A US civil war

[Reality Check]

However, I think most of us do not necessarily envision the main islands of the Philippines being the first level of appeasement. I believe their claims over the South China Sea will be the first level. I believe at some point, we will basically agree with China that those waters are their domain.

The type of appeasement being discussed here is the historic kind.

Germany invaded the German speaking portion of Czechoslovakia before World War II. The super power of the day, Great Britain, negotiated with Germany and signed a treaty allowing Germany to keep the captured territory in return for a promise not to do it again.

[thomasglee]

Hainan Island (where China has large bases already) is very close to the Philippines.

Actually Hainan Island is farther away from the Philippines than mainland China. And much farther away than Taiwan.

Hainan Island is on the edge of the Tonkin Gulf next to North Vietnam.

It's not worth an argument over, but the distance from Luzon is about the same whether from Hainan or the mainland. My point is that Hainan is already very much militarized and more likely a jumping off point for the Philippines. However, as mentioned previously, other than the South China Sea, the more logical idea is that we would appease China in an overtaking of Taiwan.

[thomasglee]

China's navy isn't far from a blue-water navy. Given a few more years, they'll have one; it's already more than doubled over the past 15 years. The Philippines might be able to come up with some measure of resistance, but I don't see them lasting long against a determined Chinese attack.

They may believe that their ballistic missiles could seal of the South China Sea, but assumptions don't get you very far in warfare. We haven't had a major naval conflict for close to 70 years. I don't think conventional missiles are going to be enough to sink a carrier, at least not without hitting it many, many times. One of our old carriers managed to sustain 4 weeks of missile and torpedo attacks before being sunk. It's why they're coming up with this 10-ton missile; that's about what it would take and even then, i'd say it would take a few hits.

Review the naval battles of the Falklands, then let me know if you still fee the same way. Not being condescending, just pointing out how FAR technology has come and the Falklands was 30 years ago. Think even how much further from then anti-ship missiles have come.

[thomasglee]

Problem is, they may decide that we do not have the will to do anything if they decide to invade, whether their target is Taiwan, the Philippines, or somebody else. If war broke out today, we could win, although it'd be more difficult than many suspect. A few years from now, though, it may be a different story.

Again, we might eventually win the war, if one were started today, but at what cost in money, lives, etc.? China doesn't have to "win", they just have to inflict a LOT of pain. So much pain that it would set us back several decades, while they would easily and quickly rebuild and overtake us economically.

[thomasglee]

However, I think most of us do not necessarily envision the main islands of the Philippines being the first level of appeasement. I believe their claims over the South China Sea will be the first level. I believe at some point, we will basically agree with China that those waters are their domain.

Could you clarify this?

Are you saying that in your circle it's accepted that Scarborough Shoal
is Chinese territory?

John

I will not say it's "accepted", but the idea of war with China frightens many in my circles in Asia. The Koreans also have a dispute going with China (which isn't getting much attention) over an island (really nothing but a submerged rock - [China, South Korea in Row Over Submerged Rock]) and they're running up against the Chinese in the Yellow Sea often, because the Chinese keep illegally fishing Korean waters.

My point is more that I think the US may give China tacit approval to claim the South China Sea as a form of appeasement.

The Koreans are full well expecting a conflict with China and their government just announced the aim to spend some USD2.0 billion over the next five years to secure 500-600 new cruise and ballistic missiles S.Korea to Build 500-600 More Missiles. They claim it's to counter north Korean threats, but I know from my discussions, it's more aimed at the Chinese threat.

As I've mentioned on this site before, for the past few years their has been a quiet, but growing arms race taking place in Asia.

[Reality Check]

The United States continues to send U.S. Warships into the South China Sea and U.S.military aircraft fly over it.

Short of an appeasement treaty like Great Britain signed with Germany in which the U.S. gives the South China Sea to China, it will remain an international body of water to everyone except China.

[Reality Check]

China may be over playing their hand slightly.

As long as the South China Sea remains an international body of water an attack by China on anyone in the South China Sea might unite everyone against them.

[thomasglee]

The United States continues to send U.S. Warships into the South China Sea and U.S.military aircraft fly over it.

Short of an appeasement treaty like Great Britain signed with Germany in which the U.S. gives the South China Sea to China, it will remain an international body of water to everyone except China.

because we do today, doesn't mean we will be able to tomorrow. Also, if you'll recall, a few years ago one of our "spy" planes was forced to land on Hainan Island when the Chinese intercepted it over the South China Sea. I'm not saying it will happen, but at some point, the Chinese may start requiring we inform them prior to execution, any activities we plan to conduct in the SCS.

[Reality Check]

Review the naval battles of the Falklands, then let me know if you still fee the same way. Not being condescending, just pointing out how FAR technology has come and the Falklands was 30 years ago. Think even how much further from then anti-ship missiles have come.

Anti-Ship missiles, even very large ones can be launched from four engine and eight engine bombers.

Not sure they are as good as you suggest. But if they are, it is not reasonable to assume the Chinese have the only "good ones".

[thomasglee]

Review the naval battles of the Falklands, then let me know if you still fee the same way. Not being condescending, just pointing out how FAR technology has come and the Falklands was 30 years ago. Think even how much further from then anti-ship missiles have come.

Anti-Ship missiles, even very large ones can be launched from four engine and eight engine bombers.

Not sure they are as good as you suggest. But if they are, it is not reasonable to assume the Chinese have the only "good ones".

Look, not trying to get into arguments over semantics, but this is an industry I work in and I'm very familiar with what's going on in the defense electronics industries.

First of all, the anti-ship missiles used in the Falkland were nothing compared to what we have today, yet the Exocet missile still accounted for the most casualties of the war.

Secondly, the Chinese are known to have supersonic anti-ship missiles. Not sure why that seems so hard to believe. No one believes they "only" have the good ones, but it would be ignorant to assume they "only" have inferior ones.

The Chinese The Yingji-83 or YJ-83 (Chinese: 鹰击-83, literally "Eagle Strike"; NATO reporting name: CSS-N- ) is a Chinese anti-ship missile based on the YJ-82, designed as a supersonic successor to the subsonic YJ-82 missile. The export designation is C-803. (LINK) - for more information on the varieties of supersonic anti-ship missiles the Chinese have, just Google "Chinese supersonic anti-ship missiles" and you'll find all kinds of information from Janes and others.

Again, there is a reason we asked the Australians to let us build new bases near Darwin on the northern coast of Australia. We need a land base from which to launch aircraft and drones as the South China Sea is no longer an open water that can be dominated by the US Naval forces without facing serious threats from Chinese technologies.