China's Military Strategies

[SipahSalar]

What about your shipments to other countries? I think China is a huge exporter country. There are a huge of shipment that being shipped from the mainland to everywhere in the world? You can reach it from another place, but isn't that just raise the transportation cost, thus to will affect the price?

I think you misunderstood me. Of course a blockade will have effect, but in the very long term. If it becomes a war of attrition, not otherwise.

 

[Brainsucker]

I think you misunderstood me. Of course a blockade will have effect, but in the very long term. If it becomes a war of attrition, not otherwise.

Yes, that's why they have to thwart the US attempt to surround them. It just like Xiang Ji Chess. When you know that the enemy try to surround your piece, you have to find away to breakthrough their position. If you don't know what is Xiang Ji Chess is, well, learn it. It's a fun chess game

Correction : It is not Xiang Qi Chess, it is Weiqi Chess.
Go (game) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Visit here if you want to play it online : KGS Go Server

Xiang Qi Chess is a Chess that almost identical to the Western Chess,
Xiangqi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
sorry for causing confusion.

Learn WeiQi Chess, it's a fun game. Even the Zhou Dynasty Thinker know that being surrounded by the enemy is dead. And Zhou was a kingdom of 1000 bc - 200 bc.

 

[Jlaw]

Malacca Strait

Challenge: US Navy controls the Strait of Malacca and bottlenecks your trade ships. What do you do?

Replies: The most obvious response is to send out your navy to be massacred. US naval strength and submarine capability in the Strait of Malacca are too strong.

In military parlance, a navy-on-navy engagement is called a frontal assault. You are fighting against the enemy's strength. It is usually suicidal. For example, you would never fight a Roman legion in a direct frontal attack. The Romans will close the ranks of their phalanx (and turtle-up as necessary) and you're done.

Does this mean the US wins? Not exactly.

1. Annex Myanmar to build new shipping ports. This bypasses the Strait of Malacca entirely. Also, establish radars and anti-ship ballistic missile defenses along the entire coast of Myanmar. This will extend Chinese naval control out by 2,000 miles.

2. Alternatively, use the PLA Army to march southward and annex along the way. The PLA Army can be used to control both sides of the Strait of Malacca.

In military terms, these are called flanking movements. You move your military strength to the enemy's weak points and let them have it.

In conclusion, it is important to be creative in dealing with a military problem. A straight force-on-force is not a good idea. Beating the US Navy at its own game is unlikely. You have to change the nature of the game itself.

I've mentioned #1 in other threads as that is the best option.

 

[UKBengali]

LOL - We have fantasists who seriously think that by 2030, the US will have any chance to holding onto it's dominance in the Western Pacific.

By 2030, China's GDP should be roughly twice as large as the US when factors like price differences are taken into account. Even should China spend half what US does as a percentage of it's GDP on defence then the Chinese will be spending as much as the US by 2030. After 2030 the the Chinese advantage only increases over US even further.

Over the next decade and a half China will be introducing new weapons such as J-20 fighter, J-31 fighter, Type-095 SSN, CVNs and many more that will be broadly comparable in technology to what the US has. Difference is that China will have home-turf advantage and can bring overwhelming force to bear in the Western Pacific up to Hawaii.

Hawaii should be the dividing line in the Western Pacific in the respective spheres of influence of the US/China.

 

[TaiShang]

Difference is that China will have home-turf advantage and can bring overwhelming force to bear in the Western Pacific up to Hawaii.

Indeed, the real difference is and will be the question of who is the aggressor and who is the peace-seeker. By the nature of its system, the US will remain expansionist and a control freak, hence, it remains their burden to keep up with China's home turf advantage, which is quite costly. This will likely remain so for conventional war scenarios. The US has to come and beat China conventionally on its home turf.

Blockading China is out of question. In the event of a serious threat to the nation's survival with the US attempting a Japan 2.0 on China, there will be nuclear exchange. Given that China is not a defenseless Japan (which can take two atomic bombs but cannot retaliate), US will simply shut up and sit back.

 

[cirr]

20000 nuclear-tipped ballistic and/or cruise missiles with a multitude of delivery platforms（land、underwater、air and space）will do the job of check-mating any potential foe who has evil desire on China。

China should sign into law the 1st use of nuclear weapons against any aggressor who dares launch an attack on Chinese soils。

There are countries in this world which fear mutually assured destruction more than China does。

Let's start afresh。At least this time everyone will be starting from the same starting line。

 

[TaiShang]

20000 nuclear-tipped ballistic and/or cruise missiles with a multitude of delivery platforms（land、underwater、air and space）will do the job of check-mating any potential foe who has evil desire on China。

China should sign into law the 1st use of nuclear weapons against any aggressor who dares launch an attack on Chinese soils。

There are countries in this world which fear mutually assured destruction more than China does。

Let's start afresh。At least this time everyone will be starting from the same starting line。

I guess, if it comes to that point, China will liberally declare that any naval blockade on its trade is a threat to China's survival and punishable with nuclear retaliation.

We will see who has the nerves.

Conventionally, the US can come and face China within first island chain and, very soon, second island chain.

 

[SipahSalar]

Difference is that China will have home-turf advantage and can bring overwhelming force to bear in the Western Pacific up to Hawaii.

That is the real deal. Aircraft Carriers are not the same thing as mainland.

 

[UKBengali]

That is the real deal. Aircraft Carriers are not the same thing as mainland.

Try telling that to our two resident Asian US Cheerleaders.

Anyway China is destined to dominate Asia as the Indians will never be in China's league and so no other potential challengers.

I guess, if it comes to that point, China will liberally declare that any naval blockade on its trade is a threat to China's survival and punishable with nuclear retaliation.

We will see who has the nerves.

Conventionally, the US can come and face China within first island chain and, very soon, second island chain.

I doubt whether China will respond with nuclear weapons to a naval blockade.

Much more likely will be Chinese use of SSNs to sink the ships trying to enforce the naval blockade.

China may not build as many aircraft carriers as US but should build as many SSNs to stop any enemies putting it's trade routes hostage.

 

[j20blackdragon]

In 10 years, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor will be complete and the Strait of Malacca will be bypassed completely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China–Pakistan_Economic_Corridor

The Chinese military will control global oil supplies from Gwadar along with our friend Pakistan.

China will be the one doing the blockading. How does that sound?