NEWS If War Comes, Will the U.S. Navy Be Prepared?

[nodropinufaka]

You ain’t ever been and will never be in Fallon. And the only beer you could offer Brett is whatever cheap shit you steal out of Mom and Dad’s fridge in the basement!

Go back to harassing your friends on Xbox!

I did an Air Wing Fallon as an ensign Intel O and went back again for a month for something else. I loved Fallon And def understand why people like being stationed out there. The desert, Reno, and Tahoe. Good times.

 

[nodropinufaka]

Just curious, but how would China "face the end"? They are not small Japan. And even Japan was very hard to break, it took two atomic bombs and the Soviet Union declaring war. At most, IMO, China would just suffer an embarrassment if they lost a conflict with the U.S.

Prob right that it would just be an embarrassment. With so much of our economy reliant on them and the rest of the world supply chains also running through them it’s impossible to tell what would happen and if we’d want them to be destroyed as well.

but you never know. So many wildcards in the equation like political will, economy, trade, human rights violations, etc.

 

[SELRES_AMDO]

You ain’t ever been and will never be in Fallon. And the only beer you could offer Brett is whatever cheap shit you steal out of Mom and Dad’s fridge in the basement!

Go back to harassing your friends on Xbox!

I actually know @nodropinufaka in real life. He's no troll. He is in fact a former active duty Intel Officer, former corpsman, and does work for a research think tank at a university.

His views are different from most of the Wardroom but no need to be a dick because you disagree.

 

[Random8145]

Prob right that it would just be an embarrassment. With so much of our economy reliant on them and the rest of the world supply chains also running through them it’s impossible to tell what would happen and if we’d want them to be destroyed as well.

but you never know. So many wildcards in the equation like political will, economy, trade, human rights violations, etc.

Well what I meant more was that I don't think we'd have the capability to destroy them aside from nuking them and they could do that to us.

 

[nodropinufaka]

Well what I meant more was that I don't think we'd have the capability to destroy them aside from nuking them and they could do that to us.

That’s another thing too. With Mutually Assured Destruction is it going to lead to diplomacy and no conflict at all?

 

[Notanaviator]

That’s another thing too. With Mutually Assured Destruction is it going to lead to diplomacy and no conflict at all?

We are in more than a few ways in a conflict with them right now, just not in the kinetic way that has been the topic of this exchange, and mostly calibrated on their end in a way to avoid rising to that level. War on the Rocks (TX Natl Security Review podcast) has a good episode on the cyber landscape and the changing attitudes of global actors on what level of cyber attack/espionage/etc constitutes an act of war. There’s a continuum on the cyber front just as with other more conventional options.

I think that at times your way of asking this very question has gotten in the way of the question. I don’t think folks on here would disagree that cyber will play a role in the next large scale conflict- it plays a role today in the conflict that falls short of that. But it is a tool in the toolbox, just as TACAIR and all the other tools are. I think if you’ve read Ghost Fleet or 2034 there’s a rhetorical exaggeration exploring what the growing impact of the cyber domain might look like in a kinetic conflict; Being on the outside, I’d venture to guess it’s a mistake to think that folks shaping doctrine and tactics haven’t thought about this, much in the same way it’s a mistake to think you’re going to get an in-depth discussion of that in this venue.

edit: I quoted your latest but didn’t address that question. No, and no. Honestly, the economic drivers for both CCP and the US are probably more important or immediate drivers for diplomacy today than our respective nuclear arsenals.

 

[Griz882]

Prob right that it would just be an embarrassment. With so much of our economy reliant on them and the rest of the world supply chains also running through them it’s impossible to tell what would happen and if we’d want them to be destroyed as well.

but you never know. So many wildcards in the equation like political will, economy, trade, human rights violations, etc.

Taken as a whole, if this is the kind of analysis you offer your peers, then woe be to them. Any soothsayer can say….”but you never know,” but a genuine intellectual balances history, policy, economics, and geography to shape various scenarios. Right now, @nodropinufaka isn’t displaying those traits…indeed, quite the opposite. Statements like “with so much of our economy reliant on them (assuming China) are close to sophomoric.

As we exchange these messages the global economy is already moving beyond China. India is looking to bump them from their manufacturing pillar as the US is looking to other INDOPAC allies to pick up any trade imbalance. If you are thinking like a traditional communist, Xi has made a crucial mistake, he created a middle class and they will demand their stake in the economy - deny it and Xi will be chopped to tiny bits. The truth is, China is dependent on the rest of the free world to maintain their economy. This leads to other statements people have made. Any war with China will be “different.” At least for the next ten or fifteen years we can choke off China’s economy without ever facing the “hordes.” We can cut what parts of the “belt and road” system exists today but surely it will get harder as it progresses. Put simply, geography and economics do not favor China in most future war scenarios. Of course, that could change for any number of reasons, but few imaginable are going to be in the near term.

One last thing, the US will never start a war against China mostly because we don’t need to do so. If ever there is to be war, it will be because China starts one.

 

[nittany03]

I think if you’ve read Ghost Fleet or 2034 there’s a rhetorical exaggeration exploring what the growing impact of the cyber domain might look like in a kinetic conflict; Being on the outside, I’d venture to guess it’s a mistake to think that folks shaping doctrine and tactics haven’t thought about this, much in the same way it’s a mistake to think you’re going to get an in-depth discussion of that in this venue.

Yeah, those who talk don't know, those who know can't talk, etc. etc.

I have to say I was not very impressed with 2034 in general. I mean, it wasn't supposed to be Great Literature anyway, but given the resumes of the authors, I was hoping for a lot more credible scenario to be laid out, even using only open-source data. Instead, the entire premise basically rests on "ooga-booga cyber! The Chinese have magic computer fairies that let them do whatever they want." And the crowning absurdity was "well, the F-35 and all the modern platforms are compromised, so good thing we can go all Battlestar Galactica-style on the Chinese with our ancient legacy Hornets and get around those damn computers. Rip 'em all out and grease-pencil the combining glass on the HUD!"

Uhh . . . except the legacy Hornet is still a fly-by-wire aircraft, you idiots. Did the magic Chinese cyber fairies just skip that because they knew you needed a deus ex machina there, Admiral? As a software guy on the civ side, I get that sometimes tech can be a black box to the non-technical, but 2034 was the equivalent of listening to a geek at an airshow tell me that one Prowler or Growler crew could shut down the whole East Coast if they wanted . . .

 

[Brett327]

Any soothsayer can say….”but you never know,”

It's astounding to me that someone with an Intel background is so averse to making... you know... an assessment.

 

[Griz882]

Yeah, those who talk don't know, those who know can't talk, etc. etc.

I have to say I was not very impressed with 2034 in general. I mean, it wasn't supposed to be Great Literature anyway, but given the resumes of the authors, I was hoping for a lot more credible scenario to be laid out, even using only open-source data. Instead, the entire premise basically rests on "ooga-booga cyber! The Chinese have magic computer fairies that let them do whatever they want." And the crowning absurdity was "well, the F-35 and all the modern platforms are compromised, so good thing we can go all Battlestar Galactica-style on the Chinese with our ancient legacy Hornets and get around those damn computers. Rip 'em all out and grease-pencil the combining glass on the HUD!"

Uhh . . . except the legacy Hornet is still a fly-by-wire aircraft, you idiots. Did the magic Chinese cyber fairies just skip that because they knew you needed a deus ex machina there, Admiral? As a software guy on the civ side, I get that sometimes tech can be a black box to the non-technical, but 2034 was the equivalent of listening to a geek at an airshow tell me that one Prowler or Growler crew could shut down the whole East Coast if they wanted . . .

Hence the zombie S-3 brother! (Note: zombie S-3 includes a broad range of “back to the future” aircraft like the zombie F-14, A-6, A-7, and any cool helicopter).

 

[Hail_HYDRA!]

Hey, wanna swap out your 1830 with an 1810? ?

That is awesome actually. My DH (1815) was aircrew when he was active duty. We (1815’s) have been told that path is not available to pursue in the reserves. Either way, still pretty cool to hear!

 

[Notanaviator]

Yeah, those who talk don't know, those who know can't talk, etc. etc.

I have to say I was not very impressed with 2034 in general. I mean, it wasn't supposed to be Great Literature anyway, but given the resumes of the authors, I was hoping for a lot more credible scenario to be laid out, even using only open-source data. Instead, the entire premise basically rests on "ooga-booga cyber! The Chinese have magic computer fairies that let them do whatever they want." And the crowning absurdity was "well, the F-35 and all the modern platforms are compromised, so good thing we can go all Battlestar Galactica-style on the Chinese with our ancient legacy Hornets and get around those damn computers. Rip 'em all out and grease-pencil the combining glass on the HUD!"

Uhh . . . except the legacy Hornet is still a fly-by-wire aircraft, you idiots. Did the magic Chinese cyber fairies just skip that because they knew you needed a deus ex machina there, Admiral? As a software guy on the civ side, I get that sometimes tech can be a black box to the non-technical, but 2034 was the equivalent of listening to a geek at an airshow tell me that one Prowler or Growler crew could shut down the whole East Coast if they wanted . . .

Agree. I heartily enjoyed the notion of a VMFA in 2034 launching a strike with 10/10 up Charlie hornets. Overall the devils advocacy I’d offer is maybe the authors were trying to reach the broadest possible audience with a very specific point they wanted to make about the changing landscape wrt American strategic narcissism etc… because for about 60% of the book I’m thinking to myself “so we’re not trying to do diplomacy at all, huh? Just going right to the good stuff?”

 

[Brett327]

That is awesome actually. My DH (1815) was aircrew when he was active duty. We (1815’s) have been told that path is not available to pursue in the reserves. Either way, still pretty cool to hear!

I'm not smart on the reserve Intel/IWO world, but NAWDC has a pretty robust group of reservists.

 

[nodropinufaka]

It's astounding to me that someone with an Intel background is so averse to making... you know... an assessment.

Well I’m not in Intel anymore….

Let’s face it- my background and thoughts disagree with the majority of wardrooms and posters here. But they’re hardly sophomoric or controversial. For example our trade and economy with China-

The People's Republic of China

U.S.-China Trade Facts U.S. goods and private services trade with China totaled $579 billion in 2012 (latest data available). Exports totaled $141 billion; Imports totaled $439 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade deficit with China was $298 billion in 2012.

ustr.gov

We are intertwined with China at this point. It would devastate our economy stopping.

Everyone in the CCMD I worked at before I got out is convinced we’d be at war with China by 2025 at the latest and I simply don’t agree with that notion or belief at all. But if you state that publicly as an intel officer on active duty you can kiss your career goodbye.

See example here:

How We Lost the Great Pacific War

The U.S. Navy can lose the next war in the Pacific.

www.usni.org

But many Academic circles believe it will be a Cold War not an actual conflict:

Everyone Misunderstands the Reason for the U.S.-China Cold War

The left says it’s U.S. arrogance. The right says it’s Chinese malevolence. Both are wrong.

foreignpolicy.com

“Third, and perhaps most important, both sides have a genuine and shared interest in keeping their rivalry within boundaries, both to avoid unnecessary clashes and to facilitate cooperation on issues where U.S. and Chinese interests overlap (climate change, pandemic prevention, etc.). One cannot eliminate all risks and prevent future crises, but Washington must be clear about its own red lines and make sure it understands Beijing’s. This is where unit-level factors kick in: The rivalry may be hard-wired into today’s international system, but how each side handles the competition will be determined by who is in charge and by the quality of their domestic institutions. I would not assume that America’s will fall short, but I wouldn’t be complacent about that either.”

 

[Griz882]

Well I’m not in Intel anymore….

Let’s face it- my background and thoughts disagree with the majority of wardrooms and posters here. But they’re hardly sophomoric or controversial. For example our trade and economy with China-

The People's Republic of China

U.S.-China Trade Facts U.S. goods and private services trade with China totaled $579 billion in 2012 (latest data available). Exports totaled $141 billion; Imports totaled $439 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade deficit with China was $298 billion in 2012.

ustr.gov

We are intertwined with China at this point. It would devastate our economy stopping.

Everyone in the CCMD I worked at before I got out is convinced we’d be at war with China by 2025 at the latest and I simply don’t agree with that notion or belief at all. But if you state that publicly as an intel officer on active duty you can kiss your career goodbye.

See example here:

How We Lost the Great Pacific War

The U.S. Navy can lose the next war in the Pacific.

www.usni.org

But many Academic circles believe it will be a Cold War not an actual conflict:

Everyone Misunderstands the Reason for the U.S.-China Cold War

The left says it’s U.S. arrogance. The right says it’s Chinese malevolence. Both are wrong.

foreignpolicy.com

“Third, and perhaps most important, both sides have a genuine and shared interest in keeping their rivalry within boundaries, both to avoid unnecessary clashes and to facilitate cooperation on issues where U.S. and Chinese interests overlap (climate change, pandemic prevention, etc.). One cannot eliminate all risks and prevent future crises, but Washington must be clear about its own red lines and make sure it understands Beijing’s. This is where unit-level factors kick in: The rivalry may be hard-wired into today’s international system, but how each side handles the competition will be determined by who is in charge and by the quality of their domestic institutions. I would not assume that America’s will fall short, but I wouldn’t be complacent about that either.”

Disagreeing is perfectly fine. The issue you have here is that your lack of academic rigor males your disagreement seem more obstinate than anything else. Just saying “I have a different point of view” is pointless if you can’t deliver on your analysis.