Moderated taiwan invasion war game

[FutureTank]

That also is interesting as it assumes the following:

 that the USN will be caught in some temporal flux and make no attempt to maintain separation of capability superiority - let alone accept parity and superiority
Ability to maintain parity is very expensive. The British Royal Navy was once unchallenged, and yet it is but a shadow of its former self today.
 it assumes that the US will willingly abrogate Mahanian bedrock beliefs (thats not going to happen in 200 years - let alone 50 years if they have anything to say about it)
Huge Chinese fleets dominated Asia’s seas long before America was even discovered. I’d say Mahanian bedrock beliefs are not new to Chinese either.
 that the threat matrix for both countries is unimpeachable and thus scriptable (for the next 50 years). hell, nobody - and I mean nobody would have said in 1988 that the USSR was going to collapse like a deck of cards within 12 months. You want to bet on a 50 year window?
So far as USSR’s demise is concerned, it was predicted in 1918. Since there are naval types around, I’ll explain it this way. ‘The fish rots from the head’. The rot in this case set in before 1917. You see, Karl Marx’s thinking never finished on the matter of class. It is one thing to be a revolutionary, it is altogether different to be a leader. For anyone living in USSR in the 70s, the end was apparent and near. Gorbachev was just part of the generation like generations in other countries feel compelled to follow a pattern of behaviour suggested by the peculiarities of their social environment. This is hard to appreciate from the outside looking in, and even more so if one attempts to remove oneself from one’s own ‘generation’.
Change is swift. There is a Jewish saying that “a hundred thousand changes fit on the head of a pin”. Who predicted American Revolution? Who predicted start of WW1?
Of course I don’t say that in 50 years China WILL have a larger Navy then the USA. In fact I tend to believe that there will not be a single China in 50 years, and so USA will face several ‘Chinas’. However this is what will make their combined navies larger….IF they combine.
There is a second part to this equation – what will the USA be like in 50 years time?
 that absolute mass denotes superiority - it doesn't. military competency has got nothing to do with absolutes of mass. The first major post classical significant historical lesson was Carthage vs the Roman Republics in round 1 . The object end lesson about Carthage and the Roman Republic is not Hannibal Barca - its Scipio Africanus. (there's a message there )
So China is ‘Carthage’ and USA is ‘Rome’? I’m afraid the Chinese may see it the other way. Absolute mass does not denote superiority, but mass has a quality of its own. However historical analysis does not bear out the comparison in the case of China. It has a combative character altogether different to either, and so does the USA. As a Chinese guy told me once, “The USA has many aircraft carriers, but China has only one sea” Think about it.
 that China is a continental power - and her clear vulnerability is the fact that she is coast locked and thus easier to monitor 24/7. Thats why landlocked countries are easier to deal with as far as Sat racetracking is concerned.
But continental is what counts. It has counted since US forced Japan to give it access to their coal for mail steamers. The USN is there to keep the trade routes open, not to bottle up ports of lading. Can American consumers do without Chinese imports?
 it assumes a bipolar world as no other variables are counted in so as to pollute the mix. The PACRIM is on the verge for the forseeable future - but so is Africa. Population wise Continental Africa is projected to pass both India and China within the next 50 years.
Are you not contradicting your own statement that absolute mass doesn't denote superiority?
Everything is of course conditional, however it is my belief that the next 50 years will see the Islamic world coalesce in a more united entity, and India will be consumed with this reality. In this it will share the fate of Israel which is blessed with human resources and really bad neighbours. China of Chinas will not face this problem, and will likely overtake India. It seems that China is well aware of Africa though. Wasn’t there a large gathering of African VIPs in China recently?
I’m also a believer in Europe. I will be so bold as to predict that at some time in future, though maybe not in 50 years, the United States, Canada and Mexico will rejoin Europe. I realise Europe has a falling population now, but this is only a circumstance of abundant wealth. Europe however is the paragon of creativity, and ideas cost more then all the cheap clothes in China.
So the answer is that no, I don’t see a bipolar World of US and China, but a more complex relationship.

 

[gf0012-aust]

 that the USN will be caught in some temporal flux and make no attempt to maintain separation of capability superiority - let alone accept parity and superiority

Ability to maintain parity is very expensive. The British Royal Navy was once unchallenged, and yet it is but a shadow of its former self today.

China has to get to not only a baseline asset parity – but a capability parity as well. The US on the other hand has the advantage of being able to witness well ahead of build cycle what Chinas production – and capability intentions are. Unless they revert to a 21st Cent version of the Monroe Doctrine – they do not have to be as focused on china reaching parity at all

 it assumes that the US will willingly abrogate Mahanian bedrock beliefs (thats not going to happen in 200 years - let alone 50 years if they have anything to say about it)

Huge Chinese fleets dominated Asia’s seas long before America was even discovered. I’d say Mahanian bedrock beliefs are not new to Chinese either.

I hope you’re not relying on Adm Gavin Menzies for that claim – as even current Chinese historians regard it as a work of cavalier assumption (ie fiction presented as forensic history) Mahanian beliefs didn’t work within the same construct in 1421.

 that the threat matrix for both countries is unimpeachable and thus scriptable (for the next 50 years). hell, nobody - and I mean nobody would have said in 1988 that the USSR was going to collapse like a deck of cards within 12 months. You want to bet on a 50 year window?

So far as USSR’s demise is concerned, it was predicted in 1918. Since there are naval types around, I’ll explain it this way. ‘The fish rots from the head’. The rot in this case set in before 1917. You see, Karl Marx’s thinking never finished on the matter of class. It is one thing to be a revolutionary, it is altogether different to be a leader. For anyone living in USSR in the 70s, the end was apparent and near. Gorbachev was just part of the generation like generations in other countries feel compelled to follow a pattern of behaviour suggested by the peculiarities of their social environment. This is hard to appreciate from the outside looking in, and even more so if one attempts to remove oneself from one’s own ‘generation’.

Change is swift. There is a Jewish saying that “a hundred thousand changes fit on the head of a pin”. Who predicted American Revolution? Who predicted start of WW1?

You’re actually reinforcing my point – was that your intention?

Of course I don’t say that in 50 years China WILL have a larger Navy then the USA. In fact I tend to believe that there will not be a single China in 50 years, and so USA will face several ‘Chinas’. However this is what will make their combined navies larger….IF they combine.

Actually, I think China will fragment into at least 3 separate entities - but thats another topic altogether, and one that can't be persued here.

There is a second part to this equation – what will the USA be like in 50 years time?

Exactly – but we work on evolving reference points. The contemporary reference point is that the US is being challenged so as to dissolve a single polar power and to move towards a multi-polar international community. Again, it assumes that the US will not fight to maintain Mahans fundamental précis of the protection of the state at a global, projected and persistent level

 that absolute mass denotes superiority - it doesn't. military competency has got nothing to do with absolutes of mass. The first major post classical significant historical lesson was Carthage vs the Roman Republics in round 1 . The object end lesson about Carthage and the Roman Republic is not Hannibal Barca - its Scipio Africanus. (there's a message there )

So China is ‘Carthage’ and USA is ‘Rome’? I’m afraid the Chinese may see it the other way. Absolute mass does not denote superiority, but mass has a quality of its own. However historical analysis does not bear out the comparison in the case of China. It has a combative character altogether different to either, and so does the USA. As a Chinese guy told me once, “The USA has many aircraft carriers, but China has only one sea” Think about it.

I'm not sure how China can be Rome when she fails to fulfill the basic requirements. ie the fundamental power behind a republic. When hannibal invaded southern europe to rattle the roman cage - Rome was just a fledgling republic - it was by no means an empire. what hannibal did was trigger the birth of change where the republic decided that they needed to change. He triggered the birth of the empire. Chinas not even remotely in that position of political change. Dramatic change in china is just as likely to rend her apart before anything else.

re quotes, as my Chinese mother said, you have 2 ears and 1 mouth – use them in the right ratio. (its just as relevant as your quote). I inherently find it a bizaare case that people still focus on US Carriers as the principle sword behind the shield. Landlocked powers struggle to contain “island” continents. They are automatically contending at the physical level with a multi fronted enemy. In chinas case, she’s unable to fulfill all the requisite “P’s” of warfighting – and being landlocked exacerbates that dilemna

 that China is a continental power - and her clear vulnerability is the fact that she is coast locked and thus easier to monitor 24/7. Thats why landlocked countries are easier to deal with as far as Sat racetracking is concerned.

But continental is what counts. It has counted since US forced Japan to give it access to their coal for mail steamers. The USN is there to keep the trade routes open, not to bottle up ports of lading. Can American consumers do without Chinese imports?

The US has the capacity to rapidly change her risk profile - and she's doing that in various areas already. Chinas single biggest piece of coal in the engine room of her growth is american consumerism, so its an incestuous relationship – as much as china thinks that she can define and mold an American response – the reality is that if American investment and purchasing power is turned off – the the Chinese economy would tank. They can’t sell off the US consumption to Europe – as the European and African demand is but a fraction of American consumption. The US however has the resources and motivation to build and buy elsewhere. Eg India and Africa. While some are getting excited at the notion that China has suddenly moved into Africa, they seem to be unaware that Congress has made provisions for African nations to trade into the US without the normal penalties. They did that quietly and without fanfare.

 it assumes a bipolar world as no other variables are counted in so as to pollute the mix. The PACRIM is on the verge for the forseeable future - but so is Africa. Population wise Continental Africa is projected to pass both India and China within the next 50 years.

Are you not contradicting your own statement that absolute mass doesn't denote superiority?

Not at all, I’m highlighting then fact that India as well as Africa are threats to the speed of its development. The US is a consumer society – and that means that it will have the opportunity to source its needs between 4 economic blocs. The consumer wins.

Everything is of course conditional, however it is my belief that the next 50 years will see the Islamic world coalesce in a more united entity, and India will be consumed with this reality. In this it will share the fate of Israel which is blessed with human resources and really bad neighbours. China of Chinas will not face this problem, and will likely overtake India. It seems that China is well aware of Africa though. Wasn’t there a large gathering of African VIPs in China recently?

China does not have stellar relationships in place with her neighbours – in fact she has over the last 500 years been in military conflict with all her bordered neighbours. Again, as my good old Chinese mum said – “we have long memories and don’t forgive readily”. Neither do her neighbours. As for the meeting in Africa – well as I said before, the US already gives them (African states/countries) preferred access to export their products into the US. They get a significant tax exemption. For some reason the rest of the world is oblivious and seemingly ignorant of what the US has been successfully doing in Africa. They haven’t been asleep at the wheel at all. Hence my distrust of mass media commentary as it tends to lack diligence of execution in research.

I’m also a believer in Europe. I will be so bold as to predict that at some time in future, though maybe not in 50 years, the United States, Canada and Mexico will rejoin Europe. I realise Europe has a falling population now, but this is only a circumstance of abundant wealth. Europe however is the paragon of creativity, and ideas cost more then all the cheap clothes in China.

Intellectual and creative centres change - that is the wonder of developmental gravity - the centre shifts over time. Whoever educates their population effectively wins - and an educated population seeks change and freedom to be and maintain creativity. That leaves a few countries with some inherent dilemnas

So the answer is that no, I don’t see a bipolar World of US and China, but a more complex relationship.

I don’t see a US Canada Mexico bloc with Europe – IMV its more of a Central American bloc. The US will become closer with her southern neighbours over time. Look at the steady but persistent rise in her Hispanic population. Cultural bonds are hard to break. The Canadians IMV are more European in attitude/behaviour, the Americans? – definitely not.

 

[Sgt.Banes]

this will be about a mock invasion of taiwan,a member will play the different forces such as PRC commander and centcom with another as ROC commander and centcom,these members will post there moves and moderators will determine the outcome of each move,members can also post moves for other factors like japan and America
with that in mind ill put down the starting conditions

it is june 2008 taiwan has just elected another DPP leader he decides to declare independance the PRC condems this and gives him 3 days to back down.....or else
and the scenario proceeds from there...enjoy

More or less China will not do anything to provoke any conflict, they know that if they attack either taiwan or any U.S ally in the region that P.R.C will lose international banking assests. Not to mention it will face U.S. retaliation.

 

[FutureTank]

Locking out Zimbabwe from the international finance systems is doable, but China is in a different scale of involvement. It's not possible to just lock PRC out, nor are the sanctions going to work because of the huge value of US Dollar that PRC holds and would be able to trade with via middle-men. This would devalue the US dollar further.

In any case, Taiwan is indefencible. Its only a matter of time before mainlanders realise the way to implement such a plan. No neighboug is going to fight for Tauwan, and the US is not going to blockade it or try to re-invade it.

Give it 2-5 more years and Taiwan will go the road of Hong Kong willingly.

Cheers
Greg

 

[Manfred]

China has its enemies too...
As things stand now, India can send a more effective carrier battle-group to Taiwan than the PCR can, and has good reson to do so.

However, can they get there quick enough? The Red fleet could possibly mass for an invasion in 2 days. Is a US carier group always that close to Taiwan?

If I were the PRC commander, I would want a serious 5th column movment inside Taiwan. I would mount a massive (3 division) para drop simultanuiously with a 3 Army sealift. this would take place hours after minfields had been laid all around the island, and submarines were operating INSIDE those minefields supported by maritime partol aircraft and ASW craft to suport the Subs. Air supremacy would be enforced by several raids per day of 1-2 thousand planes, several times per day.

Proportionatly, it would be as bloody and vicious as Crete, and much bigger. This begs the question; would it be worth it?

If I were the PRC commander, I would wait for Kin Jong Il to do something truely ignorant, and use that for and excuse to grab North Korea. Far easier, and far more unexpected. They would be greeted as liberators, and the international community would have no way to react, or reason to oppose it.

 

[hybrid]

Locking out Zimbabwe from the international finance systems is doable, but China is in a different scale of involvement. It's not possible to just lock PRC out, nor are the sanctions going to work because of the huge value of US Dollar that PRC holds and would be able to trade with via middle-men. This would devalue the US dollar further.

In any case, Taiwan is indefencible. Its only a matter of time before mainlanders realise the way to implement such a plan. No neighboug is going to fight for Tauwan, and the US is not going to blockade it or try to re-invade it.

Give it 2-5 more years and Taiwan will go the road of Hong Kong willingly.

Cheers
Greg

Eh? Locking China partially or mostly out of the export/import system and its related financial system is rather simple in theory, mainly start mining key harbors, tell any insurance underwriters their cargoes are at risk of being sunk if they trade with China and the mine laying power will not guarantee their safe passage (in a time of war it may actively even hunt these ships down). Hell just the mention of war in the region will pretty much force many underwriters to NOT insure cargos going through the area. This in turn causes trade to be effectively curtailed. No insurance means almost every captain/ship owner is not going to run the risk of getting their ship sunk or damaged just to get into a port in China. Me I'd give China approximately 14 days for their monetary system to suffer a Chernobyl style meltdown followed roughly at the same time with internal rioting that would probably ensue from the said breakdown.

 

[FutureTank]

Eh? Locking China partially or mostly out of the export/import system and its related financial system is rather simple in theory, mainly start mining key harbors, tell any insurance underwriters their cargoes are at risk of being sunk if they trade with China and the mine laying power will not guarantee their safe passage (in a time of war it may actively even hunt these ships down). Hell just the mention of war in the region will pretty much force many underwriters to NOT insure cargos going through the area. This in turn causes trade to be effectively curtailed. No insurance means almost every captain/ship owner is not going to run the risk of getting their ship sunk or damaged just to get into a port in China. Me I'd give China approximately 14 days for their monetary system to suffer a Chernobyl style meltdown followed roughly at the same time with internal rioting that would probably ensue from the said breakdown.

I think you need to realise that we are no longer in the WW2-type international environment, particularly where financial world is concerned.

 

[FutureTank]

China has its enemies too...
As things stand now, India can send a more effective carrier battle-group to Taiwan than the PCR can, and has good reson to do so..

Good reasons...like what? In any case I doubt the Indians could send a carrier battle group to Taiwan in anything like the time required, particularly since they would need to transit territorial waters of several states that may not grant permission, like Malaysia and Indonesia.

However, can they get there quick enough? The Red fleet could possibly mass for an invasion in 2 days. Is a US carier group always that close to Taiwan?.

The US does not kee a carrier battle group on station in close proximity of Taiwan. The nearest base of origin for such a force would be Pearl Harbour.

If I were the PRC commander, I would want a serious 5th column movment inside Taiwan. I would mount a massive (3 division) para drop simultanuiously with a 3 Army sealift. this would take place hours after minfields had been laid all around the island, and submarines were operating INSIDE those minefields supported by maritime partol aircraft and ASW craft to suport the Subs. Air supremacy would be enforced by several raids per day of 1-2 thousand planes, several times per day..

I would agree to the 5th column, bu the rest is suicide. The Taiwanese would make chopped liver out of massed airborne ops, and there is no capacity in PRC for a conventional amphibious assault using 3 armies (or even two armies like Normandy). In fact it would struggle with even three divisions.

Proportionatly, it would be as bloody and vicious as Crete, and much bigger. This begs the question; would it be worth it?.

No.

If I were the PRC commander, I would wait for Kin Jong Il to do something truely ignorant, and use that for and excuse to grab North Korea. Far easier, and far more unexpected. They would be greeted as liberators, and the international community would have no way to react, or reason to oppose it.

Kim is not going to do anything stupid, and the Chinese would not march into NK simply because it would therefore fall on them to take over the management of the country that has been mismanaged for 70 years (at least).

 

[Manfred]

India is no friend of China, but that was just a hypothetical jab in the dark.

China has a massive comercial fleet, and I am willing to bet that most of them were designed with an auxilliary military purpose in mind.

Imagine this; a Daylight crossing of the 150km Strait of Taiwan. This will allow even those PRC aircraft with limited all-weather capabilities to take part in a busy operation. hundreds of fighters cover the fleet while Thousands of fighters, fighter bombers and bombers "beat up" the Islands defences. After 12 or more hours of constant raids, the paras arrive for a dusk landing, the low-angle rays of the sun make all ground features visible to even the most ameture jumper.

An hour or two later, the landings take place, and the best PRC pilots and planes crowd down on the tired Taiwanese pilots, those that are left.

How long can Taiwan hold out? How much damage can the 5th column do?

Would a prior take-over of N Korea help pave the way to this operation?

 

[Tasman]

The US does not kee a carrier battle group on station in close proximity of Taiwan. The nearest base of origin for such a force would be Pearl Harbour.

You're correct that the USN doesn't keep a carrier battle group on station in close proximity to Taiwan but one carrier, currently USS Kittyhawk, is home ported at Yokosuka in Japan.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Actually Taipei seems to be moveing in the opposite direction.
Heres a good read on the topic, reeeks of propaganda but the facts seem to speak for themselvs.

http://english.people.com.cn/200201/19/eng20020119_88962.shtml

This is an extract from DT news thats a bit more resent

"The report comes as tensions across the Taiwan straight have risen after President Chen Shui-bian pledged to push for independence and a new constitution earlier this week.

Chen told the pro-independence group Formosan Association for Public Affairs Sunday: "I want to say this again, 'four wants, one no'. That is, Taiwan wants independence, Taiwan wants to change its name, Taiwan wants a new constitution, Taiwan wants development."

http://www.defencetalk.com/news/pub...Cruise_Missile_Capable_Of_Striking_China16001

If the Taiwanese really want indipendance, and i beleve political freedom is something they do cherish, and something they stand to loose, then they have a window of time while PLAN does not really have the capability to sucsesfully invade. They might be tempted to push now while the cost for PROC will be too massive to be feasible.

 

[Manfred]

I am surprised that they didnt go independant a long time ago. The ideal time would have been back in the 1970s, when Carter recognized China.

In the last 110 years, the Island has only been part of China for 4 years. What is the big deal?

 

[FutureTank]

China has a massive comercial fleet, and I am willing to bet that most of them were designed with an auxilliary military purpose in mind.

Imagine this; a Daylight crossing of the 150km Strait of Taiwan. This will allow even those PRC aircraft with limited all-weather capabilities to take part in a busy operation. hundreds of fighters cover the fleet while Thousands of fighters, fighter bombers and bombers "beat up" the Islands defences. After 12 or more hours of constant raids, the paras arrive for a dusk landing, the low-angle rays of the sun make all ground features visible to even the most ameture jumper.

An hour or two later, the landings take place, and the best PRC pilots and planes crowd down on the tired Taiwanese pilots, those that are left.

How long can Taiwan hold out? How much damage can the 5th column do?

Would a prior take-over of N Korea help pave the way to this operation?

Having a commercial fleet and using it for an amphibious assault are different things.
Having thousands of fighters (hundreds maybe) is not like having the ability to use them in the same theatre. Movement of so manyu aircraft and their supporting equipment would take weeks if not linger, and would be detected. Afte that it would be like shooting fish in a proverbial barrel.

There is nothing simple about Taiwan's totpography that would make it possible even for amateurs to jump. Taipei is particularly difficult as far as parachute approaches are, and the lopesided nature of the island's mountanous region in relation to the population centres would make the whole operation even more difficult with all sorts of weird thermals and currents.

Direct assault of this type are almost predestined to fail in the same way that rushing the walls in medieval siege without prior beseiging and reduction would fail given the degree of preparadness of the defenders.

Take over of North Korea is a nightmare for both South Koreans and the Chinese. Consider the effect of German reunification of the German economy. Kore is still recovering from the 97 recession! If this was to happen now to China it would become a serious burden on the economy by essentially adding the North Korean population the the ranks of Chinese unemployed (the NK employable population by Western standards is around 20% of the population).

The effect of 5th column on the defence of Taiwan is hard to predict, and I would say it would be minimal if unsupported by clandestine operations.

Cheers

 

[eckherl]

I would have to agree with Greg on this, China has the time and patience to play the waiting game in-regards to Taiwan plus they would have more to lose if they attacked Taiwan in re-gards to their economy. The U.S has pretty much warned Taiwan not to go independance, so that tells you where our government is committed to helping them.
North Korea is nothing more than a big major head ache for everyone in that regoin and China has more to gain by leaving them alone, also there are
Kim Jong Ill high ranking staff members who have kind of turned away from trusting China, the nuke test lays testimony to that.

 

[Manfred]

Ah, very good, we have a little controversy here! Glad to see that, it makes things more interesting.

Shall we have a Gentlemanly War Game? I would volunteer to serve as a PRC commander. We will need a Moderator, or two Mod's to run a few double-blind turns as resolve conflicts (drawing cards or rolling dice) and of course, I need an opponent or two.

Shall we give it a try? I think this could be an interesting research tool, and perhaps entertaining to the observers.

 

[eckherl]

Ah, very good, we have a little controversy here! Glad to see that, it makes things more interesting.

Shall we have a Gentlemanly War Game? I would volunteer to serve as a PRC commander. We will need a Moderator, or two Mod's to run a few double-blind turns as resolve conflicts (drawing cards or rolling dice) and of course, I need an opponent or two.

Shall we give it a try? I think this could be an interesting research tool, and perhaps entertaining to the observers.

Is North Korea involved also, if so I will play Uncle Kim and his lackey commanders, nukes are on the playing table right?

 

[Waylander]

Ah common, you just want to have some fun with your own regime and fire some nukes at everything were it could cause some nasty trouble.

 

[eckherl]

Ah common, you just want to have some fun with your own regime and fire some nukes at everything were it could cause some nasty trouble.

All I would have to say to China is, any movement beyond the Yalu River and that is it, you will eventually win but will be worth what I am about ready to send you in air freight mode.

 

[eckherl]

All I would have to say to China is, any movement beyond the Yalu River and that is it, you will eventually win but will be worth what I am about ready to send you in air freight mode.

Sorry - forgot to add this, Uncle Kim and his posse.

 

[FutureTank]

You're correct that the USN doesn't keep a carrier battle group on station in close proximity to Taiwan but one carrier, currently USS Kittyhawk, is home ported at Yokosuka in Japan.

With all due respect, a carrier may not be a solution in this case. A Carrier Air Wing is three Navy squadrons, a Marine squadron and a whole lot of fixed and rotary support aircraft. One Navy squadron is always on CAP. This leaves about 54 aircraft for strike missions. However with an entire PRC Air Force in the hypothetical fight, I would say that it would be more prident to keep one squadron on standby below deck, so this leaves 36 strike aircraft. How much difference 36 aircraft are going to make in this case is open to dispute because they will be operationg in a less favoured battle space confined to coastal regions and facing not only Chinese land-based aircraft, but also land based AD and cruise missiles (and Chinese are reported to have 300nm+ ranged weapons which would force carrier aircraft to operate at extreme range and therefore with reduced payloads). While I have no doubt the USN and USMC pilots have what it takes to perform their missions in this environment, this is not the optimal use of carrier air wing, nor is it sustainable for a week (at least).

On the other hand there are two USAF wings stationed in Japan with 4-5 fighter squadrons (F-15s) that can add substantially to the defence of Taiwan (most of their equipment can be airlifted by the cargo wing also in Japan). With Continental USA squadrons, the USAF can double that number in 24 hours I think. IMHO that, was why NK kept firing missiles in Japan's direction. They were trying to engratiate themselves with China by saying "look, we can take out the US bases in Japan if you want us to". Most journalists missed this possibility.

Cheers

Cheers
Greg