@
anon45 @
jhungary
I want to defend @
NiceGuy a bit. Japan cannot fully rely on the US protection if it comes to a confrontation with China.
First, that´s correct: the US does not take a position on the ultimate sovereignty of the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands. Though you acknowledge the administration of Japan, reiterate the U.S. government's position that the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty to defending Japan in case of island-related hostilities.
Second, if history is a guide, one can remember of the
battle of Paracels where China and South Vietnam fought over the islands in the South China Sea in 1974. Although South Vietnam was US ally, the Americans refused to help its ally in the battle. For the sake of a good US-China relation. Who says that history never repeats? The US as traitor, again?
Third, the US is too far away, while China is too close. The US military machine is doomed to downsize amid defence cuts, while China is increasing its budget thanks to its economic power.
Well, you can defend all you want so, you don't need to say that to us.
I want to defend @
NiceGuy a bit. Japan cannot fully rely on the US protection if it comes to a confrontation with China.
Modern Warfare has changed. Today warfare are more mobile and more only scratching the surface.
The simple law with warfare is, you need to balance what you pay and what you get in return, sure, China can occupy Senkaku Island in a minute. Even as i speak, they have the power to invade and control the island over. Then you need to ask yourselve why they have not done it already??
Same things with North Korea and the South, China Mainland and Taiwan, you need to ask. China is allmighty, no point denialing that, why Taiwan and Senkaku still stand??
The answer is, both cases are, you will pay more than you earn.
China is strong, but actually not as strong as you think. Yeah, on paper they are the 2nd Most GDP country in the world, then they also are the world largest country by population. China unlike North Korea, they cannot ignore people in their own country and use a cool look to treat everything. And the punchline is, China is a Businessman, if you want him to invade something. They need to come out ahead on the balance sheet.
Senkaku is an Island. Beside the vast Gas reserve it claim to have, they have nothing left, maybe the fishing right too. What if China were to attack a peer country (Japan) tomorrow. Then China will be an agressor, as Japan currently hold the island and Island Warfare dictate the Agressor must have Naval and Air Superiority to have a hope of winning the war.
Naval strength, both country are almost identitical now with the almsot the same technology, so a war will both come down to the air power. The air power is a Distinct Chinese advantage with 2 : 1 ratio between CHina and Japan (800 fighter of all sort vs 400 fighter of all sort in Japan) however the problem is, the geographical distant between Fujian Province (The nearest PLAAF Command) is 282 Km, where the nearest JASDF establishment in Ishigaka Island is only 98 Km away. that is if we assume the Japanese did not build an airfield in Senkaku already, in military term, that mean Japan can launch 2 Sortie for every Chiense Sortie launch, that equal to Japan is 4 times ahead of the Chinese schedule (Based on a round trip made between China and Senkaku)
What that translate is, unless China put a alpha strike on Ishigaka island first and destroy their air defence capability, the chinese is coming out losing the Air war as twice as much aircraft are launched to intercept the same sortie. The probability of Alpha strike is nearly impossible as they pass thru many radar region during the 300 km transit.
So, what is the realistic figure if China were to go to war tomorrow? From a WW2 prespective and from malay campagine, we know that the Attacking side are best with Air and Sea dominance when they will require a 1:3 or 1:5 defender to attacker ratio. Without Air support, the ratio jump to 1 :7, if without both dominance, number jump from 1:7 to 1:11 or even 1:12.
So, for every 10,000 troop Japan stationed in Senkaku, China need to have at least 80,000 to 120,000 troop to attack. Chinese know that figure, they are not stupid, unlike many poster here. They know that can do no good. if they do go ahead and plan an attack like this. They need break thru coming either from overpowering Japanese navy or Airforce, or a co-op campaign with Taiwan, or even some arbitratory help.
If this is that hard to conquer senkaku, what is the chance of China having a full scale attack on Japan? Which, is another island. And another island battle.
Don't get me wrong, i am not saying Chinese do not have the power to take either Senkaku and Japan, but the price to pay is just too high and it have been the same reason why China still holding out it's move toward Japan and senkaku now, not because of US interdiction, but rather a more economical reason.
First, that´s correct: the US does not take a position on the ultimate sovereignty of the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands. Though you acknowledge the administration of Japan, reiterate the U.S. government's position that the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty to defending Japan in case of island-related hostilities.
I will have to admit, even hearing Hilary say that in front of people, i would still say US may not help Japan if China do invade the senkakus. However, this will definitely
NOT the case if China were to attack Japanese mainland.
The one reason being, US have troop (about 50,000 strength) in Japan, they are stationed in Japan. I cannot see how China invade Japan and not touching those US bases. You either attack them first, so they will be of no use/of minimised used to the later warfare or if you left them alone, they will become sentury to Japanese Troop. Then you can never conquer Japan if you don't take out the US bases. And once you took on the US bases, it is not a Treatical subject anymore, it will be a direct attack on US Troop itself. US may turn back on their allies, but US will never turn their back on their own man.
However, if you see US withdrawing troop and closing down bases in japan, that is a good indication that US have forego the Japanese Defence, that will be the clear indication that US will not be involve in this war. But this has not happen as of now.
As i said, The price to pay is too high for the Chinese, even if there are war broke out in Senkaku, it will
NOT be a total war, sink some ship and save some face. A full scale war is just a big price to pay even without US help. But i am sure US will help in some degree, may not be sending troop, but maybe help with AWACS, EWACS, even Fighter Escort or CAS.
Second, if history is a guide, one can remember of the battle of Paracels where China and South Vietnam fought over the islands in the South China Sea in 1974. Although South Vietnam was US ally, the Americans refused to help its ally in the battle. For the sake of a good US-China relation. Who says that history never repeats? The US as traitor, again?
The battle of paracel happened after Vietnamization of the war, from 1972, we do have Participate in any direct engagement on behalf of the SOuth vietnamese side and we are pulling out of Vietnam from 1972. So on that day in 1974, the situation is the same as everywhere else in South Vietnam, i don't see how different between Battle of Paracel and Battle of Danang both happened in 1974. Both without US intervention.
It wouldn't be, we signed a cease fire deal in 1973.........I would not say this is a traitor act. The cease fire on 1973 and the vietnamization of vietnam war in 1972, on the other hand, is a whole different story.
Third, the US is too far away, while China is too close. The US military machine is doomed to downsize amid defence cuts, while China is increasing its budget thanks to its economic power.
Do not forget China is a free economic too, It's GDP is not dollar to dollar directly entering the Treasury of China. The coutnry itself did not hold that wealth, it is the individual who hold the wealth of China, the exact same thing as in America.
And as per our previous convo, i believe the US budget is a bit too high with we blindly invest in stuff here and there. China would probably stop at 250 billions to 300 billions top and US should be around 450-500b. Bear in mind, China need to have 4 times the GDP than US to be "Truely" surpass US .
US Military is not winding down like you say, rather it have becoming a "Smart" force. Contextual Number would be the same, and the obligation would be the same, we only need to adapt to how to get more with less. It would be stupid to believe US Milirary are winding down and doomed.
Again,China is more like a Businessman than mad man, i would be scare if NK's Kim take the helm of China, but with Chinese on China's power, there are nothing to be worry about.
The US has done the first step to alienate Japan: Obama refused to receive Abe when he wanted to visit the US in a move to strengthen the military alliance. Well, I don´t believe the story that the time did not fit Obama´s calendar.
One can say you are partly to blame for the increasing provocations of Beijing in the islands dispute, thanks to American indecisive policy. So instead of Washington, Abe chose Hanoi for his first foreign trip. Japan was not amused.
That does not change the fact that even with US total withdrawal that does not change the fact that South Korea are depending on us to defend their coutnry, Taiwan depending on us too, and we also have terroritories on Asia......
Obama have refused many leader when their visit, he even refused Juila Gillard visit just a few months back, does that stain the US-Australia relationship?? Don't make a big deal out of these news........
.
