Go to nordvpn.com/covert and use code COVERT to get a 2-year plan plus 4 additional months with a huge discount in their special new deal! It’s risk free with Nord’s 30 days money-back guarantee!
Are you also going to make a video detailing how the us could win a war with China? Seems quite fair that way. Otherwise you wouldn’t be objective, but just one sided.
ONLY those species who get off of this Earth and out of this solar system/galaxy might continue to survive, (if it can even actually be accomplished for various reasons), everybody else is eventually going to die and go extinct. We do not have to defeat our enemies, we only have to outlast them beyond this Earth. Nature will wipe them out for us.
3 basic ways out of this galaxy to potentially continue to survive, (as a species or whatever evolves from our species): 1. Long way: Outward through the galactic plane. 2. Medium way: Outward through the angled solar system's plane. 3. Short way: Outward, about 90 degrees from the galactic plane, as adjusted for the galactic magnetic lines of flux for a smoother ride. (Basically 'rise above' the collapsing spiral shaped galaxy). * And music, don't forget music. It's going to be a long trip.
I can also say the weapons disparity is swinging more in US favor. China challenged us at what we do best and they tipped their hand too early. Prepare for doom.
Both would collapse soon after if they wage war anyways. There's no real benefit in war in this day and age. On one side is a corporate dystopia, the other is a communist dictatorship. The unaffiliated would be eating popcorn as long as both won't end up throwing nukes at each other.
Japan is playing an increasingly large role in the defense of Taiwan. And as Japan continues to militarized… thats only going to become a bigger thorn in China’s side.
@@shinchan-F-urmom south Korea a Chinese ally? Hah! China is the biggest reason why NK exists in the first place. You're forgetting the tens of thousands of US troops and hardware sitting on SK soil/
One thing I d say would weigh in the US military favor is the fact that it has a lot of real life battle experience. This experience is hard to simulate.
"One thing I d say would weigh in the US military favor is the fact that it has a lot of real life battle experience [of losing wars one after another since WWII -- Korean War, Vietnam War, Iraqi War, Afghan War, . . .] This experience is hard to simulate." Fixed it forya. You are very welcome.
@@michaelngan99 Lmaoo Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan were political losses not combat losses America outclassed the other side in combat but the American public lost faith in the operations to go along with no clear operational objectives that could be sold to them, Korea is a stalemate and is a story of two tales before Chinese intervention and after even after Chinese intervention look how many Chinese died compared to Americans, before Chinese intervention America was winning the fight, North Korea couldn’t penetrate the 38th parallel line lost Inchon, Seoul fell next and then America penetrated deep into their territory. Americans can fight and are good at it, the key is the American public, and clear objectives and clear, factual reasons for doing so
@@user-ex7qx4pv2u You didn’t understand at all American public opinion only matters when it comes to the political objectives as far as military objectives we’ll be fine. The important factor is time. America will need to be swift and quick in defense of Taiwan it can’t be more than five years. At the end of the day the government will protect its assets and Taiwan is very important for the US if the public knows that and isn’t ignorant to that fact then all is good
I don't think China would directly attack US forces if they wanted to take Taiwan. I believe the more likely scenario would be China declaring Taiwan part of their territory and simply impose a soft blockade around the Island. They would then intercept any ship suspected of carrying military equipment. The US would then have to decide if they want to escalate and use force to restore free access to Taiwan. In that scenario the US would be forced to fire the first shot, and that would make it much more complicated to get public opinion behind the conflict, while China could easily paint the US as the aggressor.
Or the US is willing to give up a pilot in exchange for casus belli and China is forced for surrender either immediately or eventually. Imagine if China killed a pilot woman of color...
You mistook one thing. China’s objective is never to reach out to US continent and attack there. It just wants to keep Taiwan and defend any US/Japanese military from going in. That would be a relatively smaller mission.
@@kerbodynamicx472 why is that, cn never needed to go around the world doing slave trade/ bombing other nations with depleted uranium warheads/ chemical attack 3-4 generations using the orange bomb/ occupy all the oil production regions. So why the need to have allies wandering around the world? Cn always BUYS goods from others with real cash, not like you lot, robbing/invading/killing is in your blood.
@@Hotsauce1936 It can still work, you can fire some cruise missiles at them from the sea level, and then fire some ballistic missiles which brings death from above. While the enemies are busy intercepting the cruise missiles, the ballistic ones goes in for the kill
1. All the limitation you mentioned applicable to the US is also applicable to China; 2. China cannot launch its ASBMs as they risk US nuclear response. Pre-launch ambiguity is real.
The SM-3 can take out ICBMs in their midcourse phase, we also have the ground based midcourse defense the fastest missile in the world capable of mach 33, which can also take ICBMs out in their midcourse phase, no other nation has midcourse phase interceptors, all others are terminal.
@@Joe_Friday Correct they are based in the US and once again they are midcourse phase ICBM interceptors. There radar range is around 10,000km as the AN/TPY-2 from THAAD which China and Russia already accused the US of using it to spy has almost 5000km range, and it's only a terminal stage interceptor that's mobile. The LRDR the GBMD uses is not mobile. much larger and more powerful. But it's specs are classified so it could be over 10,000km. Sources below. "The GBI consists of a 3-stage solid rocket boost vehicle which can place it's payload of an Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle outside the earth's atmosphere. In order to do this the missile must reach an escape velocity of more than 6.9 miles per second. This hypersonic speed is several times what a 7.62mm bullet travels leaving the muzzle of a gun. To put it another way, it reaches a speed of approximately Mach 33." "The AN/TPY-2 Surveillance Transportable Radar, also called the Forward Based X-Band Transportable (FBX-T) is a long-range, very high-altitude active digital antenna array X band surveillance radar designed to add a tier to existing missile and air defence systems. It has a range of 2,900 mi (2,500 nmi; 4,700 km)"
Remember though, the US did manage to deploy SIX carrier groups around Iraq in 1990-91. Wartime can generate a lot of initiative. That said, the US had several months to get large numbers of fighters, bombers, tankers, airborne early warning, transports, helos, fighting soldiers, airmen/women, marines, ground support equipment, etc in situ.
@John Smith a carrier group is anything but an easy target lmao. There is a reason china is building carriers of their own. They are the most powerful military weapons on the planet.
Every fish in the ocean might be a drone with a mini bomb nowadays. Hundreds of mini bombs togather can make a big explosion. It's like nanotechnology, but a bit bigger . Aircraft carriers could be an easy target , too easy to spot .
War is not just about equipment, there is also economic strategy. Today People's Republic of China is not the same as Iraq. It is the second largest economy, third strongest military in the world. War is not just about how advance you are and how many carriers do you have. Don't be naive
@@Acrillian it will be like the reverse of the previous cold war. By 2030, China economy will be larger than US. By 2050, it is projected to be 50% larger.
China: *attacks U.S. U.S.: *attacks China Japan: *attacks China Koreas: *attack each other Russia: *attacks Ukraine Germany: *attacks France through Belgium.
Why would Germany attack France? Besides, the Germans don't have the modern equivalents of those erstwhile plentiful panzers, nor Stukas, for starters. Contemporary German command staff would still be more worried about Russia...which would have to go thru Poland, anyway. Poles would likely not stand for that.
It would end up being an economic war of attrition. Without NATO importing Chinese products how long could china last financially vs how much can NATO produce without the assistance of China manufacturing
It'd likely hurt China way more. The West can go without cheap TVs, and could simply work more on repair and recycling what they already have until alternative sources get set up; China depends on the open seas for food, fuel, and funds from exports, and scaring away civilian ships with crossfire could lead to China quickly emptying its treasury paying for overland alternatives while increasing domestic "stability" operations against domestic unrest.
@@richdobbs6595 That too. I'd would refer to the fact that China is able to mobilise its entire population overnight to whatever is needed without any need for funds or finance.
China's plan to counter relies heavily on their ability to replicate their adversaries military tech and tactics. Unfortunately it also depends largely on the individual abilities of the PLA/PLAN and the training given to those servicemembers. All the advanced military technology China has aquired over the last few decades is only as effective as their targeting systems, GPS and the problem-solving skills of their missile force. Of course, German U-boats off the coast of the US wasnt seen as a possibility until they were already a viable threat to commerce and travel. It would be unwise to assume the CCP are unable to reach out and touch us.
You don't think the Chinese are smart enough to effectively use the weapons they've created? They know the entire US playbook and have studied their tactics for decades. Neither the US nor Chinese forces have fought a great power since Korea (which the US did not win) so the US does not have an edge in experience just because they have been fighting wars continuously. Also, China's military objectives do not require a 100% victory. They just need a stalemate to win. If they can hurt the US badly in the Pacific to convince the entire world will shift away from the US dollar as the reserve currency. After all, the US will certainly just print several trillion to fund their China war. If they borrow that much money but China can still cause a stalemate (i.e. US lose pacific bases, supercarriers) global investors will lose faith in the US regardless of China's military losses. Why bet on a country that is already saddled by unrepayable debt and ALSO not the CLEAR winner in a conflict? It will not be Chinese weapons that destroy America, it will be a loss of faith in America that does it in.
It's even worst that thanks to Biden F-up in Afgan, China has a treasure trove of American Tech now. Same with OBama. We just lost a small advantage point now no thanks to Biden. Impeach Biden, Harris, Nancy, and recall all Democraps from all offices in America. Defund the Democrap party. Don't believe me, then Deep dive every Democrap bill and law and see how it sounds good but in the end screw you over like the forbidden fruit that it is from the Garden of Eden. Start cutting open the fruit people before you bite into it. Eve didn't learn the first time. She had better learn now along with Adam.
@@achong007 - this civil war mentality is what weakens America. Despite the crude simple nature of the CCP dictatorship, and the low bar of law and order it represents, the bulk of the population support it. While Americans hysterically and pointlessly hate each other.
It would require US submarines winning big victories forcing the Chinese to stay in harbor with a stand off on both sides. Then the US doesn't replace its loses and China goes back to a massive build up and tries again in a few years.
@@winstonsyme7672 I could imagine subversive tactics taken against the three gorges dam and river it sits on could go a long way in paralyzing their industry. Not to mention the casualties sustained if that dam broke.
@@Stinger522 well the global economic market is much more interconnected in the modern day than it used to be. That is one of the main reasons why wars between powerful nations haven’t happened almost at all since ww2. The damage it would be economically and politically is not worth anything you could gain. The same could not be said 100 years ago.
Maybe I missed something, but it would seem to be really stupid for China to attack US forces on Okinawa in a scenario in which Japan is not pulled into the fighting. In such a scenario, Okinawa is probably neutralized as a base of operations against China due to diplomatic pressure from Japan, in-case anyone has forgotten - Okinawa is Japanese territory. An unprovoked attack on US Forces in Okinawa would almost certainly draw Japan in, (heck an attack on the uninhabited, Japanese-administered Senkaku Islands is pretty likely to cause Japanese intervention,) significantly escalating the conflict, and making it significantly more difficult for China to secure a quick and decisive victory. I normally enjoy your videos, but I think this one is quite a stretch.
Yes, however maintaining the First Island Chain and the trade that goes to Japan through Taiwan's eastern side is very crucial too. So it depends on whether or not China thinks that Japanese involvement is a foregone conclusion or not.
@@jevinliu4658 True, though 'legally binding' defense agreements aside, I doubt Japanese intervention would have any support amongst the Japanese public unless China did something provocative like attacking Japanese territory, military assets, or citizens. If the government intervenes without clear and domestically popular justification, then it will be that much easier for China to pressure Japan to return to the sidelines and cease its intervention.
JAPANESE NEVER DARES TO INTERVENT!0N IN REUN!F!CAT!0N 0F CH!NA TA!WAN!!! JAPAN 0NLY G00D EN0UGH T0 DEFENCE IT'S SELF!!! N0 F0R ASS!ST 0R ATTACK 0THER C0UNTR!ES!!!
Being sarcasm wont bring you anywhere, in fact, with such thinking is the reason why the West are falling behind to China. Always live in your own imagination and ignored the facts and underestimated them.
Although it'd cost China the use of a strong diversion, taking Taiwan first would make a subsequent pushback against the US in the 2nd island chain much simpler. Without a clear, secure route into the Pacific, it doesn't really matter how many naval assets China has, as they are so few possible corridors they can take through the 1st island chain that they will always be sitting ducks. If she can secure the Taiwanese east coast and Orchid islands, then her odds of a successful offensive against Guam or Okinawa improve markedly.
@@benjamindixon3512 85 billion of equipment given to a allied government not the usa leaving it & if we really wanted to we could bomb & air strike all equipment left behind but most of the equipment is old asf anyways & will be nonoperational in a year 1-2
How to win a war against superpower: 1. Let them easily counquer your whole country 2. Destroy your economy with constant attacks and warfare. 3. Superpower realises ocupation is not worth it's price 4. Victory, now you can enjoy your destroyed country with medieval economy.
@@hphp31416 Afghanistan was a medieval country before the war. No NAVY, no Airforce, no Social Security. Only an idiot would have attacked them. Oh pardon me idiots are ruling the US at least for the last 30 years.
pls make a book about something related. i have finished reading red dawn after you recommended and started reading trial by fire, which im loving to too! This type of stuff is right up your door! greeting from portugal!
Would like to suggest you a book if I may : A man's view of the world by Lee Kwan Yew . Lee is a former Singaporean president and was nicknamed " The Bruce Lee of Politics ". Hope it will give a few new perspectives of some of your thoughts😊😊
CG 70 that was my ship! That was also the back of the head of a certain captain that we compared to capt. Brannigan from Futurama. God we where so glad when we got a new capt.
Exactly, I'm British & know for a fact the US solution to everything is throw more money at a problem until it goes away. They tried it in Afghanistan so when it fails they've got no answers strategy or know how. So they run away leaving their allies in the crap, & 68 billion dollars worth of weapons as a parting gift. Honestly you couldn't make it up of how unprofessional & pathetic they are.
@@DavyRo Well, I wouldn't agree with your statment, The war in Afghanistan was covered by the Oil from IRAQ and the mess they left in Afghanistan is so huge cleaning it up is almost impossible...and they left a mess deliberately...watch 2022
Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake - Napoleon Bonaparte. That's why China should never interrupt the USA and let the USA continue to do what they are doing
A few things to keep in mind. The PRC is the number one importer of crude oil and foodstuff and eatable oils. It would not need to be a close restrictions but the threat of war raises shipping insurance rates that are unsustainable
A few things for you to keep in mind. Russia is the world's 2nd biggest exporter of crude oil. Its biggest customer is its neighbour - China. Russia & China are defacto allies. There's 2 pipelines running from Rus to Chi already with a 3rd in the planning. What we're you saying about shipping again?
@@DavyRo haha. War starts prices triple be it a pack train or a pipeline I would not bet too heavily on Russia as an ally who would see no gain on a war PRC is bound to lose
The US saw the assembly of Iraqi forces on the Kuwaiti border and would have known what was about to occur, but they couldn't have stopped the invasion. I get that same feeling in this instance, but I will dissect the issue from my point of view as someone with a little experience, albeit not at this scale. I don't see China invading Guam or any place the US claims hegemony. I also don't see them attacking Japan's holdings, mainly because it is not tenable in the long run, as it is not as if the Japanese government would be overrun or anything, and with US support counter-attacks would be relatively simple, at the very least to drop ordinance and prevent resupply. It just couldn't be held. Guam would be easier, but China could not avoid the escalation factor, which does not work in their favor. They stand to gain nothing by starting a nuclear war, and as such are unlikely to take actions that would trigger such a conflict, thus their targets will be, as they have been up to this point, relatively small. The islands they have taken to the present time were taken precisely because they knew there would be no consequences militarily speaking. But also because those islands will serve them well in an invasion of Taiwan, thus they had a purpose. This is just like Russia's violation of sovereign territory to secure a naval base that has important strategic implications in future power projection. Taiwan is quite different from the other potential "main" targets in my opinion. Once Taiwan is seized, there is no more territory where the government and military forces can regroup. Any counterattacks would be quite predictable from Guam, Japan, or Korea, and the only avenues of approach are land or sea. You need not worry about ground forces any longer once Taiwan is overrun. I disagree that China would have to keep a Taiwan conflict down to a few weeks to be successful. Rather, they would have to keep it to about 4 or 5 days to prevent getting bogged down and increasing the uncertainty to the point that victory is no longer probable. What I mean is that all major military resistance on the ground must be quelled in that time period. You cannot have large military forces that still pose a threat on the ground, as this will increase American resolve and result in increased air activity by giving the US a force to support. Once Taiwan has been taken, the US air response will be lessened, as there is no longer a military objective to be achieved. If you cannot take the territory back, your only other option is to bomb it, but the civilians are friendly and you don't want to hurt them, and you can't really achieve anything through air attacks alone. You can destroy all the military targets you want at that stage, but it will not accomplish anything without retaking the island. If their assembly can be done relatively quietly for support materiel as well as infantry, a quick unification of the sea-based forces would be possible, and could be kept hidden from satellite observation simply by not uniting till it is time for the operation, as well as signals intelligence given good discipline and practices. The US would notice the movements, but the question is would it be enough time to have any effect on the outcome? And as for airpower, that would be even easier to hide from signals intelligence in my opinion. But the kicker is that as long as assembly is done at a relatively fast pace, I don't think the US reaction will be fast enough to really stop the operation, regardless of whether it is picked up or not, granted that China can assemble and launch in less than 72 hours. That is the window I would give them for the best outcome, but they could take longer and still succeed. It would take much prior preparation away from the coast, which likely would be picked up to a large degree, but perhaps would not be understood. Deception would be helpful. I don't know just how streamlined Chinese C2 is, and it would be challenging, but if anyone could pull it off it would be them. If I were in charge of landing troops in Taiwan, I wouldn't focus on the obvious approach from directly across the strait. I would want to land most of the amphibious forces further around the island, which would be more difficult, but without engagement restrictions I think China could, with acceptable losses, just throw a wall across the water that lands on and crushes Taiwanese defenses. But I also would not make the amphibious portion of the assault the main effort. I would save that for airborne forces. The short distance makes this quite do-able. One unknown factor is just how long it would take China to suppress the air defenses on the island, and whether it could be done before the US responds in force. Taiwan has been preparing for one major military engagement for a long time, so you cannot discount their preparation, which still could simply be outmatched in sheer numbers. That goes back to the importance of assembling in a specific manner that doesn't draw attention, over a long period of time. China would not have to defeat US air support coming to Taiwan's aid, because it likely would not be fast enough or with enough force to prevent the initial beachheads and landing zones from seeing strong Chinese forces embedded on the island. Once that happens, I feel that China could succeed. Even with prior warning in Taiwan it is possible that they could still succeed. As far as US intervention, if history has taught us anything it is that the US is never ready for the initial attack, which just bolsters my opinion that initial success is quite possible.
You don’t see China’s lack of large scale military experience and no amphibious landing experience a problem? Not to mention there are only 2 logical approaches to the island by sea and China doesn’t have the equipment to circumvent that. It would have to seize a port virtually undamaged to have a chance at a successful push into Taiwan. Deception is also difficult to pull off since there’s only 2 times a year that’s feasible to conduct a month long amphibious operation.
If China somehow took Taiwan via force then they could not withstand the full force of the rest of the world. China would lose half of their landmass and would be forced to be a developing nation for another 50-100 years, assuming the war doesn't go nuclear.
The problem is a 4-5 day invasion is impossible US pacific command is ready marines up and down Japan and throughout Asia, air groups ready to go China would not be able to accomplish this also can’t forget about Taiwan’s own military and the geographical challenges of crossing the Taiwan Strait
The one thing that I believe that you overlooked is the scale of this invasion of Taiwan that you mentioned. I would imagine it would have to be at least 1/2 the size of Operation Overlord. That means that this invasion would be easily detected. This means a strike like the one that you mention must be done as a preemptive strike months before any invasion of Taiwan. Otherwise troops will be on alert and things like sending 1,000 guys on a transport with no way of being supplied and reinforced to Okinawa is not going to work.
@@mustavogaia2655 Oh, its much worse than that. The D-Day landings took 150K men and nearly 7,000 ships. There is no way to gather a force 1/2 that size in anything less than days, once it exists. That is why this kind of strike has to be before any invasion. Heck, the world will have years of warning before this could even possibly happen.
Also there are 200k Taiwanese troops on the island, don’t think China can spare that many ships and planes if they are “also” invading Taiwan. Maybe they mistake Taiwan with Singapore?
There is also the consensus that the D-Day Landing of June 6th, 1944, could NEVER have happened the way it did, if the Germans had spy Satellites in Earth orbit to detect the Invasion and that it was heading for NORMANDY and NOT the Palais De Calais, as Ike led the Germans to think it was.
Attacking Guam - which is US territory - and hope for a modest response which could lead to a tactical advantage for China after the conflict? Does not sound reasonable.
I believe the good old strategy for the US and Allies will still work well....just take control of the choke points like Malacca Strait, The Suez Canal, The Strait of Hormuz, etc. It will devastate the Chinese export and oil imports, eventually hurting the Chinese economy so much that it has to give up.
These videos if you look precisely 1. The dude isnt apart of a Central Intelligence agency these 2 countrys arent stupid nor is the U.S. alone it isnt a idiot these youtubers look for local information while Intelligence Agencies go off of Federal Info so its funny to see this type of stuff becuase these same types of videos were made but for WW2 it wasnt a video but recorded conversations of Locals talking about it
@@Ass_of_Amalek agreed, in current situation I too believe that US will not go to war just for Taiwan, I was saying from a US vs China perspective if a war really breaks out, which is the theme of the video as well.....and even though the threat is real, Chaina has a long way to go to invade Taiwan considering possible high death toll on Chinese side as well and post war consequences.
I think the most likely scenario China would push for is to force the Taiwanese government to surrender within days, which I can see happening to be honest. Not because they're so weak willed like the Afghan government but because the cost inflicted by missile barrages and a blockade would be too great to withstand for the Taiwanese population, used to very high living standards.
US needs more light carriers and hypersonic weapons along with intelligence and drone technology. Imagine cruise missiles with the capability of mimicking aircrafts.
*We did just get the Spy Chief of China to Defect to the US a few months ago, along with a huge Treasure Trove of Secret Data he brought with him. Dozens of Terabytes (cant remember the exact number they said) of Secret Data.* *The Value and impact of this cannot be overstated. He was like 2nd or 3rd ranked in Xi's Faction which is a major blow to Xi and China.*
Well Russia is diverse and won't try to assimilate you at least. China strategy is always of full assimilation. Ironically they built a modern natsoc state.
In the case of Taiwan, China would seek to create the same kind of war as what happened in Korea and the Falklands. This would be where there's a sort of designated zone of conflict where conventional fighting between the great powers is permitted but going outside risks a nuclear exchange. This would vastly mitigate (though not totally eliminate) the US initial advantage with forward positions in Japan and the RoK. If the PLA can lock down the water and airspace around Taiwan, and seize enough land there, any counterattack would either have to be in the teeth of PLA antiship/anti-aircraft defenses or risk escalation into a nuclear exchange.
yeah, the scenario of China attacking the US to invade Taiwan makes no sense. It's not the Chinese way of war and it would be a total waste of resources. Downvoted the video.
@@deprecor1 I think it's propaganda. This guy also made a comment in his video that the U.S. didn't know Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked and pretends not to know China attacking U.S. bases violates NATO Article 5 which drags all members without exception. He makes it seems as American allies have a chance of not being involved or like America will agree to peace after they are attacked. They have been suing for war and they will not stop because it's the best way to end China and war is the only thing the U.S. is genuinely good at.
Correction: China has more Hulls in Ships but the USA has far more Tonnage in Ship Size and Firepower! The Chinese Aircraft can't even compare to US Airpower.
This narrative is very much different than the ~8 pentagon war games where according to the pentagon , we got our asses handed to us. Cleary the assumptions in the ~8 pentagon war games in 2019, 2020 were very different than the narrative here. The most recent pentagon war game held in march 2021, as reported in the news had us winning but with huge losses on both sides. But that simulation was for a war in 2030, and several emerging technologies are assumed to be deployed on our side. It'd be interesting to know under what assumptions we had our assess handed to us. Some assumptions might be that we believe their carrier killing balistic missles work and our carriers never get within 1500 miles. Since our F18's, F35 only have a 500 mile range and we don't have that many tankers for mid-air refueling, the carriers are totally out of the fight. Another assumption is that China has munitions where one or two hits would render the all run ways at Anderson AFB useless. (in fact we're practicing having our jets take off from freesays.) And how would Okinowa be defended? The people of Okinowa have for decades wanted our military off their island, if a war was fought on their soil, would they demand the US leave Okinowa after this conflict? Clearly the assumptions in this video are different than the assumption is the pentagon war game simulations in 2019,2020.
Those assumptions in 2019 and 2020 could have been having to "fight tonight" with whatever is on hand in theater now, while the 2030 situation would have factored in new platforms as well as both US and allied preparations over 10 years up to 2030 putting us in a better tactical position.
To ask a serious question, unleashing the Corona virus when healthcare care costs in the USA are out of control and a Achilles heel? What if an adversary sees that the US would collapse economically and therefore be domestically too distracted or weak to fight? Maybe the combination of animosity between rural/urban, cyber attack, pandemic has changed our focus already?
or maybe a good media campaign can convince people to forget about those things and focus on a more important threat... people often forget that part of why the US did so well in wwii was because of the efforts of its citizens in production. apparently the US alone supplied 2/3rds of the supplies for the allies during the war because of a national effort.
@@nicelypenn Well, after the war our infrastructure was intact while the rest of the world was destroyed. We also amassed huge amounts of gold BEFORE WWII under the Trading with the enemy act of 1917. After the war, Breton Woods made the $ the reserve currency of the word and secured American hegemony. Since 1973, the gold window was closed and even though productivity per worker grew rapidly in the US, the wages and wealth of the working class stagnated. None of the gains in productivity or the stock market trickled down to the middle class.
"Unleashing the coronavirus" If you read this, please unleash less then 5 minutes if your life and look up "event 201" in any search bar. A global coronavirus pandemic exercise from a month before covid. Look at who hosted the pandemic practice exercise on their page. Not China, the white knights we saw on TV. Their latest global pandemic readiness exercise was called "catastrophic cantagion".
By having a large navy to sink, an air force to shoot down, ports to blockade and and economy to destroy. While very powerful, China is also very vulnerable because any serious action would be a conventional war. That makes a very, very big difference.
That’s true, invading China is virtually out of the question…. But maintaining a blockade and cutting it off economically and withering it down from the outside is a much different type of fighting and war.
The latest US Military war game where this exact scenario was run, showed the US and its allies lost fast and lost comprehensively. Idk what makes you think what you presented is anything close to plausible but, no worries. According to intelligence I've read, China may invade Taiwan as soon as NEXT month...September. Looking forward to an update after it actually happens irl. Btw, the reason for all militaries to do physical war games is to habituate the enemy to practice strikes. Then it's not practice. You can maintain tactical surprise while everyone watches that way. Think deeper.
@@thechaozrevenger404 Nope. Japan, Australia, and the Philippines. IIRC. The US side lost so fast and so comprehensively there is now an effort to completely change how the US Military fights Think about that. The commanders.that force military men to walk.around in high heels is.gonna reform and update US Military doctrine. We.r fk'd.
"It takes a long time to prepare a carrier strike group" Which is why we constantly keep them active all over the world... and only phase one out when we have a new one ready to replace it.
@@goda7137 except Taiwan and the encroaching waters are all within kill range of most Chinese missiles. A perfect killzone. Only the blind won't be able to see it
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Gotta cut the cord sometime. After that length of time and training, they should have been able to take care of themselves.
Right now, and in the near-mid term, the key to a Chinese victory in some Taiwan invasion has to be political strategy. Even if they manage to invade successfully, if the U.S. decides to call together a coalition to kick them out, they will be only slightly less helpless than the Iraqi Army was during the Gulf War. They can't project forces far enough to protect their trade routes, and militarily they lack the mass or technology to go toe to toe with the U.S., much less the U.S. and a bunch of allies. I imagine China would attempt to politically confuse and divide any support for Taiwan, using techniques similar to what Russia did when it invaded Crimea. It's a much harder sell, but given the right circumstances, it may not be impossible. The success or failure of such a strategy is probably mostly dependent on the Taiwanese government's ability to fight without formal orders and direction from their leadership, and the ability of the government to make sure it doesn't fall into the hands of turncoats during the confusion. If there is clearly a war going on, I don't think China will be able to diplomatically keep the rest of the world at bay.
China can NEVER stop the US from blocking maritime trade to China, if the US so desires. Meanwhile, China can never blockade the US. We don't have choke points, the way China does in the Malaccas.
Yep that's true, and if you look at it NATO and her Allies can survive without doing business with china while china can't survive without NATO and her Allies.
You are forgetting that the USA and Europe are the biggest trade partners of China, meaning that in case of war they won't be trading anyways also leading to many shortages in Europe and the U.S. Also China is pushing its Belt and road initiative, so it can trade with Europe, Africa and Asia without being intercepted by the US navy
You're forgetting, and I hope China will too, about the massive Air buildup on Diego Garcia. An attack on Okinawa would unleash U.S. non nuclear weapons coming from all angles. China knows this. The one question remains. Would the U.S. get into a war with China over Taiwan? I don't believe it would.
90% of all advanced semiconductors are made in Taiwan. You're an absolute fool if you think the US would just sit by and let China either take over that production or let them destroy it.
China is focused and they know exactly what they want, US still debating among themselves on what direction they want to go, and what leader should lead them. typical end of an empire and raise of another, not much US can do about it really.
You have a point but it’s not that simple. The US has obtained a unique position in world history. It is the most powerful and dominant nation that has ever existed, not even the british empire at it’s peak could claim to have near unrivaled control of the world’s seas, and it does not have that position simply by having a strong military or economy. The us has the best geography in the world. Complete safety from any kind of invasion from any direction. Direct access to the two largest oceans in the world. Massive land area that does not have issues of overpopulation. Huge oil and gas reserves. Among other things, China does not have those qualities. It is possible that the US is on the decline permanently. It is also possible it is in a slump, that wouldn’t be something that’s never happened before. The roman empire nearly collapsed in the third century before stabilizing.
@@Larry_Suave You forgot one important detail, once it start declining (as it's the case now) it will also split into multiple small countries that will fight each other forever, it's the way life is, any history students knows that.
@@Larry_Suave We're talking about empires, not countries or nations. while it has been thousands of countries and nations throughout history, there only handful empires that none of them have survived to date. US is no difference, again any junior history student would easy confirm this. I would higly recommend an unbiased YT channel called "Kings and Generals" for you, I will guaranty that you will learn a lot.
@@yetanothername1131 Us is not an empire. Though their action is very similar to empire just how they move there military it just different to empire. It is true there is possibility. As above mentioned US has geographical location. Which you can't dent it.
If China can cut off internet access on the US mainland, they will win and vice versa. I've had experience witnessing people lose their shit at hotels when internet access was down. Back in the day the number one hotel problem that would cause the most complaints would be no hot water. Now it's internet. It's made even worst if you charge guests $15/day for highspeed access
When it comes to Taiwan, China’s problem is the island’s’ geography. There aren’t many suitable beaches to land on and the whole island has been preparing for an invasion for many decades. China has a huge military but they cannot all crowd onto small spaces that might be optimal for taking the island .
The incredibly dicey circumstances outlined here convince me even more of the unlikelihood of a Chinese first strike. It’s just not in China’s interest to start a conventional war at this time when they are already so handily winning at commerce and trade.
@@TeleologicalConsistency If China REALLY wanted to expose the West, what China in my opinion OUGHT to do is drop all claims to Taiwan and seek to formally normalize relations with the tiny island. Look, Taiwan is nothing compared to China - they have them beat by every conceivable metric. Ok, Taiwan is a hyper advanced state with an arsenal pointed at the mainland, but China has the same pointed right back and is far more capable of defending itself. Any provocation or action by Taiwan would DEVASTATE them. They must know that. Just normalize relations with them. Taiwan will already fall into China’s orbit in the next 50 years with its continued economic dominance.
@@Grimloxz That's not going to work at all. Taiwan's elites and government have been captured by the US already. Trying to make any sort of deals based on mutual interests is totally pointless. It's akin to trying to reason with a zombie. Before any kind of reconciliation can happen US interests and US backed elites must be purged from Taiwan. Since the Taiwanese are incapable of doing it then it falls to China to step in to liberate the island.
@@Grimloxz Remember Yuri Bezmonov's lectures on subversion. A society that has been fully subverted cannot be freed from the inside. It requires military intervention. Taiwan is exactly this type of situation. It's been fully subverted by the US over the course of the last several decades.
@@TeleologicalConsistency EXACTLY. That’s what I mean by “expose them”. The narrative has been that it’s the CCP that’s being obstinate when I’d have it that as you said, it’s Taiwan’s US influenced government and elites who are. China wouldn’t be “negotiating” as much as revealing the game. Just reverse trajectory and say “OK, be your own nation, we’ll even recognize you” and watch them squirm.
you made this a head to head, I get it, it's good youtube content. But the US has alleys that would be in this scuffle. China is aware of this, they aren't going to go into a hot war with the US.
US let's Fly 400 Nukes hitting the 50 largest Chinese Cities and 50 of China's largest Dams. Then drops another 200 Nukes in the Aftermath. Saving about 3500 Nukes just in case Russia feels frisky. China's 400 Nukes my get 50 strikes on US oh what an Equal Exchange.
How would you covertly invade using cargo ships? Real military transport ships would work even less well since then it wouldn’t be covert at all. Only thing I see as working would be RoRo, but those are civilian ships and not made for invasions. They couldn’t store tanks, maybe APC’s. This really is a stretch.
Only when you start seeing the Chinese start being interested in Transport ships thats when these Countrys will Wake up but just like WW2 all it will do is poke the Bear like The Japanese did in 1941
@@totifaddye6587 it's all a plan to restart the american war machine, unite the world against a common foe and like after every world war, league of nations, united nations next will be united world of America lol look at 13:08 for that amazing Chinese quality 🤣🤣🤣
@@hendrikdependrik1891 yes because these “navy ships” were actual fishing boats. They are just staffed by navy personnel. It’s quite smart, but also very underhanded. I assume you’re joking about disguising an aircraft carrier as a cargo ship. That could only work if you took an actual cargo ship and put small drones in some of the top containers launchable by catapult. Not really a match for a “true” aircraft carrier.
Why strike US forces; just invade Taiwan and see how lame America's response would be. At most US will send a few drones over HK to show it means business. That's it.
Keep in mind, they fought the Chinese civil war and the communists won. They fought with North Korea during the Korean War. Also they fought against India in the Sino Indian war in 1962. Also the Sino Vietnam war in 1979.
You fail to mention the economic havoc that China would wreak on the US in the event they start a war. The Chinese economy would be prepared for such a blow, but the US would be surprised and markets would go absolutely to hell. I wouldn’t be surprised if a war at that scale caused a crash like 2008 again. To get things back to normal, everyone who wants the markets to stabilize would be lobbying for peace ASAP, and the media would be flooded with anti-war messaging.
I doubt if China started attacking and trying to invade Taiwan, Americans would just let them do whatever they want and try to sue for peace when China was done taking over other countries. Yes there would be economic issues for the US but for China it would be worse since they are both highly dependent on economic trade and in a war with the US they would have to deal with a naval blockade to their country. Unless China could control the waterways around the world like the US does (which is incredibly doubtful), the US would still be able to trade with ALL their allies around the world and China would be limited to just Russia. Also the average American would realize that letting China take over other countries at will would be no better than letting Nazi Germany take over Europe and other countries at their leisure. America has become a pro-military/pro-war country in the last hundred years or so and more or less EAGER to fight wars when the opportunity presents itself.
The us can start getting labor in other places which is the main thing China provides. The us provides china with a good sum of needed materials and also would have Allie’s such as the Middle East and austrilia in this war plus India making it where china wouldn’t beable to have steel and be extremely low on fossil fuels/oils that are two thing really needed in a war.
@@openyourmind2840 Wrong. U.S. depends on global trade more than China does. The world depends on China for global trade more than the U.S. Therefore, the American economy would be hit worst. Americans have a highly inflated standard of living because of imperialism that they waste so many resources. China has been learning to live without them
US Advantage: More connections to more countries (greater cross section of relatives from every country). So greater global support Chinese Advantage: Greater tolerance of losses, concentration of power in their government, resistant to subversion
@Esphaeras Praestans yes it is that internal security that ensures they catch the subversion early on and stamp it out. But you could be right. Because I also believe that the act of stamping down on the population does normally create problems of its own. But the Chinese seem to be a very obedient people. My sister taught in China back in the 90s and she said in the town they arrived in there was a billboard in English welcoming her and her husband, he was an engineer for General Electric and she taught English to school children. She was used to teaching in the deep south of the United States and the juxtaposition was very jarring she said. They were super obedient and listened to everything, she said it was kind of alarming
@Esphaeras Praestans by the way China is currently waging what is known as fifth generation Warfare against the United States. You should look it up it is quite interesting
@Esphaeras Praestans Well said and thanks for your perspective. Yes, I am very familiar with the Khmer Rouge. I have read The Killing Fields and I have read first they killed my father. This is one of the reasons I am so anti-communist. They just cannot seem to help themselves to cause such long-term suffering. I worked in a department with another scientist and she was from Taiwan and was a lot of fun and a very good friend. Some of the Chinese students there took her work and tried to pass it off as their own. She was very giving and she did not make an issue of it. She told me that likely because of the one-child policy, that most of the Chinese students she had met were very selfish because when you grow up as an only child you never learned how to share. So they took her research and called it their own. It was very shameful but she was definitely the bigger person and ultimately got a big patent for her work. I do not dislike the Chinese people, obviously it is the CCP that is the problem. Just like there are a lot of good folks in the United States but our government has started to become an oligarchy rather than a government of the people.
Wrong. The only advantage the US still hold is its overwhelming military. If the gap closes even further you not gonna have global support anymore. You've not been treating your allies fairly for decades. If they don't fancy your odds of winning anymore they'd turn on you 100%. Do you really think Japan, Germany, France, Korea, Italy wants to be pushed around by you? Do you really think the world can't survive without USD, US debt and the periodic economy crisis that you caused?
interesting, although I noticed some mistakes your 20% carrier activity is seriously underestimated for a fact, I know that 1 or 2 are stationed at Afghanistan for the withdrawal support also, 2-3 are currently active in the SCS and I know they testing the newest version of carrier, this one is loaded out with supplies and can be rushed to the SCS to, on the way there will be some exchange of planes. that's a total of 5-6 active out of 12, so 40-50% is a more accurate estimate I also think that after the withdrawal that AC will go home first and after join the others in the SCS during Trump's administration with the NK thing, Trump send 4 there at once, while another was stationed near Iraq and Afghanistan for ISIS issues. so they have or can have Trippel your estimate in the SCS very quickly. The attack on Japan will not go as planned, when the US sees a large formation of bombers heading their way, they'll shoot, might be some dmg due to waiting till the last moment, but at this time, they'll kill some before they drop bombs but I do agree with the surprise ground assault there, might work and do serious dmg as the US wont suspect this. lastly, if this is all while going for Taiwan, I doubt China has reserves left, so any counterstrike will push them back quickly and possibly have to abandon the landing in Taiwan as they can't do both at once. They'll have to keep forces near India to
Yes. And you'll sail up the Yangtze and slaughter the peasants armed with sickles, than you will loot and burn the Summer Palace, force a treaty to pay you trillions in war repairs, force half of China to become opium addicts and take best Chinese ports for your enjoyment for next 100 years. Wake up for your Imperial drams! It is 21th century and if not for the English language, you'd be just an insignificant country.
@UCZWTrHaEjsyzytuwZQZ4dQQ No. If it wasn't for us deciding to dismantle our empire we'd still have a very large power position. We decided to take steps back to allow the US to take the role of "Global policemen" as naturally the US economy was out growing the British economy. China is only in a position of military growth because it steals technology and the nations it steals from don't want to nuke them over it. If it was the other way around the outcome would be different. Btw a little country, islands of the North West of Europe dominated 1/4 of people of this planet and all its oceans. What's your shithole country done?
@@BroadHobbyProjects Just stay on your island and enjoy what you have stolen from the rest of the world at the cost of hundreds of millions of lives and unimaginable suffering. Don't go to South China sea for war. You will never return. .
@@b.griffin317 its not that. Both of their economies benefit the most from trade with the PRC and have more to lose than, lets say, Japan if they side with one country against the other. SK in particular also needs PRC´s cooperation for mediating and dealing with NK.
@@alanch90 @alanch90 That's what I mean. They could tell Kim to cause enough trouble to keep SK busy and non-subtly imply if SK gets involved they would sponsor a NK agro move. One of the purposes of the SCS atoll bases is to keep Vietnam and Philipines in check.
@@shubhamanand19 CHECK GENERAL GD BUKSHI SPEACH HOW MANY TIMES PAKISTAN TEACHES VERY GOOD LESSON TO DIRTY AND ALWAYS CRASHING INDIAN ARMY AND AIR FORCE A LOT OF TIMES INDIA CRYING TO USA PAPA FOR HELP
I would not bet on a military with next to no deployment experience and no naval warfare experience. Also the cutting of sea supply routes would strangle the Chinese. They are dependant upon food imports and do not have a land infrastructure connecting them with their suppliers. Assuming the US sanctions would not have ended that relationship by then....
Thank you! You are so correct china has complete net zero in live battle experience in military officers missiles gen 5 fighter jets ships subs blah blah blah any combat soldier worth his salt will tell you there is absolutely no substitute to have actual warfare on your resume. China's entire military is very immature.
Yes, historically it has always been a good idea to underestimate your opponent... "do not have a land infrastructure"... Wait what? Where do you come up with this nonsense? China has had land infrastructure connecting it to the rest of the continent since 115 BC. Infact they get most of the food that they don't grow themselves, from other Asian countries and from Europe.
@@RenseBakker sure this why china has imported more grain mostly from india ever since the country existed more flood and drought on there current history still importing more beef them ever i could go on and on china is far from food self sufficient this not my opinion but fact.
@@kenfelix8703 Their Navy is not capable of protecting supply lines that long, which also run through several non friendly controlled chokepoints. In any case they would take massive supply hits, even if they manage to operate in the Indian Ocean. It is not a fight worth fighting for them.
The video neglects to consider warfare by other means via the internet. Web based attacks on US infrastructure could severely hamper a US response and could cause serious communications gaps. Without electricity or water any efforts to load ships and send reinforcements would be in vain. Corrupting logistics databases and communications could do the same thing.
You are watching too many movies. Cyber can cause problems but with the flick of a few hard switches they can make their networks internal with no external inputs at all. Most of the control systems are hard switch systems. TH-cam might not work for the average person but powerline's and water will.
![ปฏิเสธไม่ไหว (Crush on you) - LIPTA feat. No One Else [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/NBw1jF342vw/mqdefault.jpg)
Go to nordvpn.com/covert and use code COVERT to get a 2-year plan plus 4 additional months with a huge discount in their special new deal!
It’s risk free with Nord’s 30 days money-back guarantee!
How does china deceive the location of a landing in Taiwan or even an attack somewhere else? This is dumb
Are you also going to make a video detailing how the us could win a war with China? Seems quite fair that way. Otherwise you wouldn’t be objective, but just one sided.
This is a wishy-washy analysis. Thumbs down.
ONLY those species who get off of this Earth and out of this solar system/galaxy might continue to survive, (if it can even actually be accomplished for various reasons), everybody else is eventually going to die and go extinct. We do not have to defeat our enemies, we only have to outlast them beyond this Earth. Nature will wipe them out for us.
3 basic ways out of this galaxy to potentially continue to survive, (as a species or whatever evolves from our species):
1. Long way: Outward through the galactic plane.
2. Medium way: Outward through the angled solar system's plane.
3. Short way: Outward, about 90 degrees from the galactic plane, as adjusted for the galactic magnetic lines of flux for a smoother ride. (Basically 'rise above' the collapsing spiral shaped galaxy).
* And music, don't forget music. It's going to be a long trip.
I know how they can win: they keep doing what they’re doing and we keep doing what we’re doing.
You are wrong, as a person living in Hong Kong, I can tell you China is killing itself at an astonishing speed.
I can also say the weapons disparity is swinging more in US favor. China challenged us at what we do best and they tipped their hand too early. Prepare for doom.
@Heinrich
Rising on sand
Both would collapse soon after if they wage war anyways. There's no real benefit in war in this day and age. On one side is a corporate dystopia, the other is a communist dictatorship. The unaffiliated would be eating popcorn as long as both won't end up throwing nukes at each other.
@@eugene7145 nah china is fine. Hk is fucked tho, with Shanghai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou and all the other port, your lazy ass just can't compete
do i still need NordVPN in a nuclear winter??!
Yes
Yes, more then ever, it's crucial. No more questions.
@@Veldtian1 Very well placed answer, if the ad says, it's because it's true.
Depends if the roving bands of canibals can track you over the internet or not
That is still only a theory at this point,
Japan is playing an increasingly large role in the defense of Taiwan. And as Japan continues to militarized… thats only going to become a bigger thorn in China’s side.
and yes, just a thorn that takes about 5 secs to remove.
@Bobo Mbutu look at this lying leftist
South Korea and North Korea don't approve Japan's re militarise, so they, both Korea's, are China's allies.
@@shinchan-F-urmom south Korea a Chinese ally? Hah! China is the biggest reason why NK exists in the first place. You're forgetting the tens of thousands of US troops and hardware sitting on SK soil/
@@cbrtdgh4210 still Japan is SK's biggest enemy, not NK. Also the only issue which unites SK and NK is Japan and comfort women
One thing I d say would weigh in the US military favor is the fact that it has a lot of real life battle experience. This experience is hard to simulate.
"One thing I d say would weigh in the US military favor is the fact that it has a lot of real life battle experience [of losing wars one after another since WWII -- Korean War, Vietnam War, Iraqi War, Afghan War, . . .] This experience is hard to simulate." Fixed it forya. You are very welcome.
@@michaelngan99 either way, you learn more from failure then you learn from success
Accompanied by the U.K, a tiny land that has never surrendered, and no one has had the balls to invade in modern times.
@@michaelngan99 Lmaoo Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan were political losses not combat losses America outclassed the other side in combat but the American public lost faith in the operations to go along with no clear operational objectives that could be sold to them, Korea is a stalemate and is a story of two tales before Chinese intervention and after even after Chinese intervention look how many Chinese died compared to Americans, before Chinese intervention America was winning the fight, North Korea couldn’t penetrate the 38th parallel line lost Inchon, Seoul fell next and then America penetrated deep into their territory. Americans can fight and are good at it, the key is the American public, and clear objectives and clear, factual reasons for doing so
@@user-ex7qx4pv2u You didn’t understand at all American public opinion only matters when it comes to the political objectives as far as military objectives we’ll be fine. The important factor is time. America will need to be swift and quick in defense of Taiwan it can’t be more than five years. At the end of the day the government will protect its assets and Taiwan is very important for the US if the public knows that and isn’t ignorant to that fact then all is good
Earth: *is destroyed
Aliens: Ha, those guys probably didn't use nordvpn.
Lol there just waiting us out
Your dogo is cute
That’s why I love it
Aliens: Still trying to reverse our Tech since we goofed and crashed==US Airforce.
Clearly you need to launch drones from shipping containers to take your enemy by surprise ;)
this comment is sponsored by Erusea
Haha ace combat references loved it
i understood that reference
@@fegenein862 "Yup, we have nothing to do with it." - Unidentifiable Northeastern Osean.
check out the club-k shipping container missile system
I don't think China would directly attack US forces if they wanted to take Taiwan. I believe the more likely scenario would be China declaring Taiwan part of their territory and simply impose a soft blockade around the Island. They would then intercept any ship suspected of carrying military equipment.
The US would then have to decide if they want to escalate and use force to restore free access to Taiwan. In that scenario the US would be forced to fire the first shot, and that would make it much more complicated to get public opinion behind the conflict, while China could easily paint the US as the aggressor.
Or the US is willing to give up a pilot in exchange for casus belli and China is forced for surrender either immediately or eventually.
Imagine if China killed a pilot woman of color...
If China puts up a blockade around Taiwan, then other countries could blockade the straight of Malacca.
Blockade is an act of war…
@@jan22150 BRI exists for a reason you know
@@MK_ULTRA420 sacrificed for the greater good. i like the way you think.
You mistook one thing. China’s objective is never to reach out to US continent and attack there. It just wants to keep Taiwan and defend any US/Japanese military from going in. That would be a relatively smaller mission.
It’s a pain in the ass to have non-friendly carrier strike groups wandering near your borders isn’t it?
@@kerbodynamicx472 why is that, cn never needed to go around the world doing slave trade/ bombing other nations with depleted uranium warheads/ chemical attack 3-4 generations using the orange bomb/ occupy all the oil production regions. So why the need to have allies wandering around the world? Cn always BUYS goods from others with real cash, not like you lot, robbing/invading/killing is in your blood.
+15 social credits from winnie da poo
@@libertyprime8964 when your little brain couldn’t reason, you had to be a bit throw out that credit thing. Pathetic.
@@padtag1742 NO answer needed here, just go on, can't talk to demented person.
‘The greatest victory is that which requires no battle’ - Sun Tzu
So… trade wars, spying and sabotage?
Covid
Nowadays they got bomb drop from the sky so sun tzu shit not working😂😂
@@Hotsauce1936 It can still work, you can fire some cruise missiles at them from the sea level, and then fire some ballistic missiles which brings death from above. While the enemies are busy intercepting the cruise missiles, the ballistic ones goes in for the kill
@@J_X999 between china and the us, who has used biological weapons the most...hmmmm
War is not about winning it's about making the other side losing more than it can afford until they give up
But is it that winning?
@@critical_shot9292 well if the other team gives up yes...yes it is
@@critical_shot9292 it's like your car on fire but the guy you hate his house on fire you still lost but he lost more so technically you win
That system is called “winning”
If China loses, their last resort will be a nuclear Holocaust
Notice how before every war the Enemy underestimates it
Everyone think they can win is what you are trying to say, and i highly doubt that this is the case before every war
Yes, true. China does seriously underestimate the US. This is a huge mistake for them.
I dont underetimate chinas ability to expend ALOT of troops, the CCP does not care about its people.
@John Smith And which country is that?
@John Smith what a mooroonnnn
1. All the limitation you mentioned applicable to the US is also applicable to China;
2. China cannot launch its ASBMs as they risk US nuclear response. Pre-launch ambiguity is real.
This is why the US is building aegis ashore on Guam.
How well would these systems work against their Dong Feng 21's and 26's?
@@Joe_FridayThe US Navy has SM3's and SM6's for that purpose
The SM-3 can take out ICBMs in their midcourse phase, we also have the ground based midcourse defense the fastest missile in the world capable of mach 33, which can also take ICBMs out in their midcourse phase, no other nation has midcourse phase interceptors, all others are terminal.
@@ThatCarGuy What is the ground based midcourse missile you speak of? The only ones I can think of are GBI missiles but they're based in the US.
@@Joe_Friday Correct they are based in the US and once again they are midcourse phase ICBM interceptors. There radar range is around 10,000km as the AN/TPY-2 from THAAD which China and Russia already accused the US of using it to spy has almost 5000km range, and it's only a terminal stage interceptor that's mobile. The LRDR the GBMD uses is not mobile. much larger and more powerful. But it's specs are classified so it could be over 10,000km. Sources below.
"The GBI consists of a 3-stage solid rocket boost vehicle which can place it's payload of an Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle outside the earth's atmosphere. In order to do this the missile must reach an escape velocity of more than 6.9 miles per second. This hypersonic speed is several times what a 7.62mm bullet travels leaving the muzzle of a gun. To put it another way, it reaches a speed of approximately Mach 33."
"The AN/TPY-2 Surveillance Transportable Radar, also called the Forward Based X-Band Transportable (FBX-T) is a long-range, very high-altitude active digital antenna array X band surveillance radar designed to add a tier to existing missile and air defence systems. It has a range of 2,900 mi (2,500 nmi; 4,700 km)"
Remember though, the US did manage to deploy SIX carrier groups around Iraq in 1990-91. Wartime can generate a lot of initiative. That said, the US had several months to get large numbers of fighters, bombers, tankers, airborne early warning, transports, helos, fighting soldiers, airmen/women, marines, ground support equipment, etc in situ.
@John Smith especially with there new df21d anti ship ballistic missiles
@John Smith a carrier group is anything but an easy target lmao. There is a reason china is building carriers of their own. They are the most powerful military weapons on the planet.
Every fish in the ocean might be a drone with a mini bomb nowadays. Hundreds of mini bombs togather can make a big explosion.
It's like nanotechnology, but a bit bigger . Aircraft carriers could be an easy target , too easy to spot .
@@Ahoooooooo
So are you saying the Chinese navy will be vunerable to drones?
War is not just about equipment, there is also economic strategy. Today People's Republic of China is not the same as Iraq. It is the second largest economy, third strongest military in the world. War is not just about how advance you are and how many carriers do you have. Don't be naive
The new cold war isn't coming, it's already underway
Yup only China's much tougher economically than the USSR Id like to see America crumble for once
@@Acrillian it will be like the reverse of the previous cold war. By 2030, China economy will be larger than US. By 2050, it is projected to be 50% larger.
@@sgdhskjvcdjkfsdffwe Trump tried to slow them down with the trade war but it didnt work.
@@Acrillian didnt know you want the social credit system that bad 💀💀💀
Worse its already begun, xi even did a speech on how much they couldnt give a shit if they decided to subjugate taiwan
Same as black hawk down the enemy knew the US doctrine and use it to his own advantage it was quite a success
China: *attacks U.S.
U.S.: *attacks China
Japan: *attacks China
Koreas: *attack each other
Russia: *attacks Ukraine
Germany: *attacks France through Belgium.
German : srry force of habit
UK: *invades everywhere*
India attacks Pakistan, isreal attacks Iran 🇮🇷
Why would Germany attack France? Besides, the Germans don't have the modern equivalents of those erstwhile plentiful panzers, nor Stukas, for starters. Contemporary German command staff would still be more worried about Russia...which would have to go thru Poland, anyway. Poles would likely not stand for that.
@@HRHolm-bi6zu you dont get the joke.
It would end up being an economic war of attrition. Without NATO importing Chinese products how long could china last financially vs how much can NATO produce without the assistance of China manufacturing
It'd likely hurt China way more. The West can go without cheap TVs, and could simply work more on repair and recycling what they already have until alternative sources get set up; China depends on the open seas for food, fuel, and funds from exports, and scaring away civilian ships with crossfire could lead to China quickly emptying its treasury paying for overland alternatives while increasing domestic "stability" operations against domestic unrest.
No! What do without muh latest mobile devices?
Just a note. China would not be reliant on finance in a total war scenario.
@@Redsauce101 Yeah, international finance is pretty much null and void during the war, and only re-asserts itself in the post-war settlement phase.
@@richdobbs6595 That too.
I'd would refer to the fact that China is able to mobilise its entire population overnight to whatever is needed without any need for funds or finance.
China's plan to counter relies heavily on their ability to replicate their adversaries military tech and tactics. Unfortunately it also depends largely on the individual abilities of the PLA/PLAN and the training given to those servicemembers.
All the advanced military technology China has aquired over the last few decades is only as effective as their targeting systems, GPS and the problem-solving skills of their missile force.
Of course, German U-boats off the coast of the US wasnt seen as a possibility until they were already a viable threat to commerce and travel. It would be unwise to assume the CCP are unable to reach out and touch us.
You don't think the Chinese are smart enough to effectively use the weapons they've created? They know the entire US playbook and have studied their tactics for decades. Neither the US nor Chinese forces have fought a great power since Korea (which the US did not win) so the US does not have an edge in experience just because they have been fighting wars continuously.
Also, China's military objectives do not require a 100% victory. They just need a stalemate to win. If they can hurt the US badly in the Pacific to convince the entire world will shift away from the US dollar as the reserve currency. After all, the US will certainly just print several trillion to fund their China war. If they borrow that much money but China can still cause a stalemate (i.e. US lose pacific bases, supercarriers) global investors will lose faith in the US regardless of China's military losses. Why bet on a country that is already saddled by unrepayable debt and ALSO not the CLEAR winner in a conflict?
It will not be Chinese weapons that destroy America, it will be a loss of faith in America that does it in.
@@kuanged India and Australia entry in war 😂😂😂😂
@@kuanged china lost the Korean war as well because south Korea still exist.
It's even worst that thanks to Biden F-up in Afgan, China has a treasure trove of American Tech now. Same with OBama. We just lost a small advantage point now no thanks to Biden. Impeach Biden, Harris, Nancy, and recall all Democraps from all offices in America. Defund the Democrap party. Don't believe me, then Deep dive every Democrap bill and law and see how it sounds good but in the end screw you over like the forbidden fruit that it is from the Garden of Eden. Start cutting open the fruit people before you bite into it. Eve didn't learn the first time. She had better learn now along with Adam.
@@achong007 - this civil war mentality is what weakens America. Despite the crude simple nature of the CCP dictatorship, and the low bar of law and order it represents, the bulk of the population support it.
While Americans hysterically and pointlessly hate each other.
A lot of the “if’s” mentioned have to go just perfect for China to actually win.
Which is why a war with the US is the last thing China wants
Judging by recent events, they could just leave us alone and we will win it for them.
Now do a video on how The US military could win against China
It can't
it already has and only now start to lose it out of stupidity
It would require US submarines winning big victories forcing the Chinese to stay in harbor with a stand off on both sides. Then the US doesn't replace its loses and China goes back to a massive build up and tries again in a few years.
@@armanaryn8372 it can. Though by no means assured
@@winstonsyme7672 I could imagine subversive tactics taken against the three gorges dam and river it sits on could go a long way in paralyzing their industry. Not to mention the casualties sustained if that dam broke.
What about the economic damage of going to war with your biggest customer.
That hasn't stopped people before.
@@Stinger522 well the global economic market is much more interconnected in the modern day than it used to be. That is one of the main reasons why wars between powerful nations haven’t happened almost at all since ww2. The damage it would be economically and politically is not worth anything you could gain. The same could not be said 100 years ago.
Lol, Australia in a nutshell
We can go without cheap TVs, but China can't go without food and oil
Maybe I missed something, but it would seem to be really stupid for China to attack US forces on Okinawa in a scenario in which Japan is not pulled into the fighting. In such a scenario, Okinawa is probably neutralized as a base of operations against China due to diplomatic pressure from Japan, in-case anyone has forgotten - Okinawa is Japanese territory. An unprovoked attack on US Forces in Okinawa would almost certainly draw Japan in, (heck an attack on the uninhabited, Japanese-administered Senkaku Islands is pretty likely to cause Japanese intervention,) significantly escalating the conflict, and making it significantly more difficult for China to secure a quick and decisive victory.
I normally enjoy your videos, but I think this one is quite a stretch.
Yes, however maintaining the First Island Chain and the trade that goes to Japan through Taiwan's eastern side is very crucial too. So it depends on whether or not China thinks that Japanese involvement is a foregone conclusion or not.
@@jevinliu4658 True, though 'legally binding' defense agreements aside, I doubt Japanese intervention would have any support amongst the Japanese public unless China did something provocative like attacking Japanese territory, military assets, or citizens. If the government intervenes without clear and domestically popular justification, then it will be that much easier for China to pressure Japan to return to the sidelines and cease its intervention.
yep, it is really crazy for japanese, to think about war against china.
today is not 1937.
JAPANESE NEVER DARES TO INTERVENT!0N IN REUN!F!CAT!0N 0F CH!NA TA!WAN!!!
JAPAN 0NLY G00D EN0UGH T0 DEFENCE IT'S SELF!!!
N0 F0R ASS!ST 0R ATTACK 0THER C0UNTR!ES!!!
Okinawa is USA colony
One of the sure way to victory is your enemy is over confident and underestimate you.
dont think the us underestimates china. there is a reason the military budget keeps getting bigger
1:54 - Skip an AD
Thanks
How can the chinese operate the controls when they're hands are covered in honey.
Oh Bother
Eeeey orrrrre
their
Being sarcasm wont bring you anywhere, in fact, with such thinking is the reason why the West are falling behind to China. Always live in your own imagination and ignored the facts and underestimated them.
@@yewsingooi9573 But without imagination, how would the west invent all the useful and beautiful things for china to copy? 🤔
Although it'd cost China the use of a strong diversion, taking Taiwan first would make a subsequent pushback against the US in the 2nd island chain much simpler. Without a clear, secure route into the Pacific, it doesn't really matter how many naval assets China has, as they are so few possible corridors they can take through the 1st island chain that they will always be sitting ducks. If she can secure the Taiwanese east coast and Orchid islands, then her odds of a successful offensive against Guam or Okinawa improve markedly.
That is silly.
They can ask Taliban a question, "how win a war against US with troops in flip flops?" Or "how to get 85 billion worth of equipment in 10 days?"
Sad but true
@@benjamindixon3512 85 billion of equipment given to a allied government not the usa leaving it & if we really wanted to we could bomb & air strike all equipment left behind but most of the equipment is old asf anyways & will be nonoperational in a year 1-2
How to win a war against superpower:
1. Let them easily counquer your whole country
2. Destroy your economy with constant attacks and warfare.
3. Superpower realises ocupation is not worth it's price
4. Victory, now you can enjoy your destroyed country with medieval economy.
@@hphp31416 Afghanistan was a medieval country before the war. No NAVY, no Airforce, no Social Security. Only an idiot would have attacked them. Oh pardon me idiots are ruling the US at least for the last 30 years.
@@artiombeknazaryan7542 its also one of the most mineral rich country on the planet.
pls make a book about something related. i have finished reading red dawn after you recommended and started reading trial by fire, which im loving to too! This type of stuff is right up your door!
greeting from portugal!
Would like to suggest you a book if I may :
A man's view of the world by Lee Kwan Yew .
Lee is a former Singaporean president and was nicknamed " The Bruce Lee of Politics ".
Hope it will give a few new perspectives of some of your thoughts😊😊
@@taktsang5563 I will check out in the future. Thank you for the suggestion!
Red dawn will never happen...who wants to occupy that mess of a nation USA ???
@@rradical4714 You are very welcome！ 😊
Maybe up your alley?
"tchhhhhyynaahhhhh"
_-some orange dude_
He's gone, we have a new idiot now.
When he will be reinstated? I heard he got supposedly reinstated on a monthly basis lol
CG 70 that was my ship! That was also the back of the head of a certain captain that we compared to capt. Brannigan from Futurama. God we where so glad when we got a new capt.
Its not even a contest anymore. Its merely one side waiting out to systematically annihilate the other at their convenience.
The joke when the commentator says " china has to figure a way out" while the U.S has everything figured out..
Exactly, I'm British & know for a fact the US solution to everything is throw more money at a problem until it goes away. They tried it in Afghanistan so when it fails they've got no answers strategy or know how.
So they run away leaving their allies in the crap, & 68 billion dollars worth of weapons as a parting gift. Honestly you couldn't make it up of how unprofessional & pathetic they are.
@@DavyRo Well, I wouldn't agree with your statment, The war in Afghanistan was covered by the Oil from IRAQ and the mess they left in Afghanistan is so huge cleaning it up is almost impossible...and they left a mess deliberately...watch 2022
If you think the US Military has everything figured out, I invite you to revisit the botched retrograde operation from Afghanistan.
Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face...
Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake - Napoleon Bonaparte. That's why China should never interrupt the USA and let the USA continue to do what they are doing
It's the us who's doing it not china.
A few things to keep in mind. The PRC is the number one importer of crude oil and foodstuff and eatable oils. It would not need to be a close restrictions but the threat of war raises shipping insurance rates that are unsustainable
A few things for you to keep in mind. Russia is the world's 2nd biggest exporter of crude oil. Its biggest customer is its neighbour - China. Russia & China are defacto allies. There's 2 pipelines running from Rus to Chi already with a 3rd in the planning. What we're you saying about shipping again?
@@DavyRo haha. War starts prices triple be it a pack train or a pipeline I would not bet too heavily on Russia as an ally who would see no gain on a war PRC is bound to lose
@@DavyRo Really a pipeline you say? A stationary object what runs for MILES & MILES. One Brimstone or a Sidewinder would put a stop to all of that.
Lol i was rechearching about this and then i see a notification that you posted about it
You forgot to mention Taiwan's defense system of the island which is planned to slow down a possible Chinese invasion.
The US saw the assembly of Iraqi forces on the Kuwaiti border and would have known what was about to occur, but they couldn't have stopped the invasion. I get that same feeling in this instance, but I will dissect the issue from my point of view as someone with a little experience, albeit not at this scale.
I don't see China invading Guam or any place the US claims hegemony. I also don't see them attacking Japan's holdings, mainly because it is not tenable in the long run, as it is not as if the Japanese government would be overrun or anything, and with US support counter-attacks would be relatively simple, at the very least to drop ordinance and prevent resupply. It just couldn't be held. Guam would be easier, but China could not avoid the escalation factor, which does not work in their favor. They stand to gain nothing by starting a nuclear war, and as such are unlikely to take actions that would trigger such a conflict, thus their targets will be, as they have been up to this point, relatively small. The islands they have taken to the present time were taken precisely because they knew there would be no consequences militarily speaking. But also because those islands will serve them well in an invasion of Taiwan, thus they had a purpose. This is just like Russia's violation of sovereign territory to secure a naval base that has important strategic implications in future power projection.
Taiwan is quite different from the other potential "main" targets in my opinion. Once Taiwan is seized, there is no more territory where the government and military forces can regroup. Any counterattacks would be quite predictable from Guam, Japan, or Korea, and the only avenues of approach are land or sea. You need not worry about ground forces any longer once Taiwan is overrun.
I disagree that China would have to keep a Taiwan conflict down to a few weeks to be successful. Rather, they would have to keep it to about 4 or 5 days to prevent getting bogged down and increasing the uncertainty to the point that victory is no longer probable. What I mean is that all major military resistance on the ground must be quelled in that time period. You cannot have large military forces that still pose a threat on the ground, as this will increase American resolve and result in increased air activity by giving the US a force to support. Once Taiwan has been taken, the US air response will be lessened, as there is no longer a military objective to be achieved. If you cannot take the territory back, your only other option is to bomb it, but the civilians are friendly and you don't want to hurt them, and you can't really achieve anything through air attacks alone. You can destroy all the military targets you want at that stage, but it will not accomplish anything without retaking the island.
If their assembly can be done relatively quietly for support materiel as well as infantry, a quick unification of the sea-based forces would be possible, and could be kept hidden from satellite observation simply by not uniting till it is time for the operation, as well as signals intelligence given good discipline and practices. The US would notice the movements, but the question is would it be enough time to have any effect on the outcome? And as for airpower, that would be even easier to hide from signals intelligence in my opinion. But the kicker is that as long as assembly is done at a relatively fast pace, I don't think the US reaction will be fast enough to really stop the operation, regardless of whether it is picked up or not, granted that China can assemble and launch in less than 72 hours. That is the window I would give them for the best outcome, but they could take longer and still succeed. It would take much prior preparation away from the coast, which likely would be picked up to a large degree, but perhaps would not be understood. Deception would be helpful. I don't know just how streamlined Chinese C2 is, and it would be challenging, but if anyone could pull it off it would be them.
If I were in charge of landing troops in Taiwan, I wouldn't focus on the obvious approach from directly across the strait. I would want to land most of the amphibious forces further around the island, which would be more difficult, but without engagement restrictions I think China could, with acceptable losses, just throw a wall across the water that lands on and crushes Taiwanese defenses. But I also would not make the amphibious portion of the assault the main effort. I would save that for airborne forces. The short distance makes this quite do-able. One unknown factor is just how long it would take China to suppress the air defenses on the island, and whether it could be done before the US responds in force. Taiwan has been preparing for one major military engagement for a long time, so you cannot discount their preparation, which still could simply be outmatched in sheer numbers. That goes back to the importance of assembling in a specific manner that doesn't draw attention, over a long period of time.
China would not have to defeat US air support coming to Taiwan's aid, because it likely would not be fast enough or with enough force to prevent the initial beachheads and landing zones from seeing strong Chinese forces embedded on the island. Once that happens, I feel that China could succeed. Even with prior warning in Taiwan it is possible that they could still succeed.
As far as US intervention, if history has taught us anything it is that the US is never ready for the initial attack, which just bolsters my opinion that initial success is quite possible.
hey iooojjjjjjjnn im
You don’t see China’s lack of large scale military experience and no amphibious landing experience a problem? Not to mention there are only 2 logical approaches to the island by sea and China doesn’t have the equipment to circumvent that. It would have to seize a port virtually undamaged to have a chance at a successful push into Taiwan. Deception is also difficult to pull off since there’s only 2 times a year that’s feasible to conduct a month long amphibious operation.
If China somehow took Taiwan via force then they could not withstand the full force of the rest of the world. China would lose half of their landmass and would be forced to be a developing nation for another 50-100 years, assuming the war doesn't go nuclear.
The problem is a 4-5 day invasion is impossible US pacific command is ready marines up and down Japan and throughout Asia, air groups ready to go China would not be able to accomplish this also can’t forget about Taiwan’s own military and the geographical challenges of crossing the Taiwan Strait
About your first point on the US must have seen the assembly of Iraqi Forces, Yes, of course but mind you that's exactly what US wanted.
This was a great laugh. Thank you.
Sun never sets on the British Empire eh?
@@roxorz309 ????
Why laugh? We couldn't even handle Afghanistan.
You couldn’t defeat China in Korea when they were weak asf, you think you could defeat them now? Haha
@@alexy6093 we handled Afghanistan, the politicians screwed it up
Just made my day lol!! Love your videos man!
The one thing that I believe that you overlooked is the scale of this invasion of Taiwan that you mentioned. I would imagine it would have to be at least 1/2 the size of Operation Overlord. That means that this invasion would be easily detected. This means a strike like the one that you mention must be done as a preemptive strike months before any invasion of Taiwan. Otherwise troops will be on alert and things like sending 1,000 guys on a transport with no way of being supplied and reinforced to Okinawa is not going to work.
IIRC thte distance is 4-5 times bigger. Somewhere I've heard that the invasion fleet would be on the open for many hours.
@@mustavogaia2655 Oh, its much worse than that. The D-Day landings took 150K men and nearly 7,000 ships. There is no way to gather a force 1/2 that size in anything less than days, once it exists. That is why this kind of strike has to be before any invasion. Heck, the world will have years of warning before this could even possibly happen.
Also there are 200k Taiwanese troops on the island, don’t think China can spare that many ships and planes if they are “also” invading Taiwan.
Maybe they mistake Taiwan with Singapore?
There is also the consensus that the D-Day Landing of June 6th, 1944, could NEVER have happened the way it did, if the Germans had spy Satellites in Earth orbit to detect the Invasion and that it was heading for NORMANDY and NOT the Palais De Calais, as Ike led the Germans to think it was.
@@rdelrosso2001 Generalship is paramount.
I always loved the red vs blue background music/intro music
Attacking Guam - which is US territory - and hope for a modest response which could lead to a tactical advantage for China after the conflict? Does not sound reasonable.
After reading "Irresistible Revolution" my confidence in the military is very low.
Damn, you guys are scapegoating Marxist more than the Third Reich.
@@richpryor9650 Blaming someone for something that theyre guilty of is not a scape goat. be gone troll
I believe the good old strategy for the US and Allies will still work well....just take control of the choke points like Malacca Strait, The Suez Canal, The Strait of Hormuz, etc.
It will devastate the Chinese export and oil imports, eventually hurting the Chinese economy so much that it has to give up.
These videos if you look precisely 1. The dude isnt apart of a Central Intelligence agency these 2 countrys arent stupid nor is the U.S. alone it isnt a idiot these youtubers look for local information while Intelligence Agencies go off of Federal Info so its funny to see this type of stuff becuase these same types of videos were made but for WW2 it wasnt a video but recorded conversations of Locals talking about it
what would that achieve? china is going to take taiwan in a week with no other military firing a shot. retroactive finger-wagging won't do anything.
@@Ass_of_Amalek agreed, in current situation I too believe that US will not go to war just for Taiwan, I was saying from a US vs China perspective if a war really breaks out, which is the theme of the video as well.....and even though the threat is real, Chaina has a long way to go to invade Taiwan considering possible high death toll on Chinese side as well and post war consequences.
@@tamalmondal8550 post war consequences #cancel_china lmao
@@arjen20 LOL, in india #boycott_china works
Good luck finding the attack sub hanging out in Okinawa. I don't think a covert Tanker will be able to reach Okinawa and have boots on ground.
Ikr. Not to mention as soon as Okinawa was attacked every western country would just firebomb china.
I think the most likely scenario China would push for is to force the Taiwanese government to surrender within days, which I can see happening to be honest. Not because they're so weak willed like the Afghan government but because the cost inflicted by missile barrages and a blockade would be too great to withstand for the Taiwanese population, used to very high living standards.
I believe too the "far right" in taiwan wants china to take over anyways....
US needs more light carriers and hypersonic weapons along with intelligence and drone technology. Imagine cruise missiles with the capability of mimicking aircrafts.
US just needs less politicians and bankers
@@dizzywillow2162 that too
*We did just get the Spy Chief of China to Defect to the US a few months ago, along with a huge Treasure Trove of Secret Data he brought with him. Dozens of Terabytes (cant remember the exact number they said) of Secret Data.*
*The Value and impact of this cannot be overstated. He was like 2nd or 3rd ranked in Xi's Faction which is a major blow to Xi and China.*
@@levelwithz3779
That's news to me. Any sources?
@@levelwithz3779 yeah, doubling down on sources here.
Nice analysis! Hope that level-headed prevail and prevent disastrous war from happening.
How much hope do you have reading the comment section?
Step 1: divide the US into the political left and right and further polarize through social media
Srep 2: infighting
Step 3: ???
Step 4: profit
and all achieved for america by america.
I'd rather be forced to speak russian than chinese
I'd rather be forced to speak chinese than spanish
I rather take anything other than Chinese
Iran or South Sudan even
Whats the deal with China? Its a great country. The CCP thats the problem.
@@Lavalle.mp3 i dont hate their country i just hate the chinese
Well Russia is diverse and won't try to assimilate you at least. China strategy is always of full assimilation. Ironically they built a modern natsoc state.
In the case of Taiwan, China would seek to create the same kind of war as what happened in Korea and the Falklands. This would be where there's a sort of designated zone of conflict where conventional fighting between the great powers is permitted but going outside risks a nuclear exchange.
This would vastly mitigate (though not totally eliminate) the US initial advantage with forward positions in Japan and the RoK. If the PLA can lock down the water and airspace around Taiwan, and seize enough land there, any counterattack would either have to be in the teeth of PLA antiship/anti-aircraft defenses or risk escalation into a nuclear exchange.
yeah, the scenario of China attacking the US to invade Taiwan makes no sense. It's not the Chinese way of war and it would be a total waste of resources. Downvoted the video.
China has not enough nukes to assure mutual destruction with USA
China would have to build a real navy and air force first.
@@deprecor1 I think it's propaganda. This guy also made a comment in his video that the U.S. didn't know Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked and pretends not to know China attacking U.S. bases violates NATO Article 5 which drags all members without exception. He makes it seems as American allies have a chance of not being involved or like America will agree to peace after they are attacked. They have been suing for war and they will not stop because it's the best way to end China and war is the only thing the U.S. is genuinely good at.
Correction: China has more Hulls in Ships but the USA has far more Tonnage in Ship Size and Firepower! The Chinese Aircraft can't even compare to US Airpower.
Except in their ability to fall apart without notice.
US has better trained pilots...🙂
It is great to have this confrontation concept to learn how to defend better
China: Write That down, Write That down
And yet none of y’all wanna have diplomatic ties with Taiwan and you are talking about sacrificing your countrymen’ s lives to protect Taiwan?
This narrative is very much different than the ~8 pentagon war games where according to the pentagon , we got our asses handed to us. Cleary the assumptions in the ~8 pentagon war games in 2019, 2020 were very different than the narrative here. The most recent pentagon war game held in march 2021, as reported in the news had us winning but with huge losses on both sides. But that simulation was for a war in 2030, and several emerging technologies are assumed to be deployed on our side. It'd be interesting to know under what assumptions we had our assess handed to us.
Some assumptions might be that we believe their carrier killing balistic missles work and our carriers never get within 1500 miles. Since our F18's, F35 only have a 500 mile range and we don't have that many tankers for mid-air refueling, the carriers are totally out of the fight. Another assumption is that China has munitions where one or two hits would render the all run ways at Anderson AFB useless. (in fact we're practicing having our jets take off from freesays.) And how would Okinowa be defended? The people of Okinowa have for decades wanted our military off their island, if a war was fought on their soil, would they demand the US leave Okinowa after this conflict? Clearly the assumptions in this video are different than the assumption is the pentagon war game simulations in 2019,2020.
Did those wargames account for allies, or were they just simulating a one-on-one?
When war starts, all assumptions go out the window.
Those assumptions in 2019 and 2020 could have been having to "fight tonight" with whatever is on hand in theater now, while the 2030 situation would have factored in new platforms
as well as both US and allied preparations over 10 years up to 2030 putting us in a better tactical position.
@@TheLAGopher the problem with the 2030 estimate is that it probably had a bunch of "pie in the sky" BS that probably will be vaporware.
China doesnt have nordvpn🤷♂️
To ask a serious question, unleashing the Corona virus when healthcare care costs in the USA are out of control and a Achilles heel? What if an adversary sees that the US would collapse economically and therefore be domestically too distracted or weak to fight? Maybe the combination of animosity between rural/urban, cyber attack, pandemic has changed our focus already?
or maybe a good media campaign can convince people to forget about those things and focus on a more important threat...
people often forget that part of why the US did so well in wwii was because of the efforts of its citizens in production. apparently the US alone supplied 2/3rds of the supplies for the allies during the war because of a national effort.
@@nicelypenn Well, after the war our infrastructure was intact while the rest of the world was destroyed. We also amassed huge amounts of gold BEFORE WWII under the Trading with the enemy act of 1917. After the war, Breton Woods made the $ the reserve currency of the word and secured American hegemony. Since 1973, the gold window was closed and even though productivity per worker grew rapidly in the US, the wages and wealth of the working class stagnated. None of the gains in productivity or the stock market trickled down to the middle class.
"Unleashing the coronavirus"
If you read this, please unleash less then 5 minutes if your life and look up "event 201" in any search bar.
A global coronavirus pandemic exercise from a month before covid.
Look at who hosted the pandemic practice exercise on their page.
Not China, the white knights we saw on TV.
Their latest global pandemic readiness exercise was called "catastrophic cantagion".
If Afghanistan and Vietnam beat the USA, the real question is: how could China lose?
By having a large navy to sink, an air force to shoot down, ports to blockade and and economy to destroy. While very powerful, China is also very vulnerable because any serious action would be a conventional war. That makes a very, very big difference.
That’s true, invading China is virtually out of the question…. But maintaining a blockade and cutting it off economically and withering it down from the outside is a much different type of fighting and war.
You can always learn from your failures and I'm sure that US must be very wise by now.
Asymetric war =/= conventional warfare
@Bulk Nuts China had owned Vietnam for thousands years, what are you talking about, Yankee
The latest US Military war game where this exact scenario was run, showed the US and its allies lost fast and lost comprehensively.
Idk what makes you think what you presented is anything close to plausible but, no worries. According to intelligence I've read, China may invade Taiwan as soon as NEXT month...September.
Looking forward to an update after it actually happens irl.
Btw, the reason for all militaries to do physical war games is to habituate the enemy to practice strikes. Then it's not practice. You can maintain tactical surprise while everyone watches that way. Think deeper.
Its been said that they could invade next month.... every month for like the past 2 years
Wasn’t it only US vs China ?
@@thechaozrevenger404 Nope. Japan, Australia, and the Philippines. IIRC.
The US side lost so fast and so comprehensively there is now an effort to completely change how the US Military fights
Think about that. The commanders.that force military men to walk.around in high heels is.gonna reform and update US Military doctrine.
We.r fk'd.
the only way the US could win is if SK, vietnam and India joined the effort, but they wont
You do know that the us likes loose on purpose to get an increase in funding right?
"It takes a long time to prepare a carrier strike group"
Which is why we constantly keep them active all over the world... and only phase one out when we have a new one ready to replace it.
History dictates that it has always been about resources, and the power over them.
Oil
US blockades oil to China.
Fun fact: Americans don't realize it, but Taiwan is the bait to set up a killzone for China to lure then eliminate US forces cheaply there
@@slslbbn4096 it same I see Taiwan similar to pearl harbor in world war 2 a bait by the American.
@@goda7137 except Taiwan and the encroaching waters are all within kill range of most Chinese missiles.
A perfect killzone. Only the blind won't be able to see it
20 years and 2 trillion for world misery, not the best way to make alliances
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Gotta cut the cord sometime. After that length of time and training, they should have been able to take care of themselves.
Right now, and in the near-mid term, the key to a Chinese victory in some Taiwan invasion has to be political strategy. Even if they manage to invade successfully, if the U.S. decides to call together a coalition to kick them out, they will be only slightly less helpless than the Iraqi Army was during the Gulf War. They can't project forces far enough to protect their trade routes, and militarily they lack the mass or technology to go toe to toe with the U.S., much less the U.S. and a bunch of allies.
I imagine China would attempt to politically confuse and divide any support for Taiwan, using techniques similar to what Russia did when it invaded Crimea. It's a much harder sell, but given the right circumstances, it may not be impossible. The success or failure of such a strategy is probably mostly dependent on the Taiwanese government's ability to fight without formal orders and direction from their leadership, and the ability of the government to make sure it doesn't fall into the hands of turncoats during the confusion. If there is clearly a war going on, I don't think China will be able to diplomatically keep the rest of the world at bay.
Win? We'll all be lucky to survive! No freakin' winners!
China can NEVER stop the US from blocking maritime trade to China,
if the US so desires.
Meanwhile, China can never blockade the US. We don't have choke points, the way China does in the Malaccas.
Yep that's true, and if you look at it NATO and her Allies can survive without doing business with china while china can't survive without NATO and her Allies.
You are forgetting that the USA and Europe are the biggest trade partners of China, meaning that in case of war they won't be trading anyways also leading to many shortages in Europe and the U.S. Also China is pushing its Belt and road initiative, so it can trade with Europe, Africa and Asia without being intercepted by the US navy
You're forgetting, and I hope China will too, about the massive Air buildup on Diego Garcia. An attack on Okinawa would unleash U.S. non nuclear weapons coming from all angles. China knows this. The one question remains. Would the U.S. get into a war with China over Taiwan? I don't believe it would.
The importance of Taiwan to the US is insane. If the US wants to keep it’s advance in technology they need to protect Taiwan.
90% of all advanced semiconductors are made in Taiwan. You're an absolute fool if you think the US would just sit by and let China either take over that production or let them destroy it.
You don't understand what place Taiwan has in the free world. Everyone needs it to be free because of computer chips.
China is focused and they know exactly what they want, US still debating among themselves on what direction they want to go, and what leader should lead them. typical end of an empire and raise of another, not much US can do about it really.
You have a point but it’s not that simple. The US has obtained a unique position in world history. It is the most powerful and dominant nation that has ever existed, not even the british empire at it’s peak could claim to have near unrivaled control of the world’s seas, and it does not have that position simply by having a strong military or economy.
The us has the best geography in the world. Complete safety from any kind of invasion from any direction. Direct access to the two largest oceans in the world. Massive land area that does not have issues of overpopulation. Huge oil and gas reserves. Among other things, China does not have those qualities.
It is possible that the US is on the decline permanently. It is also possible it is in a slump, that wouldn’t be something that’s never happened before. The roman empire nearly collapsed in the third century before stabilizing.
@@Larry_Suave You forgot one important detail, once it start declining (as it's the case now) it will also split into multiple small countries that will fight each other forever, it's the way life is, any history students knows that.
@@yetanothername1131 that is not a certainty whatsoever. There are many cases of powerful nations going through a slump and coming out of it.
@@Larry_Suave We're talking about empires, not countries or nations. while it has been thousands of countries and nations throughout history, there only handful empires that none of them have survived to date. US is no difference, again any junior history student would easy confirm this. I would higly recommend an unbiased YT channel called "Kings and Generals" for you, I will guaranty that you will learn a lot.
@@yetanothername1131 Us is not an empire. Though their action is very similar to empire just how they move there military it just different to empire. It is true there is possibility. As above mentioned US has geographical location. Which you can't dent it.
This just seems a lot like a high-tec pearl harbor / midway.
If China can cut off internet access on the US mainland, they will win and vice versa. I've had experience witnessing people lose their shit at hotels when internet access was down. Back in the day the number one hotel problem that would cause the most complaints would be no hot water. Now it's internet. It's made even worst if you charge guests $15/day for highspeed access
Yes, Taliban is no match to US force as well.
Exactly, after twenty years of war against the US the Taliban has been complete dest.... oh they have Afghanistan now lol.
When it comes to Taiwan, China’s problem is the island’s’ geography. There aren’t many suitable beaches to land on and the whole island has been preparing for an invasion for many decades. China has a huge military but they cannot all crowd onto small spaces that might be optimal for taking the island .
You have no idea how little interest Taiwan has in fighting war.
In war...there are no winners, only losers & thats the people and destruction that happened.
USA cannot be beaten in war when Emma with 2 moms is in control of the patriot missile defense systems.
The incredibly dicey circumstances outlined here convince me even more of the unlikelihood of a Chinese first strike. It’s just not in China’s interest to start a conventional war at this time when they are already so handily winning at commerce and trade.
That's why the US is doing everything it can to provoke a war by trying to get Taiwan to declare independence.
@@TeleologicalConsistency If China REALLY wanted to expose the West, what China in my opinion OUGHT to do is drop all claims to Taiwan and seek to formally normalize relations with the tiny island. Look, Taiwan is nothing compared to China - they have them beat by every conceivable metric. Ok, Taiwan is a hyper advanced state with an arsenal pointed at the mainland, but China has the same pointed right back and is far more capable of defending itself. Any provocation or action by Taiwan would DEVASTATE them. They must know that. Just normalize relations with them. Taiwan will already fall into China’s orbit in the next 50 years with its continued economic dominance.
@@Grimloxz That's not going to work at all. Taiwan's elites and government have been captured by the US already. Trying to make any sort of deals based on mutual interests is totally pointless. It's akin to trying to reason with a zombie. Before any kind of reconciliation can happen US interests and US backed elites must be purged from Taiwan. Since the Taiwanese are incapable of doing it then it falls to China to step in to liberate the island.
@@Grimloxz Remember Yuri Bezmonov's lectures on subversion. A society that has been fully subverted cannot be freed from the inside. It requires military intervention. Taiwan is exactly this type of situation. It's been fully subverted by the US over the course of the last several decades.
@@TeleologicalConsistency EXACTLY. That’s what I mean by “expose them”. The narrative has been that it’s the CCP that’s being obstinate when I’d have it that as you said, it’s Taiwan’s US influenced government and elites who are. China wouldn’t be “negotiating” as much as revealing the game. Just reverse trajectory and say “OK, be your own nation, we’ll even recognize you” and watch them squirm.
you made this a head to head, I get it, it's good youtube content. But the US has alleys that would be in this scuffle. China is aware of this, they aren't going to go into a hot war with the US.
Very well done and thank you.
US, nukes Three georges dam, wins
We dont even need nukes Moabs could do the job
As if that would be easy?
Tomahawk strikes will be enough
@@QasimAli-to5lk as easy as turning a couple of keys, inputing a quick code and pushing a couple buttons
US let's Fly 400 Nukes hitting the 50 largest Chinese Cities and 50 of China's largest Dams. Then drops another 200 Nukes in the Aftermath. Saving about 3500 Nukes just in case Russia feels frisky. China's 400 Nukes my get 50 strikes on US oh what an Equal Exchange.
How would you covertly invade using cargo ships? Real military transport ships would work even less well since then it wouldn’t be covert at all. Only thing I see as working would be RoRo, but those are civilian ships and not made for invasions. They couldn’t store tanks, maybe APC’s. This really is a stretch.
Only when you start seeing the Chinese start being interested in Transport ships thats when these Countrys will Wake up but just like WW2 all it will do is poke the Bear like The Japanese did in 1941
@@totifaddye6587 it's all a plan to restart the american war machine, unite the world against a common foe and like after every world war, league of nations, united nations next will be united world of America lol look at 13:08 for that amazing Chinese quality 🤣🤣🤣
The Chinese can literally make navy ships look like fishing boats. So why not make a mockup of a cargo ship while it's actually a aircraft carrier
@@hendrikdependrik1891 oh yes and submarines that get stuck in fishing nets giving away important positioning, turbine data and acoustics super smart
@@hendrikdependrik1891 yes because these “navy ships” were actual fishing boats. They are just staffed by navy personnel. It’s quite smart, but also very underhanded. I assume you’re joking about disguising an aircraft carrier as a cargo ship. That could only work if you took an actual cargo ship and put small drones in some of the top containers launchable by catapult. Not really a match for a “true” aircraft carrier.
Why strike US forces; just invade Taiwan and see how lame America's response would be. At most US will send a few drones over HK to show it means business. That's it.
The usa will not allow TSM the worlds biggest chip producers in the world to fall to china.
CHina has never been a belligerent force. There is no reason for the USA and China to even think of war. It is a crazy thought.
Keep in mind, they fought the Chinese civil war and the communists won. They fought with North Korea during the Korean War. Also they fought against India in the Sino Indian war in 1962. Also the Sino Vietnam war in 1979.
You fail to mention the economic havoc that China would wreak on the US in the event they start a war. The Chinese economy would be prepared for such a blow, but the US would be surprised and markets would go absolutely to hell. I wouldn’t be surprised if a war at that scale caused a crash like 2008 again. To get things back to normal, everyone who wants the markets to stabilize would be lobbying for peace ASAP, and the media would be flooded with anti-war messaging.
I doubt if China started attacking and trying to invade Taiwan, Americans would just let them do whatever they want and try to sue for peace when China was done taking over other countries. Yes there would be economic issues for the US but for China it would be worse since they are both highly dependent on economic trade and in a war with the US they would have to deal with a naval blockade to their country. Unless China could control the waterways around the world like the US does (which is incredibly doubtful), the US would still be able to trade with ALL their allies around the world and China would be limited to just Russia. Also the average American would realize that letting China take over other countries at will would be no better than letting Nazi Germany take over Europe and other countries at their leisure. America has become a pro-military/pro-war country in the last hundred years or so and more or less EAGER to fight wars when the opportunity presents itself.
US economy is much more resilient than Chinese.
China means less to the us gdp then the us means to china buddy.
The us can start getting labor in other places which is the main thing China provides. The us provides china with a good sum of needed materials and also would have Allie’s such as the Middle East and austrilia in this war plus India making it where china wouldn’t beable to have steel and be extremely low on fossil fuels/oils that are two thing really needed in a war.
@@openyourmind2840 Wrong. U.S. depends on global trade more than China does. The world depends on China for global trade more than the U.S. Therefore, the American economy would be hit worst. Americans have a highly inflated standard of living because of imperialism that they waste so many resources. China has been learning to live without them
US Advantage: More connections to more countries (greater cross section of relatives from every country). So greater global support
Chinese Advantage: Greater tolerance of losses, concentration of power in their government, resistant to subversion
@Esphaeras Praestans yes it is that internal security that ensures they catch the subversion early on and stamp it out. But you could be right. Because I also believe that the act of stamping down on the population does normally create problems of its own. But the Chinese seem to be a very obedient people. My sister taught in China back in the 90s and she said in the town they arrived in there was a billboard in English welcoming her and her husband, he was an engineer for General Electric and she taught English to school children. She was used to teaching in the deep south of the United States and the juxtaposition was very jarring she said. They were super obedient and listened to everything, she said it was kind of alarming
@Esphaeras Praestans by the way China is currently waging what is known as fifth generation Warfare against the United States. You should look it up it is quite interesting
@Esphaeras Praestans Well said and thanks for your perspective. Yes, I am very familiar with the Khmer Rouge. I have read The Killing Fields and I have read first they killed my father. This is one of the reasons I am so anti-communist. They just cannot seem to help themselves to cause such long-term suffering. I worked in a department with another scientist and she was from Taiwan and was a lot of fun and a very good friend. Some of the Chinese students there took her work and tried to pass it off as their own. She was very giving and she did not make an issue of it. She told me that likely because of the one-child policy, that most of the Chinese students she had met were very selfish because when you grow up as an only child you never learned how to share. So they took her research and called it their own. It was very shameful but she was definitely the bigger person and ultimately got a big patent for her work. I do not dislike the Chinese people, obviously it is the CCP that is the problem. Just like there are a lot of good folks in the United States but our government has started to become an oligarchy rather than a government of the people.
Historically, China is very likely to have subversion, civil war, precisely because of the disadvantages you mention here. .
Wrong. The only advantage the US still hold is its overwhelming military. If the gap closes even further you not gonna have global support anymore. You've not been treating your allies fairly for decades. If they don't fancy your odds of winning anymore they'd turn on you 100%. Do you really think Japan, Germany, France, Korea, Italy wants to be pushed around by you? Do you really think the world can't survive without USD, US debt and the periodic economy crisis that you caused?
Could you give us a "How US Could Win A War vs Space Cephalopod, After Invading Hawaii"? I love these fictional topics. Thx
Yeah, man, we got a lot on our plate. Start getting ready.
interesting, although I noticed some mistakes
your 20% carrier activity is seriously underestimated
for a fact, I know that 1 or 2 are stationed at Afghanistan for the withdrawal support
also, 2-3 are currently active in the SCS
and I know they testing the newest version of carrier, this one is loaded out with supplies and can be rushed to the SCS to, on the way there will be some exchange of planes.
that's a total of 5-6 active out of 12, so 40-50% is a more accurate estimate
I also think that after the withdrawal that AC will go home first and after join the others in the SCS
during Trump's administration with the NK thing, Trump send 4 there at once, while another was stationed near Iraq and Afghanistan for ISIS issues.
so they have or can have Trippel your estimate in the SCS very quickly. The attack on Japan will not go as planned, when the US sees a large formation of bombers heading their way, they'll shoot, might be some dmg due to waiting till the last moment, but at this time, they'll kill some before they drop bombs
but I do agree with the surprise ground assault there, might work and do serious dmg as the US wont suspect this.
lastly, if this is all while going for Taiwan, I doubt China has reserves left, so any counterstrike will push them back quickly and possibly have to abandon the landing in Taiwan as they can't do both at once. They'll have to keep forces near India to
Noooo! We’re unbeatable! Aren’t we?! SOB!!!
Name ends with "in' huh😂😂
The United Kingdom has made it very clear we'd join the US against China. Plus we got some nice new naval ships and kit!
Yes. And you'll sail up the Yangtze and slaughter the peasants armed with sickles, than you will loot and burn the Summer Palace, force a treaty to pay you trillions in war repairs, force half of China to become opium addicts and take best Chinese ports for your enjoyment for next 100 years. Wake up for your Imperial drams! It is 21th century and if not for the English language, you'd be just an insignificant country.
@UCZWTrHaEjsyzytuwZQZ4dQQ No. If it wasn't for us deciding to dismantle our empire we'd still have a very large power position. We decided to take steps back to allow the US to take the role of "Global policemen" as naturally the US economy was out growing the British economy.
China is only in a position of military growth because it steals technology and the nations it steals from don't want to nuke them over it.
If it was the other way around the outcome would be different.
Btw a little country, islands of the North West of Europe dominated 1/4 of people of this planet and all its oceans.
What's your shithole country done?
@@BroadHobbyProjects Just stay on your island and enjoy what you have stolen from the rest of the world at the cost of hundreds of millions of lives and unimaginable suffering. Don't go to South China sea for war. You will never return. .
Bruh you still living in the Sun Never Set empire?
@@alexlazar4738 island are sinking I'm suprised
China do not have national Army but private arm force of CCP only.
Just keep in mind that South Korea and Vietnam already declared themselves neutral.
They have greatest exposure to PRC agro, so makes sense.
@@b.griffin317 its not that. Both of their economies benefit the most from trade with the PRC and have more to lose than, lets say, Japan if they side with one country against the other. SK in particular also needs PRC´s cooperation for mediating and dealing with NK.
@@alanch90 @alanch90 That's what I mean. They could tell Kim to cause enough trouble to keep SK busy and non-subtly imply if SK gets involved they would sponsor a NK agro move. One of the purposes of the SCS atoll bases is to keep Vietnam and Philipines in check.
They're neutral until they're being invaded by the Chinese.
@@hendrikdependrik1891 Why would China invade any of those or any other? What are China´s benefits or interests in doing so?
VERY GOOD EPISODE AGAIN LOVE FROM PAKISTAN
😂😂😂😂 see I found A begger.. Nation here..😁
@@shubhamanand19 CHECK GENERAL GD BUKSHI SPEACH HOW MANY TIMES PAKISTAN TEACHES VERY GOOD LESSON TO DIRTY AND ALWAYS CRASHING INDIAN ARMY AND AIR FORCE A LOT OF TIMES INDIA CRYING TO USA PAPA FOR HELP
@@shubhamanand19 why are some Indian so salty
@@DANI-of3jm having a quote for you..lol.
#dont_teach_your_dad_how_to_have_son..😂
@@MuhammadIqbal-uu7ic because our son betrayed us...many time.. , 🙂
I would not bet on a military with next to no deployment experience and no naval warfare experience. Also the cutting of sea supply routes would strangle the Chinese. They are dependant upon food imports and do not have a land infrastructure connecting them with their suppliers. Assuming the US sanctions would not have ended that relationship by then....
Thank you! You are so correct china has complete net zero in live battle experience in military officers missiles gen 5 fighter jets ships subs blah blah blah any combat soldier worth his salt will tell you there is absolutely no substitute to have actual warfare on your resume. China's entire military is very immature.
But this lack of food (and oil) is why China needs a navy. Would you not build a navy if you where in their boots?
Yes, historically it has always been a good idea to underestimate your opponent... "do not have a land infrastructure"... Wait what? Where do you come up with this nonsense? China has had land infrastructure connecting it to the rest of the continent since 115 BC. Infact they get most of the food that they don't grow themselves, from other Asian countries and from Europe.
@@RenseBakker sure this why china has imported more grain mostly from india ever since the country existed more flood and drought on there current history still importing more beef them ever i could go on and on china is far from food self sufficient this not my opinion but fact.
@@kenfelix8703 Their Navy is not capable of protecting supply lines that long, which also run through several non friendly controlled chokepoints.
In any case they would take massive supply hits, even if they manage to operate in the Indian Ocean.
It is not a fight worth fighting for them.
Brilliant work.
China has literally never had a better chance to check the US forces in the Pacific. This administration is such an embarrassment.
The video neglects to consider warfare by other means via the internet. Web based attacks on US infrastructure could severely hamper a US response and could cause serious communications gaps. Without electricity or water any efforts to load ships and send reinforcements would be in vain. Corrupting logistics databases and communications could do the same thing.
You are watching too many movies. Cyber can cause problems but with the flick of a few hard switches they can make their networks internal with no external inputs at all. Most of the control systems are hard switch systems.
TH-cam might not work for the average person but powerline's and water will.
Well, you know nothing about our connection to the internet do you.
Chinese generals: "WRITE THAT DOWN! WRITE THAT DOWN!"