What a mess they have made of the budget. And those who know indicate our defense spending is wholly unequal to what confronts us. I think the stats were that China had 370 warships compared to our 300, and Russia has vastly increased its spending on the military. True, they are using up a fair amount, but infrastructure, etc. will go we…
What a mess they have made of the budget. And those who know indicate our defense spending is wholly unequal to what confronts us. I think the stats were that China had 370 warships compared to our 300, and Russia has vastly increased its spending on the military. True, they are using up a fair amount, but infrastructure, etc. will go well beyond Ukraine. They are low on morale, personnel, and a tax base that is willing to pay.
I saw that article too, but I don't know that that is a consensus view.
Also, in warships, raw numbers of them isn't the way to gauge power. I repeatedly hear that China doesn't have the ability to project its naval power in the way the US does. Currently, a conflict with China would occur around Taiwan. Now that gives China an advantage of being close to home, but since Taiwan is the objective, it makes them vulnerable to area denial. They're also vulnerable to commerce restriction. Through air and sea power, they can be blockaded. The blockade doesn't have to be close to their coast like in the old days of blockades. With satellites, cargo ships can be tracked all the way from China to wherever they go that China can't protect. And who is going to ship something to China if their ships are going to be forfeit from doing so?
Beyond that, allies. Japan has a formidable navy, and S. Korea and Australia add to US capabilities too. Then add in the Europeans that would assist. China doesn't have allies. Not really. NK might join them, causing a big headache, but who else? Iran? Russia? No one is going to go up against the US, NATO, and the Pacific Allies in a global conventional war. That is why it is so critical to maintain and expand our alliances, contra to the massive damage Trump wants to cause.
We're mostly okay today, but the next 50 years is a period where we're going to need our alliances in a way we haven't for the last 30 years. I'm not worried about today, and as long as Trump isn't elected, I'm not terribly worried about the future. Russia has done the west a huge favor by giving it a wake up call and shooting itself in the foot. As long as we don't do something stupid like proclaim, "America First!!!!" we shouldn't have too hard a time maintaining a favorable balance of power.
I'm not sure I understand this concept of having allies and friends to count on. :)
I'm glad that the DoD(?) is required to put out a national defense assessment on a regular basis. I would like to think that we have the right people in place to assess and direct policy and procurement to mitigate the risks. We definitely will not have that with Trump. And, yes, Russia did do all of us a big favor. With China improving its military posture and Iran with its proxies, plus all the other uglies, we need to keep on our toes.
Look at Ukraine and how fast they're burning through munitions. I'd rather see a focus on munitions supply capability over worrying about the number of naval vessels. Heck, we can barely crew the ones we do have.
Thank you for the thoughtful reply and info. I know a lot about Russia, but little about China’s military. I do know Russia had been relying on outdated equipment—that mean numbers were completely irrelevant. It will be clear in the Ukraine battles that superior U.S. and Western equipment will be far superior no matter how many weapons Russia uses except that Russia chooses to do terrible damage to non-military targets with the hardware it has. It must also be becoming clear inside Russia that the war is not going well. Putin may try to drum up popular hatred of Ukraine, but we’ll see how far that gets him.
We don't know that much about either county's military. However, right now we know a lot more about Russia than China because the now 2 1/2 year war in Ukraine has outed Russian weakness and demonstrated that we overestimated their military capabilities.
We don't have accurate information about China's military either, but complacency and underestimation are foolish. On the other hand, if China were foolish enough to attempt a military take-over of Taiwan, the West might learn what China's actual capabilities, strengths and weaknesses are.
It's not our spending, it's what we spend our defense dollars on. Look at the boondoggle that was the littoral combat ship, and the overruns for the Gerald Ford. I'm hesitant to advocate for more spending until procurement is under control.
I agree with the budget being messy. Too many competing priorities. The American people really need to better understand the push and pull of this process. One program that I heard about was where a group of people, of varying political and philosophical persuasions, were brought together to work through the federal budgeting process. It was apparently very eye-opening to them, in terms of what money goes where and why. It was not an easy process and not everyone got what they wanted.
The second link is 5 years out of date but should still be somewhat illustrative of the actual composition of each fleet beyond an overall number.
First note the tonnage mismatch overall and then note the aircraft carrier, nuclear submarine, cruiser, and destroyer mismatch. China's total ship edge is in smaller surface vessels for coastal defense not power projection. The two aircraft carriers they do have are a 70's or 80's model purchased from Russia that is clearly inferior to anything the US has (I'm pretty sure it is not nuclear powered and has no catapults which severely limits the size/armaments of the aircraft) and the other is much newer but is at best a proof of concept for both the technology in a Chinese warship and Chinese naval aviation itself.
I'm not saying it is something that can be fully ignored but it isn't like they are a threat to the US mainland any time soon. It mostly complicates defending Taiwan. And while I'd definitely like to defend Taiwan, especially in the near term, I am uncertain of the long term usefulness vs price and even the plausibility of maintaining vast military superiority over what could become a peer economic power in waters very close to their coastal territory.
Same. I mostly remembered seeing that factoid in a Bulwark article yesterday and wanting to comment on it. You provided a place to do so. I appreciate it.
What a mess they have made of the budget. And those who know indicate our defense spending is wholly unequal to what confronts us. I think the stats were that China had 370 warships compared to our 300, and Russia has vastly increased its spending on the military. True, they are using up a fair amount, but infrastructure, etc. will go well beyond Ukraine. They are low on morale, personnel, and a tax base that is willing to pay.
I saw that article too, but I don't know that that is a consensus view.
Also, in warships, raw numbers of them isn't the way to gauge power. I repeatedly hear that China doesn't have the ability to project its naval power in the way the US does. Currently, a conflict with China would occur around Taiwan. Now that gives China an advantage of being close to home, but since Taiwan is the objective, it makes them vulnerable to area denial. They're also vulnerable to commerce restriction. Through air and sea power, they can be blockaded. The blockade doesn't have to be close to their coast like in the old days of blockades. With satellites, cargo ships can be tracked all the way from China to wherever they go that China can't protect. And who is going to ship something to China if their ships are going to be forfeit from doing so?
Beyond that, allies. Japan has a formidable navy, and S. Korea and Australia add to US capabilities too. Then add in the Europeans that would assist. China doesn't have allies. Not really. NK might join them, causing a big headache, but who else? Iran? Russia? No one is going to go up against the US, NATO, and the Pacific Allies in a global conventional war. That is why it is so critical to maintain and expand our alliances, contra to the massive damage Trump wants to cause.
We're mostly okay today, but the next 50 years is a period where we're going to need our alliances in a way we haven't for the last 30 years. I'm not worried about today, and as long as Trump isn't elected, I'm not terribly worried about the future. Russia has done the west a huge favor by giving it a wake up call and shooting itself in the foot. As long as we don't do something stupid like proclaim, "America First!!!!" we shouldn't have too hard a time maintaining a favorable balance of power.
I'm not sure I understand this concept of having allies and friends to count on. :)
I'm glad that the DoD(?) is required to put out a national defense assessment on a regular basis. I would like to think that we have the right people in place to assess and direct policy and procurement to mitigate the risks. We definitely will not have that with Trump. And, yes, Russia did do all of us a big favor. With China improving its military posture and Iran with its proxies, plus all the other uglies, we need to keep on our toes.
Look at Ukraine and how fast they're burning through munitions. I'd rather see a focus on munitions supply capability over worrying about the number of naval vessels. Heck, we can barely crew the ones we do have.
Thank you for the thoughtful reply and info. I know a lot about Russia, but little about China’s military. I do know Russia had been relying on outdated equipment—that mean numbers were completely irrelevant. It will be clear in the Ukraine battles that superior U.S. and Western equipment will be far superior no matter how many weapons Russia uses except that Russia chooses to do terrible damage to non-military targets with the hardware it has. It must also be becoming clear inside Russia that the war is not going well. Putin may try to drum up popular hatred of Ukraine, but we’ll see how far that gets him.
We don't know that much about either county's military. However, right now we know a lot more about Russia than China because the now 2 1/2 year war in Ukraine has outed Russian weakness and demonstrated that we overestimated their military capabilities.
We don't have accurate information about China's military either, but complacency and underestimation are foolish. On the other hand, if China were foolish enough to attempt a military take-over of Taiwan, the West might learn what China's actual capabilities, strengths and weaknesses are.
It's not our spending, it's what we spend our defense dollars on. Look at the boondoggle that was the littoral combat ship, and the overruns for the Gerald Ford. I'm hesitant to advocate for more spending until procurement is under control.
I agree with the budget being messy. Too many competing priorities. The American people really need to better understand the push and pull of this process. One program that I heard about was where a group of people, of varying political and philosophical persuasions, were brought together to work through the federal budgeting process. It was apparently very eye-opening to them, in terms of what money goes where and why. It was not an easy process and not everyone got what they wanted.
I'm no expert but that 370 vs 300 quote on warships seems extremely misleading.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/who-rules-the-waves-u-s-and-chinese-fleets-by-tonnage/
https://www.reddit.com/r/WarshipPorn/comments/mpdoq3/just_incase_anyone_wanted_a_comparison_in_naval/
The second link is 5 years out of date but should still be somewhat illustrative of the actual composition of each fleet beyond an overall number.
First note the tonnage mismatch overall and then note the aircraft carrier, nuclear submarine, cruiser, and destroyer mismatch. China's total ship edge is in smaller surface vessels for coastal defense not power projection. The two aircraft carriers they do have are a 70's or 80's model purchased from Russia that is clearly inferior to anything the US has (I'm pretty sure it is not nuclear powered and has no catapults which severely limits the size/armaments of the aircraft) and the other is much newer but is at best a proof of concept for both the technology in a Chinese warship and Chinese naval aviation itself.
I'm not saying it is something that can be fully ignored but it isn't like they are a threat to the US mainland any time soon. It mostly complicates defending Taiwan. And while I'd definitely like to defend Taiwan, especially in the near term, I am uncertain of the long term usefulness vs price and even the plausibility of maintaining vast military superiority over what could become a peer economic power in waters very close to their coastal territory.
I am more fearful of a continued westward march by Putin in the event Trump were to win.
Same. I mostly remembered seeing that factoid in a Bulwark article yesterday and wanting to comment on it. You provided a place to do so. I appreciate it.