Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Would the U.S. Still Lose the Naval War of 2015?
Real Clear Defense ^ | July 2, 2013 | Harry Kazianis

Posted on 07/08/2013 1:48:59 PM PDT by neverdem

Over the last few days I have begun the exhausting, yet wonderful process of moving. Considering the fact I have not moved in twelve years and I am relocating from a suburban single-family home to a small apartment urban setting in Washington D.C. I have some tough decisions to make on what to keep and what to trash.

In going through my endless collection of foreign policy, national security and defense articles (I print everything) I found quite the gem that needless to say made the save box. Instead of cleaning out our soon-to-be former home, I decided to take a small break (please don't tell my wife) and travel down memory lane.

The article in question is one you may know. From the Winter 2010 edition of Orbis, James Kraska's "How the United States Lost the Naval War of 2015" was always a piece that I have gone back to over and over again. In fact, the article was one that sparked my interest in anti-access/area-denial (A2/AD) and the DF-21D. Several years back, myself and fellow CSIS:PACNET WSD Handa scholar Daryl Morini had planned to write a follow-up piece -- but alas -- other projects always seemed to get in the way (I am still willing if you are my friend!).

The article creates a fictional scenario where China "sinks" a U.S. carrier. The scenario itself is rather, well, interesting:

"Americans woke up to a different world the day after the attack. The war was over almost as soon as it had started. Outmaneuvered tactically and strategically, the United States suffered its greatest defeat at sea since Pearl Harbor. The incident—could it really be called a 'war'?—had been preceded by a shallow diplomatic crisis between the two great powers. No one in the West expected the dispute to..."...

(Excerpt) Read more at realcleardefense.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: china
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-87 next last

1 posted on 07/08/2013 1:48:59 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: warsaw44

read


2 posted on 07/08/2013 1:51:00 PM PDT by warsaw44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Zer0 will surrender to any and all Islamic or socialist/Marxist powers that declares war on the US.

It’s not even a question one has to answer. It is a given.


3 posted on 07/08/2013 1:57:29 PM PDT by Vaquero (Don't pick a fight with an old guy. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

BM


4 posted on 07/08/2013 1:58:45 PM PDT by al baby (Hi Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero


5 posted on 07/08/2013 1:59:31 PM PDT by Iron Munro (The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

It depends on how independent and nasty individual Naval commanders get.


6 posted on 07/08/2013 2:01:46 PM PDT by BwanaNdege ("To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize"- Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Japan and India are definitely preparing for the time when the USN may not be the top dog in Asia.

http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2013-05-29/news/39602234_1_indian-ocean-south-china-sea-comprehensive-convention

I have felt that the USN’s over reliance on supercarriers is an Achilles’ heel that the Chinese were bound to exploit. The scenario discussed in this article is a bit far fetched, but not totally unreasonable.


7 posted on 07/08/2013 2:03:08 PM PDT by Ronin (Dumb, dependent and Democrat is no way to go through life - Rep. L. Gohmert, Tex)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

You’re damned right!


8 posted on 07/08/2013 2:03:27 PM PDT by laplata (Liberals don't get it. Their minds have been stolen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

Remember William Tell’s second crossbow bolt (arrow).


9 posted on 07/08/2013 2:03:36 PM PDT by BwanaNdege ("To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize"- Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

China “sinks” a U.S. carrier.

One? We have many more not to mention lots of Boomers still active. Someone sinks one of our CVN’s I surmise they will get more than a proportional response (as soon as NObama leaves office that is).


10 posted on 07/08/2013 2:04:12 PM PDT by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Skimmed the article. Interesting, but losing a single ship, even a nuclear carrier, ≠ losing a war.
11 posted on 07/08/2013 2:04:38 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

Remember several years back there was an article reporting that a Chinese sub got behind a US Carrier and we didn’t know?


12 posted on 07/08/2013 2:11:06 PM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (The reason we own guns is to protect ourselves from those wanting to take our guns from us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: warsaw44
read

Unfortunately, that rarely happens in freeperland.

13 posted on 07/08/2013 2:11:50 PM PDT by Jacquerie (To restore the 10th Amendment, repeal the 17th.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: warsaw44

American Aircraft carriers don’t sail alone.

So ‘just’ sinking the carrier still leaves the rest of the fleet.

So I don’t see the Chinese rescuing American sailors. I see the fleet rescuing the rest of the sailors and any Chinese approaching being sunk.


14 posted on 07/08/2013 2:12:22 PM PDT by Pikachu_Dad (Impeach Sen Quinn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
losing a single ship, even a nuclear carrier, ≠ losing a war.

Wars are lost in the White House and Congress.

15 posted on 07/08/2013 2:14:27 PM PDT by null and void (Republicans create the tools of oppression, and the democrats gleefully use them!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

It depends on who the president is at the time. If it is Obastard, you can guarantee that his response will be to run away and try to figure out why we made the Chinese do it.


16 posted on 07/08/2013 2:16:37 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Inside every liberal and WOD defender is a totalitarian screaming to get out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The article creates a fictional scenario where China "sinks" a U.S. carrier.

How about a fictional scenario where the Chinese launch an SLBM off Catalina Island prior to an economic summit...?

17 posted on 07/08/2013 2:19:14 PM PDT by papertyger (Blessed are the flexible for they shall not be broken....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikachu_Dad

That’s just what I was thinking.


18 posted on 07/08/2013 2:19:42 PM PDT by EternalVigilance (America's Party - 'We're partisans only for principle.' www.SelfGovernment.US)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Barring political surrender, the Chinese navy (the PLAN) would not fair well in blue water operations against the USN.

That is not to say that a cake walk is a given.

The Chinese could very well deliver some serious blows, especially with a surprise attack, but everything after that would go down hill for them. First, they would have no choice but to come out and fight. Their supply of oil and their exports would suddenly become USN property, and only defeating the USN in blue water operations would get them their stuff back.

USN attack submarines would be waiting, as would USN task forces made up of multiple carrier strike groups. Their satellites would be blinded, and many of ours might be lost, but we would still have long range recon, they would not.

You can’t win blue water Naval engagements against aircraft carriers except with nuclear submarines and/or other aircraft carriers. They don’t yet have nearly what it takes in those departments. If the Chinese mainland makes operating our carriers too dangerous, then we step back and make them come to us to get their trade routes back, advantage USN.

USAF long range support would also appear at the second island ring, perhaps even the Taiwan, if a war had started and the Chinese hadn’t seized it yet.


19 posted on 07/08/2013 2:19:43 PM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I think the author needs to go back to reading his Star Trek Generation comics (or just give up the closet space to his wife).

I just don’t see that scenario playing out. Despite the military’s deep cuts and pandering to political correctness, I still think it has a little more fight in it than presented in the article.


20 posted on 07/08/2013 2:19:47 PM PDT by Thorliveshere (Tais deau sá taghdedaul!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

How many of those skippers will be in place because they are female, black, or homosexual (Affirmative Action placements) and not because of years of proven service?


21 posted on 07/08/2013 2:20:49 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Inside every liberal and WOD defender is a totalitarian screaming to get out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

We would back down and Taiwan would be lost within a week....

We need to untie Japan’s hands and Taiwan’s hands because another Obama will sink both of them by lack of strength....


22 posted on 07/08/2013 2:20:55 PM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

‘In 1996, at the end of the Third Taiwan Strait
Crisis, PLA General Xiong Guangkai warned a visiting U.S. envoy, ‘‘. . . you care more about Los Angeles than you do about Taipei.’’’

Yeah, and they care more about Peking than Taiwan...

The destruction of a carrier would call for the destruction of similar value military facilities of the attacker.
Nuclear war would be inevitable- unless a cowardly fool is in the White House ... I guess that’s why the author picked 2015 for the scenario.


23 posted on 07/08/2013 2:22:57 PM PDT by mrsmith (Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat Party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: papertyger

How about a fictional scenario where the Chinese launch an SLBM off Catalina Island prior to an economic summit...?

Oh SNAP!!!


24 posted on 07/08/2013 2:23:24 PM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I hate to say it, but it -is- a done deal!
Our ‘fearless Ferdinand’, displaying a loss of words over what is going on in Egypt, and the loss of his puppet Morsi, would be completely dumbstruck and mentally paralyzed, ESPECIALLY if it were the Chinese, to do the dirty!

We have also already lost this, because all the free-thinking, knowledgeable military leaders have been sacked, in psychological narcissistic fears of a military sacking of the President. (not bad to dream, though.)


25 posted on 07/08/2013 2:24:52 PM PDT by Terry L Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: null and void
Wars are lost in the White House and Congress.

Wars nowadays are lost on television, in the Media, just like Walter Cronkite summarizing the results of the Tet Offensive incorrectly and saying we could never win--when for all practical purposes the Viet Cong had just been eliminated as a major force in the war.

The White House and Congress may make the decisions which get us in a bind, but the media proclaim wars to be "unwinnable". Then the WH and Congress respond to the polls...

26 posted on 07/08/2013 2:28:58 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan

Where did you find the “not equal to” sign?


27 posted on 07/08/2013 2:31:54 PM PDT by neverdem (Register pressure cookers! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

Ping!


28 posted on 07/08/2013 2:33:57 PM PDT by Disambiguator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
≠ just copy and paste it for the future
29 posted on 07/08/2013 2:36:26 PM PDT by George from New England (escaped CT in 2006, now living north of Tampa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: USS Johnston

ping


30 posted on 07/08/2013 2:40:50 PM PDT by laplata (Liberals don't get it. Their minds have been stolen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Would the U.S. Still Lose the Naval War of 2015?

Yup.


31 posted on 07/08/2013 2:42:19 PM PDT by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
& # 8 8 0 0 ;

leave out the spaces

32 posted on 07/08/2013 2:49:12 PM PDT by reg45 (Barack 0bama: Implementing class warfare by having no class.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

We need to untie Japan’s hands and Taiwan’s hands because another Obama will sink both of them by lack of strength....


I am pretty sure Japan and Taiwan have already untied their own hands.


33 posted on 07/08/2013 2:50:38 PM PDT by laplata (Liberals don't get it. Their minds have been stolen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: George from New England; Sherman Logan
≠ just copy and paste it for the future

I'm looking for other symbols also, e.g. less than or equal to.

34 posted on 07/08/2013 2:56:31 PM PDT by neverdem (Register pressure cookers! /s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The basic premise of the article is that the ChiComs are prepositioned to exploit, on humanitarian grounds, the sinking of a CVN by rescuing the surviving crew.

It neglects to consider the fact that a CVN doesn’t go anywhere without at least one (usually two) Aegis Cruisers, 2 or 3 Aegis Destroyers and a couple SSNs. THEY’D be the ones picking up the survivors ... and turning back (if not just blowing to hell and gone) any ‘rescue flotilla’ that suddenly appeared in the area offering to help.

There’d be MOUNTAINS of evidence showing the ChiCom culpability in the attack, from the moment the ballistic missile lit off.

The biggest misconception about a naval war with China is that the US would send one or more carriers on a “Charge of the Light Brigade” style sweep up through the Strait. Not a chance of that happening - the carrier(s) would provide supporting cover (CAP, offensive fighter sweeps, long-range SEAD) from well East of Taiwan while SSNs, SSGNs and strategic bombers (B-2s and B-52s with CALCMs) took the fight to the Chinese mainland and naval forces. The ChiComs could try to pop off some “guided” (as they claim) ballistic missiles at the carrier, but even if they had something that was actually capable of distinguishing a CVN AND accurately guiding onto a target maneuvering aggressively at 30kts, the missile would still have to run the Standard SM3 (ABM missile) gauntlet thrown up by the carrier’s Aegis escorts.

The only thing stopping the US from reducing the ChiComs to a land-based continental power (IOW, obliterating their navy) would be political restraint by the President ...


35 posted on 07/08/2013 2:59:17 PM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege

Did you know William Tell is a fictional character?

Useful as a metaphor, though.


36 posted on 07/08/2013 3:04:35 PM PDT by warchild9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The last time an Oriental power attacked our capital ships in the Pacific didn't work out real well for them.

That said, if a moron like Obama would be President he probably wouldn't do a thing about it.

37 posted on 07/08/2013 3:07:38 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Symbols in Word.

Had to open a Word document, insert the symbol and the copy and paste it into FR.


38 posted on 07/08/2013 3:10:36 PM PDT by Sherman Logan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

If the ChiComs are willing to use aircraft launched tactical nulear weapons, It would be an interesting time to be at sea.

If a war goes nuclear, it will do so first at sea.


39 posted on 07/08/2013 3:23:20 PM PDT by Citizen Tom Paine (An old sailor sends)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

Yep. Next to the pure advocacy coverage given to 0bama from day one, the Tet lie is about the worst betrayal the press has ever committed against the American people.


40 posted on 07/08/2013 3:48:13 PM PDT by Trod Upon (Every penny given to film and TV media companies goes right into enemy coffers. Starve them out!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro
What a great picture.

I'm calling it the "Scowl' reminiscent of the "Scream", one that portrays, projects, the true darkness that lies within.


41 posted on 07/08/2013 3:53:18 PM PDT by lbryce (BHO:"Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds by way Oppenheimer at Trinity NM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

We would lose no war if we had leadership that wanted Victory!
War for the US is MONEY, young lives in WAR makes money for arms dealers and equipment manufactures and Military wares!
boots foods clothing, pork war bills, building yet another bridge to no where.etc!
Big War Business does not care about Victory just the status quo!
Oops there goes another Humvee! When we could have made a parkin lot!


42 posted on 07/08/2013 4:23:33 PM PDT by Conserev1 ("Still Clinging to my Bible and my Weapon")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; Disambiguator

The only possible way for the US to lose a Naval War to China in 2015 is through out and ouit treason and criminal dereliction of duty.

I am not saying that is not possible, but come 2015, our quantitative and qualitative advantage over the emerging modern PLAN forces will still be far, far too great for them to possibly overcome.

When you add to that the Japanese, who are our close ally and who themselves have a more powerful Navy than the Chinese, the Koreans, who have a very strong and capable Navy, the Australians, who also have a strong presence, there is just no conceivable way in that time frame, short of what I described that the US would lose.

Now, as we project forces forward, there is a chance in the next 30 years that China could gain parity with us. That does not have to happen, and if we proceed forward with the newer technologies we are already working on, which the Chinese are decades away from deploying, and if we deploy them in numbers, that will also not happen.

Even if it does (which I hope and pray it does not) when you combine ourselves, the Japanese, the Koreans, Australia, and other smaller nations like Singapore, New Zealand, Indonesia, etc. who would most likely side with us, the Chinese are still far from overcoming that combined weight even in 30 years.

The real issue is, with someone like Obama at the helm, or someone of a similar ilk, will we have the will to use our forces to defeat such an enemy. That’s the question.

See all of the following:

The Rising Sea Dragon in Asia
http://www.jeffhead.com/redseadragon/

World Wide Aircraft Carriers
http://www.jeffhead.com/worldwideaircraftcarriers/

AEGIS and AEGIS-like Vessels of the World
http://www.jeffhead.com/aegisvesselsoftheworld/

US Navy - 21st century
http://www.jeffhead.com/USN21


43 posted on 07/08/2013 4:28:08 PM PDT by Jeff Head
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: laplata; All
Thanks for the ping...

Here's the key sentence in the scenario as far as I can see: George Washington was conducting routine patrols off the coast of China to send a signal of U.S. resolve.

"Resolve"??

The only "resolve" THIS nation governed by THIS President, backed by THIS Congress has demonstrated is the one that has been determined to feminize, undermine, and otherwise sabotage US prestige and security in ALL branches of the military.

Anyone disagree?

44 posted on 07/08/2013 4:28:23 PM PDT by USS Johnston (Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be bought at the price of chains & slavery? - Patrick Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo; laplata

Must be the ‘USS Tea Party’ taking that hit.


45 posted on 07/08/2013 4:30:42 PM PDT by USS Johnston (Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be bought at the price of chains & slavery? - Patrick Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege
It depends on how independent and nasty individual Naval commanders get.

And the time of month.

46 posted on 07/08/2013 4:31:52 PM PDT by USS Johnston (Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be bought at the price of chains & slavery? - Patrick Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ronin
The scenario discussed in this article is a bit far fetched, but not totally unreasonable.

The "resolve" of the CiC and the agenda of his minions make this scenario quite tempting for the ChiComs and not far-fetched at all.

What makes you assume the George Washington or ANY US Naval vessel would be ordered to defend itself? I could definitely envision the ship and its crew purposely sacrificed by the Marxist-in-Chief -- just to further humiliate the US and our military.

47 posted on 07/08/2013 4:42:16 PM PDT by USS Johnston (Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be bought at the price of chains & slavery? - Patrick Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: USS Johnston

And the time of month.


Oh crap! You’re right.


48 posted on 07/08/2013 4:42:56 PM PDT by laplata (Liberals don't get it. Their minds have been stolen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: USS Johnston

And the time of month.


“Bull” Halsey and George Patton would be beyond pissed off if they saw all this.


49 posted on 07/08/2013 4:44:33 PM PDT by laplata (Liberals don't get it. Their minds have been stolen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative
Someone sinks one of our CVN’s I surmise they will get more than a proportional response (as soon as NObama leaves office that is).

HA! (but replaced with whom? It can only Hillary or another Dem because NO Republican will ever become President with The Fix permanently in as well as a demographic disaster awaiting us thru Amnesty.)

50 posted on 07/08/2013 4:49:56 PM PDT by USS Johnston (Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be bought at the price of chains & slavery? - Patrick Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-87 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson