FriedRiceNSpice
Captain
Are you guys serious? Do you really think the USN can blockade the entire Chinese coast? You guys are too funny. :roll:
PLAN choke points
- Thread starter IDonT
- Start date
FriedRiceNSpice said:
Yes...the concept is called far blockade. All the US has to do is guard the Straight of Malacca, Luzon straight, and East China Sea exit. No shipping can go China's ports with US permission.
This won't be a 100 % blockade of course. The land route to Russia is still open. But considering the the majority of the world's goods travel by sea, then you have an effective economic blockade.
IDonT said:
Are we talking nonsence again? What good would blocking chinese goods do to US? A blockage only work if you did not depend on immediate imports of said country. ie if US do not have economical implications with China. When a world supplier is suddently taken off of the global market, every single consumer will feel the backlash and global depression will ensuit.
That is only the case if US can achieve complete blockade and deny every and all ship entering or leaving these waters.
These routs you mentioned are not only the life line to China but also the whole of south east asia including Japan. Could the sea lanes be completely closed by the US? I don't think so... eventually US will submit to global and internal pressure to open up sea lanes again.
MIGleader said:
In the event if US-PRC war, I doubt the US would be worried about trade with the PRC or seizure of PRC registered ships. Generally speaking Americans are law-biding 90% of the time, the when the other 10% infringes on its self-interest, the law is opposed or disregarded.
To cite one example, the US has no problems with seizing and sending foreign nationals for trial by the ICC, but when it comes to its own citizens, the US Congress passed the American Servicemember's Protection Act (ASPA), which authorizses the US President to use military force to free any US military personnel held by the ICC.
In addition, the US also pressured other countries to sign the Article 98 bilateral immunity agreement, which prohibits the surrender of any US citizen to the ICC. If the country refuse to sign, the US President may suspend military aid/sales to the country.
FriedRiceNSpice said:
The answer is, yes. The USN is the only naval power in the world today with such a capability, and the political muscle to use ports from Japan to Singapore for its war effort. They can sink every major PLAN vessel and destroy PRC port facilities with stand-off weapons. The PLAN & PLAAF may be able to sink some USN ships, but it wouldn't change the outcome. It's not necessary to maintain a blocade over long period of time, if you can muscle other countries into joining in economic sanctions against China.
If we look at some of PRC's neighbors, they wouldn't shed a tear if the USN sunk the bulk of PLAN ships. I think China's leadership understands the political the militay realities, and is willing to work patiently to develop a more favorable condition/environment. Notice I did not say "wait patiently". I said "work patiently". Slowly and surely, building up PRC's military might and economic influence over its neighbors.
FriedRiceNSpice
Captain
I find that much more agreeable. In open waters, the USN would be able to absolutely tear the PLAN apart with very little if any losses. However, much of the USN's advantages are mitigated when the battle takes place close to Chinese shores. The PLAAF and Chinese land-based air defenses will be able to nullify American carrier-based air power, and land-based missile systems can even out the odds a bit against superior American naval firepower. And even though the USN do possess high-tech standoff weapons, the Chinese also posses countless land-based naval attack and ballistic missiles.
Yes, yes that is true. I didn't fully grasp what you were suggesting before that post. The PLAN is helpless outside the range of PLAAF cover and land-based weapons systems.
hallo84 said:
The US would let other nations supplies through...especially Japan's. Only Chinese ships would be turned back.
This blockade would not have an immediate enough effect. There are many examples of nations survivng blockade. The United States survived a blockade in the War of 1812, and before that the British were harrassing shipping to a lesser extent and had been for years. Again in the American Civil War the Confederate States were blockaded and even without an industrial base of their own they still fought against far superior forces for years. In WWI the Germans were competely blockaded but still fought for years. The same in WWII. In both cases Britain survived a mostly ineffective submarine blockade by the Germans (as any US blockade would probably have large holes simply because of China's size even with a deep blockade strategy or whatever its called.).
The conclusion I have drawn from these historical examples is this: blockades do effect an enemies war fighting capability, but not enough to destroy it on their own. In order to truly defeat an enemy through economic war, their industrial heartland must be destoryed. Look at WWII: Germany had a big enough empire to keep on fighting without getting resources from the rest of the world. Only when GROUND TROOPS denied them those resources was Germany finished. It would be the same with China. China is a large enough nation to survive a blockade and provide for itself.
However, China's economy would suffer massively. The CCP:china: leadership probably wou;d not be willing to take so massive a hit to the economic progress China has made in recent years. In a case of total war, a blockade would be something China could survive. But put one in place, and China may well decide that it is not worth the pain and simply concede on whatever issue it is that brought up the war.
The same goes for the US, but in a different way. The US could survive a blockade as well, it would be painful too, just as in China case. However China cannot blockade the US. So basically the above sentence doesn't matter. The most important point to remember in this case is that while China loses almost the entire world in markets and suppliers, the US only loses China. China is a big thing to lose, but much of the slack would be picked up by Mexico, India, etc.
I hope that made sense.
darth sidious
Banned Idiot
adeptitus said:
I wonder who will give base to the US for such an action countries connected by land will face an invasion from the chinese army if they try ( an invasion the US wont be able to stop)
also most of these countries are economeicaly connected to china so even less reason for them to do this
if you are thinking of Japan it will most likely be turned in peaice of waste land if it ever try as for SK china can unlesh KIM
darth sidious
Banned Idiot
Finn McCool said:
welcome to the 21th centry this is not 1812 learn a bit more about econ before talking
there are a million ways china can use to seek revenge on on america for this
they include :
1 dumping all T-bonds causing hell on the US economey
2 attack those nation that support the american effort
3 use ties to forgein nations the pressure US ( you can hold out against the world forever
the list goes on and on
also chinas surface fleet maybe be destroyed reletive quickly but airforce and sub fleet wont be so easy they can be usd to imposed counter blockade
especialy at those who provide base to US with impovements in weaponary over the last 50 years the effect will be devasting
darth sidious
Banned Idiot
darth sidious said:
What do you mean a wasteland? Surely you aren't suggesting nukes? Are you a 14 year old? And KIM! You make him sound like some giant robot or a Pokemon or something.:rofl: But that is a good point. I bet Kim would like to use his military if he thought he had a chance of success, which is what this situation would give him. However, I don't think the US would need South Korean permission to blockade the Straits of Tsushima.
About nations being invaded by the PLA if the support the blockade...How? Let's take the Straits of Malacca as an example. How does the PLA get there? Are they going to invade Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand and Malaysia to get there? The best China could do was try to get Indonesia onto its side diplomatically, and attempt to persuade them to deny the US access. If that doesn't work, well, then there's not very much China can do, other than try to force the blockade.
darth sidious said:
Look Darth, I wasn't saying it was easy. I was just saying that both nations could survive a blockade and the other economic blow they could throw at each other. And are you suggesting that with what the Chinese have left after fighting the US they can blockade, well, lets see...BASICALLY THE WHOLE WORLD? As I said, the Germans tried a submairne blockade with an INTACT force in only the North Atlantic and failed. And remember, the US still has access, compete unfettered access to all the oil it needs. China will be getting what it needs through a few pipelines. These cross quite a few nations. Each one is a chance for the flow to be turned off.
Look...I'm not saying it would be easy. It could cause worldwide depression. But I think that in a situation like this the US has some big advantages.
If you had actually read my post you would see that I was saying that China has some big advantages too. Basically my arguement is that blockade and economic war would not bring this war to a conclusion.
Sorry for the double post.
Finn McCool said:
kims army is a peaice of crap but in time like this it can be used to pressure SK with the threat of invasion and destruction of captial
he is also eager for oppunity to "reunite" the nation so with a bit of chinese aide they will cause massive trouble for the US count in the reasource nedded to stop a NK invasion and your blockade force will be over streached
nation cant move unlike the US they do not have a ocean to hide behind after the war the will be remenbered as having betryed china in this time of need. After the war they will face a hateful china like Germany after WWI . over long term I doubt any nation would like that.
as for japan I suggest you look up how muched of its trade its conducted with china this alon will made them think twice before allowing an US blockade
obiously you have not been to china recently the HATE against japan in there is fearful to say the lest if does side with US them anything less them a nuke will be throw at it( remenber china has countles cheap balastic/cruise missile ) it also vunerable to a a chinese counter blockade from chinese aircraft /submarine ( these can be produced quickley and will most likely surive the inital american attack)
china can surive with out the sea ( example germany) japan cant(example england)
also with the forces you are describing here it looks like WWIII so its rather point less
I don't think any ASEAN nations would support a US blockade of China unless it was extremely serious (like China attacking them first or something). China runs a huge trade deficit with South East Asia, any blockade would have serious reprecussions for the economies of ASEAN. South Korea and Taiwan (assuming the blockade wasn't triggered by a Chinese attack) would not support it for economic reasons as well.Finn McCool said:
Granted the reasons behind a blockade will affect the outcome, but obviously the politcal-economic reality is not as simple as you think.