, which the Su-34 is certainly not than the A-10 is superior in that role.

Su-34 is a CAS. And a world's best and most advanced CAS, I must add.
F-16 is just a different class (but still a load of obsolete crap, of course). And your comparison of F-16 and Su-34 just shows how... welll... let it be "limited" your knowledge of world's best close air support aircrafts is.
Stick with the navy, Sir - the field where you are an expert (at least for me).

Hey, I forget, how many airplanes did those gaggle of idiots shoot down in Georgia? Russia can't even fight a tiny Caucasus nation without losing heavy bombers and the so-called equal of the A-10, the Su-25.

Oh great, we've lost a recon modification of Tu-22 (you call a heavy bomber) by Russian (ok, Soviet) SAM fire, but we've crushed that piece of stinking nazi sh!tty "army" within five days. You've lost F-117 in Serbia (by nowhere near advanced S-75 SAM fire (a half-sentury old Soviet design), so ****ing what? You've kept butchering Serbia for several weeks and had no balls to engage into actual ground combat.
You are still in "tiny desert nation" of Iraq and a "tiny mountanious nation" of Afghanistan. Are you a winning side there?
Something tells me that your aircraft casualties there are nowhere near to ours in Georgia. And mind ya - we won that war within 5 days. And you are still eating sh!t there. And honestly speaking, you have no chance to actually win either of these wars. At the end of the day you'll be running from Iraq and Afghanistan with tails between your legs like you already did in Vietnam (so yeah the moronic Zylca's "OMG it's gonna be another Vietnam!!!" was a prophecy (as I suggested when it started in 2003).
So, have a nice day and keep taking American supriority for granted - it is the best way to lose wars. Keep up that way of thinkingb:b

[Asher]

Serb, friend! Need your input in the Russian Military thread.

[Serb]

Serb, friend! Need your input in the Russian Military thread.

Wow, I'm a friend now. Let's see what you'll be saying after the final of the Ice Hockey WC

[Asher]

Wow, I'm a friend now. Let's see what you'll be saying after the final of the Ice Hockey WC

I won't be saying anything as I will not be watching. No one watches that tournament except insecure and sexually confused Russians.

It's the special Olympics version of hockey tournaments.

[KrazyHorse]

The US mission re: Taiwan is simply to defend Taiwan. That is different from beating CHina. Maybe you can;t understand the distinction, but it is there.

Yeah, the US is going to let mainland China off the hook while China's trying to sink their carriers and blow up their planes BECAUSE IT'LL BE CHEAPER NOT TO BOMB THEM.

[KrazyHorse]

We may well be able to find creditors for US debt, and will certainly be in a better position regarding not having to pay a large chunk of our debt/servicing on that debt. But I don't count on that.

a) I don't think that canceling debt held by China would negatively impact AT ALL the US credit rating with everybody else in a situation where China did something as monumentally stupid as trying to invade Taiwan against American resistance

b) Given that, the US might lose China as a creditor on ADDITIONAL US debt. So it might have to pay interest rates more in line with those of other stable, first-world nations. Forgive me for thinking that an additional 50 or 100 basis points on US sovereign debt would be far less than enough to drive the US into banana republic debt monetization status.

c) You're not as ridiculous as GePap because you can at least come up with a mechanism on your own instead of copying it from somebody else.

[KrazyHorse]

[KrazyHorse]

Serb, GePap and Whoha are aligned against me. I must be right.

[One_more_turn]

Who is that cave person still worrying about China attacking Taiwan?

Taiwan is far more likely to have a voluntary "Anschluss" with China, taking all of our prized military technologies along as a gift.