Thank you for the indepth analysis of this report. It almost seems like CSIS is trying very hard to make US win in their war games by using only open sourced information skewed with historic information. Not too many people really dug deep into it to point out the faulty assumptions. Keep up your good work.

@@jjc1347 Thanks friend, glad to hear you enjoyed it!

If u look at Taiwanese media ... they are all laughing at this so called wargames results

@@EurasiaNaval think you have never watched Wondering Balloon II, and wasn't aware that the Chinese would just utilize the world largest industrial base easily very easily produce millions if not billions of drones in a month 24 hours covering the sky - there will be no contest, no casualties and no solutions for the defenders, that is it, the conflict will be over in a week as people need to venture out for food ... they will give up before that

@@mikeparker2486 The fact that China is planning to spend many more billions to develop its fleets and having many more giant warships in the pipelines means it still firmly believes in conventional maritime strategies to achieve its goal of retaking Taiwan over the more exotic drone warfare.

Well said

I don’t think we want government controlling health care and education only because they can influence it to the narratives they want instead of science and facts

Yuuuuppppp! American think tanks are basically the media extension of the establishment.

DoD does also ran political unbiased war games. But those results are classified and not released to congress or public.

Also to affect public sentiments both domestically and internationally. Most government have ability to accurately gauge American military power.

Fuck shit up and get out. Nobody even dares to ask murica about why they only support taliban at first. Looking at the outcomes, murica reached their goals in afghanistan.

😂😂👍👍👍👍

I don’t think so.

@@JD-dm1uj Not from China. But from N. Korea. Kim Jung Un will not have an U.S. invading force in China to the west and S.Korea to the south. If Japan aids US in the war, N. Korea may help China by taking out Japan.

only if they blindly follow their master's commands.

Folks talk about nuclear conflict on here like it’s inevitable, the last thing either side wants, it’s not going to happen.

It is extremely unlikely that China will nuke Japan since that will guarantee that the rest of the world will turn against China. They are not stupid enough to get lured into nuking Japan. More likely will be that China will secure a diplomatic promise from Japan not to interfere with any action, and it will come at the requirement that China will not take any unilateral action against Taiwan outside of One China policy. So long as Taiwan does not declare independence, Japan and the rest of West Pacific countries will not have any objections to China wanting to reunify with Taiwan peacefully. They will also likely not support Taiwan's defense if the US or Taiwan provoke China and break the status quo deliberately. No one in the region wants war, lest of all Japan, and China. The only one that wants war is the US because they know the longer the status quo dragged on, the stronger and influential China gets. The US will lose control over West Pacific the longer this goes on. Even Japan and SK will move away from the US and be more independent. US has every reason to start a war in west Pacific and it is obvious they are trying to goad China into one. But China also knows what the US is doing so it won't move unless she knows she has support from everyone in the region.

You do your job to get a nice retirement benefit and to get directorships in public companies after you retire.

🤣🤣🤣👍🤭🤭👍👍👍

If the disbelievers of the CSIS wargames care to look at other wargames around, they will find the same results. You are all deluding yourselves, fed by CCP disinformation. Try the Grim Reapers for example. They run private DCS wargames for fun, with the latest (known) parameters for weapons. Weapon capabilities are the main determinant of victory. In a simulated battle available online with China vs US in the South China Sea, including all Chinas latest weapons (Hypo missiles, J-20, etc.) against US (F-35s, no hypo missiles), the US won. The F-35s, LRASMs and JASM-ERs made all the difference!

War games in the US sometimes serve the military-industry complex, or politicians, or both, for adding military budgets or political purposes, or both. They dont need to believe it, they just need to sell it to their targeted subjects.

Logistically speaking it's near to impossible to supply weapons to the island once conflict starts.

​@@fsxmantra yeah, unlike ukraine that share border with NATO ukraine are island country that far from US and NATO, and also because its an island nation, it pretty much easier for china to blockade

The economic sanctions on Russia have backfired, they would be wholly ineffective against China, the problem with using sanctions as a weapon is that it only works for so long before your enemies start finding a way around them. If China shuts off exports to America your economy will die, just like that, why? because almost nothing that Americans use on a daily basis is made in America and that's not a system you can decouple from overnight, it would take conservatively 5-10 years to bring that level of production back to America. China has nothing to fear from America anymore.

The evil empire has often stated that there Will Not be huge numbers of its troops on the ground in Taiwan (only a couple of hundred advisors). The U S is horrified about the possibilities of hundreds of thousands of body backs coming home. That is why they urging South Koreans, Japanese, and philipinos soldiers to be the cannon fodder in times of conflicts.

Unlike Russia, China is a world factory, many countries including the U.S. have high trade volumes with China, imposing sanctions on China will cause huge shortage of China made goods around the world, the U.S. and the world will suffer.

Small peepee energy 😂😂😂

Racism. That's why. Caucasians think they are superior to Asians and can demand anything from them whether Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Philiphines, etc.

Thanks friend! I'll keep your suggestion in mind

Please this guys a joke and shill for the ccp.

R!GHT!!!👍👍👍 THAT'S WHY THEY KEEPS BU!LD FANTASY H0PES CAN DEFEAT CH!NA M!LL!TARY!!!

Interesting funding information - I didn't realise that

@@EurasiaNaval Interesting reaction. In Mainland internet discussions this factor has been much more noted. It's like everyone talking about this topic knows and has noted this factor. But from your reaction it seems most Taiwanese didn't notice or just ignored that.

Actually, it's Lockheed Martin that manufactures the JASSM/LRASM. But anyways, makes no difference to your argument lol

@@neobr1ck I think I'm just a bit ignorant, or naive. I am too absorbed on the details of the paper and overlooked the incentives and motivations for the project

"Used Ukraine against Russia" LMAO Who attacked Ukraine? Who started the war? The US had zero troops in Ukraine.

​@@tommiterava5955Zero troops ten of thousands deads already they tell you.......!!!!!!!! In the name of mercenaries all the Nato troops and the US got slaughter the US is gay period.......!!!!!!!!!

​@tommiterava5955 Tommi are fucking stupid or just incredibly naive as fuck 😂😂😂😂

@@tommiterava5955The war started in 2014 after a US sponsored “color” revolution and US/NATO had troops in Ukraine even before then. Victoria Nuland’s phone call with US Ukraine ambassador plotting the “revolution”/coup in 2014 was leaked and you can find it easily here on YT.

Exactly, if the US cannot gain air superiority over the battle space the entire US force structure collapses.

philippine is closer to taiwan than japan. if US "invade" philippines, can china "save" philippine regime? the issue is never with japan.

@@lagrangewei The US has limited access to five military facilities in Philippines through the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, and has recently been given access to a few more. However, the Filipinos are not in favor of heavy US military presence on their islands...

North korea will enter the game...

​@@zix_zix_zix Filipinos are not in favor of US military presence if and only if we have no territorial disputes with China. 👀 -Real filipino

You can't make decisions on the assumption that your opponent is absolutely rational. Japan has always regarded Taiwan as their potential grab. You should assume that Japan would have military response.

IT'S DEPENS 0N ADM!N!STRAT!VES LEADER IN TA!W4N, IN MY 0P!N!0NS CH!NA W!LL LAUNCH M!LL!TARY 0PERAT!0NS IN 2035, IF T4!W4N KEEPS AND INS!ST STATUS QU0 C0ND!T!0NS!!!

*My personal opinion: China will won without casualties with two factors alone: drone and China's industrial might, on top of that it will be a short war*

@@russelfang7434 I would see Japan as very rational country and would clearly understand that it has nothing to win snd everything to loose. Japan is loosing faith in the US administration and the way the zuS has been short selling on the a Japanese currency. We are already seeing Japan respond by selling large amounts of US bonds and treasury notes along with shipping its gold deposits home for greater control. Should the US dollar stop being the currency of world trade there will be major reductions in US military expenditure as the US is forced from exporting its debt to having to meet its cost and to reduce its level drastically to avoid a further currency down grade.

@@kentriat2426 Rational? Japan is not rational in the light of World War II. The country likes to gamble everything. The Japanese right is getting louder. They may opt for military adventures

Yeah…

What the hell are you even trying to say? That several balloons can sink a carrier are you high?

and for that too, it took them 6 days.....to finally take any sort of kinetic action. As for using 1.1 million dollar aim9x to shot down a balloon, another example comes to mind is how those Israelis use their 3 million dollar a pop Iron dome missiles to shoot down mere home made hamas rockets costing in mere 1000s and those slow moving low caliber Irani drones with it which can easily be shot down using AAA.

Lots of BS in here, an ID missile cost around $50K, and the 9x that was used about $400K.

@@Blackbirdz2000 The Iron Dome missiles cost like 20K-40K. Not more. They are just glorified manpads.

They won't enjoy being ruled by communist

they have also missed a very highly possible scenario....if war really broke out, some Taiwanese military units might change side. I wouldnt be surprised at all.

while 1 and 2 cannot be justified until a war really breaks out. 3 and 4 are pure garbage now. 5 is a typical CCP sales peach. so thanks for sharing the CCP propaganda again, appreciate that.

your funny.

I would think that CSIS dront take account is the huge industry capacity that china have china are pretty much could replace their losses ship quickly due it huge ship industry. Meanwhile US cannot because they have lack of naval industty

"Do you want to play a game?" - Wargames.

The winning move is to provide money and arms to both sides. Double dip like the Rothschild did in both world wars. It made them stupidly rich because the winners had to honor the loans and agreements made by Germany in both world wars.

@@user-gc1hg9sp9k that would require the war to drag out for years. Although chinese industrial capacity will come into its own when it comes to missiles and drones which can be built in a matter of days.

"The only winning move is not to play" - wise words for all sides

China has enough advanced conventional subs to form a hedgerow of them spaced 10km apart along both sides of the taiwan straits, theres not a snowballs chance in hell a US sub gets through undetected or fights their way through all that

I dont think china would use a nuclear weapon on japan out of the blue like that, but japanese industrial and energy infrastructure would be a potential target.

if China ever nuked Japan they would be completely obliterated. also where are you getting this nonsense from that the US would lose? you do realize that China, along with Russia, constantly lie about their military capabilities, right?. for decades Russia boasted how they had the second strongest military in the world and now theyre losing abysmally in ukraine lmao. Guess what? China also lies about their military capabilities. And if China invaded Taiwan they would get completely blockaded by all of the US allies surrounding them. All economic trade to China would be cut off. China has quite possibly the WORST geography of any major country on the planet lol. Its surrounded on all sides by countries that hate them, mountains, and deserts.

@@hughmungus2760 That is China's public policy position it is not "out of the blue" Japan is well aware of this.

@@hughmungus2760 if Japan is involve in a war with China, the US not only could not defend Taiwan, it also could not defend Japan and don't forget how North Korea will joint in this war by striking at all Japanese military bases.

@@paulchoo6216 Listen to what Dmitry Medvedev said at the last discussions with Ria novosti, Vesti, and Itar tass journalists about the potential of Russia involvement of the war in pacific specially in the sea of japan and east china sea.

The wargame was ran with couple of predominant factors. First the Taiwanese must resist, 2nd Japan etc will help. Use whatever sim software you have, key in all the parameters for Korea and Vietnam war, theres almost 0% probability that US & Allies are gonna lost that and here we have two korea and a communist vietnam.

Not underestimating, but portraiting a devastating victory that points to congress we need to build more lrasm antiship missles, which is the message that CSIS’s sponsors like boeing who happened coincidentally to be the manufacturer of lrasm wants to get across

They are not, they produce these reports on purpose. It basically tells TW US will not send army to directly confront with pla. TW needs to stockpile more weapons asap of course buy from US.😂 Japan and Korea won’t help either.

CSIS is a joke! Rand Corporation had done 18 simulations on the Sino-Taiwanese war but lost all 18 simulations. How can CSIS won without the US improving their navy while the Chinese had increased their number of modernized warships drastically. US warships are mostly 30~40 years old and the Ticonderoga class cruisers were to be schedule so outdated that they are to be out of service in a few years. Worst, China had many hypersonic missiles with very long range while the US had none and these hypersonic missiles were unstoppable. US is no longer the country that is rational anymore. That CSIS simulation is not going to help US win the war in reality to make the American public feel better that they were not totally trashed in the war. And financially, US is now too broke to go to war with China! US better borrow some money from China if they wanted to go to war with China!

@@Lcr34 And the Japanese and American forces rolled 20's on all dice tests, while China rolled all 1's...

This is indeed an important point. The US will need all the pretensions that China is the evil empire like Russia, so as to drum up any support for opposing China in the region. As we all can see, SE Asia is unlikely to join the US in any action against China, so long as China played its cards right and not be provoked into a unilateral, unjustified hostile action. Everyone knows what China's position is, and few in the region, even Japan and SK, want a war that is entirely avoidable. So long as the current status quo is maintained, no one will fault China for wanting Taiwan back peacefully. But if the US is to provoke a situation that forces China's hand, I think the countries in the west Pacific will have a very dim view on the US deliberate provocation to force a war near them. Unlike Europe, where they can drink all the kool aid that Russia is solely to be blamed for the Ukrainian war, the countries in West Pacific is less likely to be taken into western propaganda. Added to the fact that China is everyone's largest trading partner and benefited greatly from China's rise and huge market, any disruption especially for selfish reasons like preserving US hegemony will displeased everyone.

But then you have the issue of unjustified hostilities. It could be another Ukraine where the US and NATO kept pushing Russia's red lines or in this case China's red lines. Ever inching closer and closer to that hard red line where once it's crossed, the gloves are off and war is commencing. Hell the hard line doesn't even need to be crossed. If China feels that its being threatened, then the leaders might find the political wil to send the troops. Same with Russia. Officials in the early 2000s and early 2010s were warning that because the US and NATO kept crossing Rus red lines, there will be a point where it breaks the camels back and WW3 commences. I wonder how the western world leaders of tomorrow will react because I do not look forward to being reactivated.

@@fuckedupbody4194 I think WWII will be a fantasy because unlike the previous world wars, no one in the west Pacific wants war and there are so many ways to avoid war. If China and the US comes to blow, most countries will not want to be involved. The assumption that Japan will join the US in any conflict against China is a flawed one, especially when China is unlikely to give Japan any reason to feel existential threat. A lot of people in the west like to imagine that Japan, SK, and SE Asia are being oppressed by China but that cannot be further from the truth. China remains tightly integrated with the region, culturally, economically and socially. Going to war does not make any sense to anyone when everyone can get what they wanted by trading. So what if China becomes the dominant power. The only one that doesn't like this situation is the US, who knows that the control over west pacific is slipping away year after year. Out of all the recent diplomatic furor, almost all of it is caused by the US provocations, from trump's trade wars to Biden's sanctions. China didn't do jack shit to the US except encroaching on its regional hegemony.

Depends on whether you believe what Xi says. Xi has made it clear he intends to reunify Taiwan and by force if necessary. He also set a goal for the PLAN and other PLA forces to be ready for a possible command to invade by 2026

I might even guessed china has already some sort of SOSUS line equivalent in its own turf

CS!S IT'S FUND!NG BY AMER!CAN INDUSTR!AL C0MPLEXS, 0FF C0URSE THEY W!LL G!VE FANTASY N0N SENSE RESULT S!MULAT!0NS F0R GET M0RE M!LL!TARY EQU!PMENT 0RDER!!!

@@alfeeman yeah that might be possible

Not even the Taiwan straight. If they come within a few hundred miles of Chinese coast, they will be toast. China has hydrophones networked underwater. China also has submarine hunting planes, helicopters, and ships. As soon as the subs move to 15-30 feet under the surface to fire, they will be engaged. If they manage to get a shot off, they will be sunk afterwards. It's a bad trade for the US. Fire a few missiles and lose a $3.5 Billion sub.

Won't mined because need to keep it clear for fraffic

US wont risk such a loss just for the sake of Taiwan

@@leexingha Yes it will because it knows the alternative is worse.

And every single one of its satellites? Both military and with military characteristics like Starlink and other satellites that can be used for recon?

@@5133937And what is worse? China invade the rest of the world and force USA to be communists?

yes, the war scenario is predicated on a mainland blitz of taiwan, not of a protracted war where the combined force of the PLAAF, PLAN and PLARF spend months bombing taiwan and degrading it's defenses. In such a scenario the US will be forced to dismantle the entire chinese military which is most likely an impossible task as it would require the US to destroy the entire PLAN, hunt down all chinese subs, bomb chinese military installation, defeat the chinese SAM network on the mainland and gain air superiority over chinese airspace. As well as hunt down MRL sites hiding all along the coast and destroy chinese industrial infrastructure such as ports and airports Even if such a scenario were possible, the likelihood of nuclear escalation is far too high.

North Korea will enter the game, South Korea and Japan will not be happy war with 2 fronts.

Have 50c

Sir this is wendy's...

Replace china with Russia and tell me this exact situation again.

"handle its own internal affairs"? - you mean invade Taiwan and take control of important technological resources and industrial infrastructure, which is of critical importance to the future of US economy?

The problem is, Taiwan isn't China's own internal affairs. Taiwan is an independent nation.

All it takes is for America to produce an idiot like Crassus...his name may yet be Trump

That was a civilian organization not from the military.

@@JD-dm1uj nevertheless China has a clear advantage here. They can consentrate their whole militarymight against the US and Taiwan whereas the US cannot. Logistics etc are all heavily on favour of China as well.

@@tuomasandersson3889 I don’t disagree with that, hopefully we’ll never truly know.

@@JD-dm1uj agreed

the chinese maratime militia would be a nightmare for US subs because they are mostly civilian flagged vessels and are indistinguishable from fishing boats belonging to other countries. The US can't afford to sink ships willy nilly either.

Another thing is the Chinese can load those medium size fishing vessels with HIMARS type mulitple rocket launchers, death charges, or drag a line with death charges to form like a grid like kelp forest except with mines. That would make it a nightmare for US subs to navigate. The Chinese wont need to sink any US ships but to deplete their battle strength to 50 percent before they get to Taiwan. Also forcing the US to waste limited onboard weapons would be another strategy. Im sure there will be hundreds of militia forces with portable manpads to shooting down US fighters jets landing or taking off.

@@maolo76 the maritime militia would unlikely be engaging in active combat, Way too risky for them as they are considered irregulars and are not protected by the Geneva convention. They would mostly act as recon

US is not able to win China in Western Pacific.

before war begin..china 20,000 fishing vessels will be use to deploy sea mines

@@maolo76 There is no corresponding minelaying equipment on fishing vessels. But what you said is indeed possible. Even if a fishing boat carries 2-3 AI naval mines. This would also be a considerable amount.

The US 7th Fleet operates from Yokosuka, Japan.

@@tvgerbil1984 So? The 7th fleet couldn’t be concentrated as much as the Home Fleet was for multiple reasons, such as the USN would still be required to protect the US aswell as it’s positions on the other side of the largest ocean in the world, not mentioning Japan and Taiwan. Also the USN is more thinly spread than the Royal Navy was at that time as the Royal Navy had 15 battleships battlecruisers with 9 under construction, and 7 carriers with 6 under construction meaning they had 22 capital ships and the RN was so thinly spread it lead to the collapse of the British empire, as the two main reasons for being apart of the empire was maritime protection and beneficial trading which both evaporated when the capital fleet of the Royal Navy was called home. Same thing would happen with the USN except the Royal Navy was multiple times larger and more powerful than the Kreigsmarine and the PLAN is larger hull numbers wise in comparison to the USN let alone the kriegsmarine. The USN would have to pull its main combat units from the North and Central Atlantic, Mediterranean rush them to the Indian Ocean while the entire Pacific Fleet is buying them time to get there. Only then could the USN win, but only if it didn’t take major losses in the Pacific in the time buying action for the rest of the Navy and mainly for Taiwan.

Remind me again where was this home field advantage during the century of humiliation?

@@remliqa even 100 years ago it took a dozen countries (allies) to beat up China - can't even go one on one, what is so humiliating?

@@justme6275 How did you failed history this badly? Each one of those nation defeated China one on one with minimum casualties. For example in the first Opium War ,The British inflicted 7,100 caulsiatis including 3000 death on the Chinese while only suffers 800 casualties. It even worse when you considered that from the 353 death, only 69 died from battle, the rest came from when Cina executed an unarmed prisoners.

L ​@@remliqa

@@realtissayeCan't handle the truth , huh.

I have to agree with you on the issue of using the gulf war outcomes in modelling. Because of the poor performance of a large number of weapons in achieving there missions a lot went through upgrades and redesigns. This information would be in Chinese hands from their major breaking into US military up to 2018. This would allow China to incorporate these improvements into all there systems making them more effective. I note most war games don’t incorporate destruction of food production which in Taiwans case becomes a critical issue given its island status and need to import food to feed its population. A six month blockade would have a major impact on fighting ability if it preceded an invasion. China could concentrate on attacking US and Taiwan military assets and not actually invading

@@kentriat2426 There's also the fact that Taiwan is vulnerable to the myriad diseases endemic to tropical islands. Cutting off their fuel would deal a hit to their public health system and medical resources, making it difficult to respond to and contain disease breakouts.

the US fighting to the point where the entire PLAN is destroyed is already entering nuclear war territory.

@hugh mungus the thing is that China has enough drydock to rebuild it's navy in a year, but the US won't able to replace its losses. The US is in wwii japan situation.

@@The136th short of china also returning the favour and destroying US missile and aircraft production facilities on the US mainland those ships in drydock are sitting ducks.

Very insightful thoughts. All valid points. Like to add to 2a- US would lose if no other action other then sanctions which would hurt both sides. Taiwan also not Ukraine, most Taiwanese are Han. If not half or closed to it that want unification. They don't want to became a war zone like Ukraine where the whole place is flatten. They're smarter then that. Let's hope Mainland and Taiwan could come to some peaceful agreement in the near future. War is not good for anyone except for US.

Again, can we use historical perspective? Like Vietnam war or Korean War were US forces operated from Japan. No, because a Vietnam and North Korea could not hit back, IF Japan gave US access to airfields the missiles would start flying, they would hit key infrastructure and basing areas and they would not be able to import anything via the western routes, and for Japan that is really bad. Japan is many things, stupid is not one of them.

Which is why China will unlikely provoke a unilateral action that is unjustifiable. So long China bide her time and continue to engage with regional powers like Japan, the influence of the US on Japanese politics will diminished. China has all the time in the world but not the US. This scenario is unlike the Ukrainian one where Russia is the one that ran out of time to protect themselves from NATO encroachment. If the US wants to keep Taiwan, it will have to provoke China into an unjustifiable conflict that turns everyone against China in the region and China is too smart to be screwed in this way. Everyone has already agreed with the One China policy. So China wanting Taiwan back peacefully and only will be provoked if Taiwan declare independence is already an internationally accepted position. It will be very hard for the US to spin the info war against this narrative in the region, where countries, even Japan and SK are less likely to be taken in by western propaganda of fighting for "freedom". Any action taken by the US to provoke a conflict in the region will be viewed in a very dim light by west Pacific countries, as shown by Pelosi's stupidly provocative visit to Taiwan.

@@MrCastodian You have to look at it from these perspectives: 1. Would China attack Japanese assets because Americans use them, which would bring Japan into the war? Is it part China's current doctrine to fight an escalating war? I hope China indeed plan for this. 2. The Americans would absolutely pressure its allies, Japan is very closely allied to the US. Japan has very strong air defense systems, which makes it bold enough to support US in war time.

@@FirstTakahashi The purpose of Japan is to trigger The USA to make war with China, Japan just supplies the war source to the USA. No matter who loses, China or the United States, Japan is the winner. If the United States loses, Japan will naturally get rid of the control of the United States (the shackles of the defeat in World War II) and become a normal country. If China loses, Japan will seize the disputed Diaoyu Islands with China and eliminate the uneasiness caused by an overly powerful China. Therefore, Japan hopes that China will have a war with the United States and that both China and the United States will mutual massive loss is the best result Japan most wants to see. At the same time, Japan hid behind the United States, only providing war materials to stimulate the economy and develop the military industry.

Theres also a slight problem in that the US only has enough LRASMs to fight for about a week before it runs out of them, and they are both expensive and slow to produce. And due to their subsonic nature, are pretty easy to shoot down within visual range.

The problem is. The PLA Navy has too many conventional submarines， At least on the side of the war zone close to China， therefore. The ideal launch location of the US SSGN is in the Philippine Sea， I even suspect that the PLA is not the first to respond to US missiles, but Taiwan's air defense forces

The USA Navy may win a few battles and sink many ships on the Chinese side but will suffer a few losses as well. This scenario doesn’t take into account whether the United States is willing to fight a long war of attrition with China where they are losing sailors and ships. The USA walked away from Korean War, Vietnam and Afghanistan for these reasons.

this doesn't take into account of China strategy for using their 20,000-fishing boats as expendable vessels to harass US naval task force with himars type multiple rockets launchers on truck loaded onto ships. Forcing US ships to waste limited weapons for defense. Also, the hundreds of mini sub drones China will be producing to patrol the waters. Surely the Chinese dont have to sink US ships. they only need to disable it enough that their battle strength is depleted below 50 percent before engaging Chinese navy waiting at Taiwan.

@@maolo76 taking potshots at the US navy would be suicide for these fishing vessels. But they could do other things such as lay mines or deploy decoys, all of which are a pain in the backside to deal with as an attacker.

nobody worries about russians, except russians.

US submarine capabilities are decades ahead, though the AO will be challenging given the constraints as referenced.

@@JD-dm1uj that's precisely the arrogant assumption. The game is modeled as if there would be no defence placed for those transports. To me it seems this whole game is modeled just to convince the US that of course we can defend Taiwan! Right?

@@tuomasandersson3889 I’ve read the entire report, IIRC it’s just under 150 pages, he just touched upon key topics, it’s actually a fairly bleak outlook when you go through everything, it was also conducted over 20 times with varying outcomes. There are tremendous assumptions made across the board, example CIWS/1130 with an 80% interception rate, haha, there are better odds in Vegas when it comes to reality. The one vast advantage the US has is experience conducting joint and combined operations to scale in a non permissible environment. Though those environments will pale in comparison to what the PRC will put forth…

@@JD-dm1uj in my opinion the assumptions favouring the US are far greater and more uncertain than those favouring China.

Exactly. China has marine mines and submarine hunters. Not as easy as CSIS thinks. Whoever prepared the report has analysed the situation based on old outdated information. The US navy will have a difficult time in the south China sea.

Hahaha, I don't know anything about balloons!

The Balloon. THe American AirForce's Nemesis.

@@EurasiaNaval Anti ship balloons

The Death Balloon! The planet demolishing Death Balloon.

@@johnzach2057genius weapon detected

Wow, thank you!

This channel is in fact cited in the paper, specifically the video on the Taiwanese Navy

Maybe 50:50

no..... US cannot afford to lose thousands at sea without declaring a full blown war with China.... so can US marines really land @ Chinese coast and take Beijing? or we see the world ends in 1000s of mushroom clouds?

No, judging by their track record, they failed to support 100% of the time.

will not. most likely they'll force TSMC to build factory in US, then "give" the island to china. win-win solution.

actually we might risk it. we are slowly changing from pacifist. our media start discussing about involvement on the conflict even we not directly invaded. Taiwan is important position to secure our defense and trade.

@@jcnamaasshi Unfortunately Japan will no longer be able to trade after giving China the long waited reason to revenge for the atrocities Japan committed during the WW2. Believe me it will be ugly.

@@laowantongchau Not only China but Dmitry Medvedev even convincing Ria Novosti journalist that japan will be the only country in history nuked twice.

@@jcnamaasshi Yes, China already expect Japan to risk it, so you can see China pumping its money, technology and human resource in military with the speed that comparable with its economic miracle in the past year, and you will only see the figure going up relative to the increment of Japanese military spending. Economic size and purchasing power will matter on such competition, but the risk for Japan to bare such consequences will not be lower, in fact, it will grows for both side. The only difference is, who have the resources and nature to bare more risk and damage. US can go away after the war, but Japan will remain as a close neighbor with China, considered US treat China as the only nation that could hurt US in every sector, I do not have any optimistic expectation from Japan to earn anything if they join such a war.

Getting the Chinese Population (especially young males) to be willing to attack Japan is way too easy (Past History, Current Needs *Wink*Wink)

They would probably be escorted by F15 sorties at least, the US would not be stupid enough to send a unescorted bomber force at chinese warships. Also Just because subsonic missiles are slow does not mean that they are "easy pickings" Its highly maneuverable, long range, as well as stealthy which by the time that any SAM would not have the knowledge or intel necessary to shoot one down.

You said US not dumb enough to send bombers unescorted. F-15 vs J-20. Might as well NOT send escorts and save the F-15 pilots for later. B-52 and other bombers short of B-21 and B-2 will just be decoys.

@@winstonchurchill5892 The PL20 have a 300-400km range, designed specifically to take down slow bombers and tankers. The F15 are not going to be much use. The simulation are talking about massive numbers of LRASMs, you can't hide that many planes and stealthy missiles doesn't mean invisible, they are optically and thermally targetable especially if you are launching them from non-stealth platforms and in large numbers. Even cannon fire will them down. China is not Iraq, China have dozens of surveillance satellite and long range drones. Assuming that Chinese missiles are ineffective and US missiles are super effective is kind delusional. These guys are probably comic books authors.

@@olderchin1558 For the First statement thats mabey true if China does have a missile like that. if you ignore the Fact that the LRASM has a range of 500-600 km and out ranges mots missile systems so the F15s are pretty much the last line of defense. For the LRASM While yes, It is not invisible but thats the equivilant of me saying "a Hypersonic missile is not always hypersonic." It is unlikely that they will have enough time to detect it in long ranges, Especially with a range of 500-600. Adding onto this would be its advanced pathfinding as well as exertional maneuverable ability. It also has a 1000-2000 KG warhead armed meaning you need verry few to sink a warship, meaning I see no mass launched more than 5-6 launches per any given time. While China is Not Iraq the US is not Vietnam and assuming that these missiles are completely defenseless because they are "non Hypersonic" is not a detrement.

@@olderchin1558 haha, we recently discovered how much a headache balloons can be to deal with. Theres absolutely no reason why china won't launch dozens of survailance and ELINT balloons off its coast to track incoming missiles, while the US hasn't demonstrated it can reliably shoot down something that is mostly invisible to radar and move so slowly what little returns look like noise at beyond visual range,

Glad you liked it!

looks like there are 2 kind (size) of that 4 missiles "storage/launchers". nothing else I know or already forgot.

that particular missile is the Fm3000n. Its never been shown operating on an active warship but it has been shown at arms shows so you can only assume the PLAN is using them.

a conflagration kicking off on the korean peninsula would divert a ton of attention away from china. US warplanes would almost all be diverted to striking north korea than dealing with china. And with Kim, nuclear weapons are fully on the table.

@@hughmungus2760 War star in Asia the US finish period...!!!!!! In the Korean war China already proof it. China alone took care of the US and it Allies they ran scared like dogs.....!!!!! That is a good lesson for US to learn better stay for the safety of the US Citizens......!!!!!!!

Your Country will win sir. The true sons of the soil will defeat the Christian imperialists.

Thank you very much!

My pleasure!

Hey thanks so much!

China has already flat out told Japan if it so much as dips a toe in the waters of a potential US/China conflict that China will nuke them straight away.

And so does china, remember that china also have hundred of anti ship ballistic missile that have range of thousand of km. And china itself have many of Destroyer and frigate that could counter those tomahawk missile

@@user-gc1hg9sp9k I merely pointed out that the models required submarines to sail into the Taiwan Strait to get within torpedo range. Those were based on WW2 submarine warfares which were obviously outdated because nuclear powered submarines these days would carry out maritime strikes using long range cruise missiles in order to stay outside the dangerous shallow waters of the Strait. The Chinese fleets certainly have good layered air defense to cope with sea skimming missiles. Analysis based on the models was therefore largely meaningless.

Don't matter the US lost that is a guarantee......!!!!!! China have too much power to throw at the US in the region....!!!!!!! Don't matter how many the US bring......?????!!!!!! China will destroy them all.......!!!!!!!! China can out products the US 20 to 1 easily in whatever weapons need to fight war.....!!!!!! Don't forget China is the world manufacturer. China can feed the entire world need. I don't see the US have any advantages......!!!!!!!

@@lengthao8424 You certainly have a way with punctuation (!!!!!!!!!!!!!???????????) I will agree with the first section. All others are conjecture or outright wrong. I don't mind having long conversations on this channels comment section ^^ I think it is really well researched and deserves all credit it can get. What I wanted to point out is, that with this particular CSIS study, you probably can't take the assumptions at face value, because they are outdated or plainly a bit in the wild. What you can do, is take the results based on the assumptions adjust the results based on the more accurate assumptions the US military probably has available and also capabilities the US military knows it has but the CSIS doesn't, like accurate ranges of planes and missiles, logistic capacity, etc... and figure out which capabilities the US military may need most to defeat a possible invasion of Taiwan by China. I didn't mean to look down on China at all. You can already observe the fairly vivid discussions on things like how the US air force could dump as much anti ship ordinance on a fleet trying to cross the Taiwan straight as possible. That goes from using old A10 bombers as drones to F35 fighters to using cargo planes housing huge batteries of anti ship missiles in their cargo bay and increasing the range of F35 fighters with novel kinds of engines. We will probably hear about some demonstration tests once they figured out a way. The goal is deterrence and that is not possible if the potential enemy doesn't know you have something that will drive up the cost of something you do. Everything the US does in this region is based on deterrence. The US goal is to keep all non-nuclearly armed nations in that region non-nuclearly armed. That is why they extend security guarantees with a nuclear umbrella. Security guarantees have to be credible, though. That is why the posture of the US towards China has become more assertive lately. It is supposed to match the current Chinese military posture. If they don't do that, Japan, Australia and Taiwan would have a very strong reason do build nuclear missiles themselves, to deter China. I hope you can see the loop in my formulation. Ultimately having as many neighbors without nuclear weapons as possible is also good for China. That is the funny part of all of this. You are welcome to reply with another set of punctuation. Lots of comments are good for this channel ^^

Lol , IJP?

Can't wait for my country to get bombed the shit out of for American interests.

In the field of early warning aircraft, China is a generation ahead of the United States.