[extropy-chat] Taiwan (was: US will cease to exist in 2007)

[J. Andrew Rogers]

> Yes, and nationalist fever is part of it. The more of a lather they can
> get the yokels in about Taiwan, they less they bitch about their own
> slavery.


You have as little understanding of China as many foreigners have of the US.  They have 
regional differences at least as wide as the US.  Think of the differences between a New 
England blue blood, a Texas rancher, and a Berkeley hippie.  Wildly different cultures with 
very different political interests, and geographically separated.  China is a big country that 
contains multiple visions for the country, and there are powerful interests that are really not 
a part of the current communist government.  Nationalism can be found in any country.

The irony is that you've basically bought the communist government's propaganda, hook, 
line, and sinker.


> Not so. They have been building Aegis rip-offs for a decade now and
> have purchased a fleet of ultra-quiet german diesel attack subs which
> outperform our own. The only category of ship they aren't building
> right now are aircraft carriers.


You greatly overestimate their naval technology, which no serious analyst has suggested is 
particularly advanced.  Their best assets are 1980s era Russian technology (often straight off 
the shelf), and the Russians were never able to keep up with us in that arena.  And their track 
record for doing their own naval design work is atrocious.  As for your spiffy diesel attack 
subs, you do know that the US Navy rents these things from the Europeans for submarine 
warfare practice, right?

The idea that they have submarines that outperform US submarines is, again, absurd.  That is 
one area of military technology where few question US dominance.  As I just mentioned, we 
rent state-of-the-art European diesel attack subs for target practice.  Are they quiet?  Sure.  
But not quiet enough and we have other very clever ways of tracking subs than passive sonar.


> Where do you think all the circuit boards for those Taiwanese ships are
> built?


Probably in Taiwan.  Or the US, since the Taiwanese use a lot of previous generation US naval 
weapon systems i.e. contemporaneous to whatever the Chinese are getting from the Russians 
(and therefore likely superior).  Though I'm not sure what your point is.  You don't expend 
circuit boards like bullets, particularly for capital military assets like guided missile 
destroyers. 


> On the contrary, these subs are ultra quiet thanks to 8 years of
> Clinton selling top notch machining technology to China.


Again, I've never seen any serious analyst assert that Chinese subs are ultra-quiet.  I *have* 
heard that they have terrible technical problems with their domestically designed subs, and 
that the Russian technology they have purchased is essentially obsolete.


> You apparently haven't been paying attention. The US Navy is obsolete


Compared to who?  The US has the only blue water navy left, except perhaps for the UK to a 
limited extent, and US naval weapon systems are years ahead of everyone else and very 
actively developed.  Your view of naval warfare is positively 1970s.


[...some misinformed currency geopolitics elided...]


> The cost of production is different for different locations.


The cost of production is mostly free, except for primary ore bodies which make up a 
minority of all silver production.  Silver is a junk byproduct of other types of mining, and 
most of the production cost is in the refining.


> When China dumps the dollar, they are going to need a new reserve
> asset. Euros might suffice for a while, but the european economy is
> stagnant. The Chinese govt is opening those silver mines to start
> issuing silver and silver backed currency.


Only if China is stupid, and they are not.  Not only would using silver exhibit all the problems 
of using commodity backed currency, but it would give the US major leverage.

ClueTime:  The US is one of the world's major producers of silver (with reserves as large as 
China), and North America pretty much dominates world production as a continent, followed 
by South America.  There is NOTHING China could do in your hypothetical scenario, that 
could prevent the US from crushing their currency by dumping silver on the world market.  
The Chinese cannot outlast us in that game of chicken.  It wouldn't be pretty, but that's 
warfare for you.  The US still has vast unexploited natural resource reserves, mostly because 
environmental regulations lead us to tear up other countries instead.  China cannot compete 
effectively, particularly if we can leverage our neighbors while China cannot.

  
> You don't seem to get it. Technology on a ship is irrelevant when your
> ship doesn't have fuel. When the dollar is in the tank, oil prices in
> the US will be over $150/bbl. The US cannot sustain a logistical train
> across the Pacific with that sort of a cost level.


The US gets most of its oil from its own shores and two neighbors.  On a war footing, there 
would be no shortage for the US military.  And the US military runs on diesel type fuels.  We 
import oil from across the ocean to get good gasoline grade crude to meet demand, as many 
diesel grade crudes are not much good for making gasoline even though there is plenty of it 
in the Americas.

All that said, you overestimate the importance of crude prices to military operations.  The US 
is not lacking in domestic production for military purposes (unlike China), and the cost of 
fuel is going to be a drop in the bucket in the big picture -- only access is important here.


> There is a maxim in military circles: "Dillettantes talk tactics,
> amateurs talk strategy, professionals talk logistics." Wars are won and
> lost on logistics alone. 


Pity you know the saying, but little of actual military logistics.


> Technology is a tactic.


Nonsense.  Technology is a force multiplier.  It can improve strategy, tactics, AND logistics.  
The weakness of the Chinese is that they are tactically inexperienced and have poor logistical 
capability.


j. andrew rogers