"What war between Australia and China could look like if" Topic

Taiwan conflict escalates

"Blood, sweat and tears. Is Australia prepared to pay the price to defend its friend Taiwan from China? And what would such a fight look like?

The vision is not a new one: White knights charging forth, flags flying, to save friends from a bellowing dragon. But China's been preparing to take – and hold – Taiwan by force for decades. It has just about every contingency covered. And the West may not be able to do much about it.

Washington and Beijing are locked in an intense strategic battle…"
Main page
link

Armand

Chinese exports of key products stop and Australia is destroyed within three months.

Eg even water treatment chemicals are imported into Australia as the country doesn't produce it's own. If Chinese supplies stop, we have 3 months or less to get additional supplies from somewhere else or we're down to third world style water supplies.

Only 2 out of 8 oil refineries still exist and one of those 2 is also scheduled for decommissioning.

Traitors have sold us out for decades. Australia surrendered in 1975 when Whitlam government started deindustrialisation process.

This may need to be added to the equation … just say'n …

Australia Will Invest Millions to Upgrade Military Sites Where US Marines Train

link

Chinese exports of key products stop and Australia is destroyed within three months.

Key exports to China stop and within months the Chinese steel industry collapses, food prices rise and their textile industry is effected by shortages.

* China imports much of its iron ore from Australia
* Australia is an important source of foreign food imports (grain, beef lamb) and raw materials for textiles (wool and leather)

So does China decide to go full Imperial Japan mode and try to conquer Australia (it seems to have already bought New Zealand)? It has been creating an arc of military bases, ports and airfields across the South Pacific, including Guadalcanal.

Not to worry, our "leaders" have done the same across the much larger pond to your northeast.

On the plus side, if things do heat up to a military action level, we'll be right there with you, either standing down and letting China have their way, or trying to aid Taiwan. I suspect the Japanese will be on board with us, either way too, since they know they'll be next, because China is itching for payback against them for the humiliation they suffered during WWII.

Given current vectors, I suspect we'll make a show of bravado, but will do nothing of real importance if China blockades, attacks, or invades Taiwan, just like we've done over Hong Kong, where there was barely any discussion or concern expressed at all.

"a show of bravado, but will do nothing of real importance if China blockades, attacks, or invades Taiwan"

Really?

The "United" States is a great ally, just ask Ukraine and Israel.

Those countries know how much it means when Uncle Sam says "I got your back".

Glup!…

Armand

Oddball, isn't that what Thresher was saying? Or did I miss something?

The "United" States is a great ally, just ask Ukraine and Israel.

Those countries know how much it means when Uncle Sam says "I got your back".

Ya, that is what Thresher said, I quoted him.

Look for the "-" symbols.

That means I'm quoting another source.

What I typed on my own, take it anyway you like.

It depends. If China should get wonky and sink a US naval ship, things could spiral out of control quickly. Americans don't like to be pushed around.

Basically what ardo says, with a couple of caveats:

There still are producers of water purification chemicals, filters and ancillaries being made in Australia. However, not enough for just the major cities, let alone many of the regions. Basic things like boiling water will be common again, as with the Sydney water issues in the late 90's.

De-industrialisation and privatising strategic assets started well before Whitlam, but he accelerated things the deeper his government went into debt.

The loss of fuel imports (assuming the PRC bothered to put a blockade onto Australia- which is a big assumption considering the size of our coastline and the need for the PRC to concentrate it's navy) would cause a quick collapse of the country and road and rail goods transportation fails. That will spark the biggest danger- internal unrest and violence, and states or even regions breaking away to go on their own paths.

Any shortage is going to promote panic buying, states "asserting their rights" and even regions shutting out "outsiders" (witness the bus loads of city shoppers being escorted out of regional towns during the first "dunny paper panic"). The longer the shortages last, the worse things will get.

Militarily we may aid the US as best we can, but domestically things will be a major mess. There may not be an "Australia" if things get protracted, just eight states and mainland territories squabbling over who owns what and trying to force break-away regions to rejoin the "true" governments.

Then again, the footy may be on TV and most Aussies will just ignore what's happening "up there" and get on with their lives, as usual.

Cheers.

Considering all probably would be same like in Munich 1938.

"sink a US naval ship…Americans don't like to be pushed around."?

USS Pueblo – 1968
USS Cole – 2000
CTS-3 – 2016

It has happened in the past.

Forgot about this one:

USS Stark – 1987

The main stream media will spin any situation however their corporate masters tell them. It's all about money and preserving the reigns of power.

Yup, all about the money and power.

The "United" States is a great ally, just ask Ukraine and Israel.

Yeah just ask many nations around the world how much $$$ and aid the US gives them every year. IMO … Too much …

"Let them eat cake !" … 🎂🍰 And pie too ! 🥧

Oddball, also sinking of South Korean corvette ROKS Cheonan by a North Korean submarine in 2010. Norks got away scot free despite killing 46 South Korean sailors.

West is completely conflict averse when it comes to anyone with even a little bit of capability even if its the garbage museum armies of Iran and North Korea.

Western militaries preferred enemies are colonial insurgents equipped with AKs, RPGs, Toyotas and IEDS or defenceless third world dysfunctional states like Libya or Iraq.

Cowardice is the new western norm.

De-industrialisation and privatising strategic assets started well before Whitlam, but he accelerated things the deeper his government went into debt.

And every single government since has promoted deindustrialisation!

The loss of fuel imports (assuming the PRC bothered to put a blockade onto Australia- which is a big assumption considering the size of our coastline and the need for the PRC to concentrate it's navy) would cause a quick collapse of the country and road and rail goods transportation fails. That will spark the biggest danger- internal unrest and violence, and states or even regions breaking away to go on their own paths.

Any shortage is going to promote panic buying, states "asserting their rights" and even regions shutting out "outsiders" (witness the bus loads of city shoppers being escorted out of regional towns during the first "dunny paper panic"). The longer the shortages last, the worse things will get.

As the ultimate vapid consumer society, Australia is probably one of the ones most at risk of any war/conflict with China.

You have a populace that doesn't understand much about the world and whose main interactions are consumption of cheap consumer goods.

The toilet paper craze was a sign of this vapid consumerism – it was literally like a version of some Pacific Islander cargo cult.

G'day, ardo.

And every single government since has promoted deindustrialisation!

I know, though that attitude's very slowly changing as a result of "import shock" during COVID. Whether the change of mind will continue, let alone ramp up, is a different question.

You have a populace that doesn't understand much about the world and whose main interactions are consumption of cheap consumer goods.

I think that's a tad harsh, mate. The high immigrant intake has brought it's own knowledge of foreign countries with it. Also Australians have always been well travelled in comparison to some other nations, if not always well-behaved over-seas. Most Australians can at least find the US, Europe and Asia on a map of the world, unlike some.

As for vapid consumerism, that's a mark of Western society and is encouraged by governments- and the corporations that own them.

Cheers.

The high immigrant intake has brought it's own knowledge of foreign countries with it. Also Australians have always been well travelled in comparison to some other nations, if not always well-behaved over-seas. Most Australians can at least find the US, Europe and Asia on a map of the world, unlike some.

Actually as a European Australian I find it depressing how clueless Australians are, even if they have travelled and even university graduates.

Most Australians I know who travel overseas go to Thailand, Philippines or Bali to basically get drunk on the cheap!

I've known many uni grads who are clueless and couldn't find Europe or Asia or actual countries on the map.

One of my friends is a teacher and doesn't know where the Eiffel Tower or Paris is, another is also a teacher and doesn't know what 4 multiplied by 7 is or that War of the Worlds was a book before it became a Tom Cruise book.

Sadly one of them teaches a class that covers grades 4,5 and 6 and none of the students can read past grade 3.

Another uni educated colleague didn't understand how basic interest worked.

When I was at university studying political science, there were students who didn't know who the Foreign Affairs Minister was at the time.

Doesn't help the universities are glorified revenue machines so any fool can enter and graduate.

It's all very depressing. I know a few Aussies who are well versed in the way of the world, but most are dense and ignorant.

Indeed the statistic that up to 50% of Australians are functionally illiterate tells you everything about the country.

link
link

link

So not only did the country embrace deindustrialise, it has also embraced stupidity with gusto.

Forgot to mention I work mainly with university educated types – doctors, nurses etc. Even hear the ability to string a coherent sentence in an email is a struggle for many. We've even had a highly qualified nurse who didn't understand how an average worked.

Thanks!.

Armand

That is scary arealdeadone … Hope otherwise they could do there job with some expertise …?

Legion,

We've had some very dangerous quacks work for us. Some have been so dangerous we've had to terminate them and report them to the regulatory authority APHRA for investigation. Others are tolerated despite incompetence or laziness or both due to inability to recruit better staff.

As a public service our salaries are relatively low compared to private where psychiatrists can charge up to $400 USD-$600/session and as a regional service we can't attract doctors who want prestige of big city hospitals.

And as I work in mental health, most practitioners prefer to charge a ton of money listen to some rich guy babble on about their daddy issues than deal with people suffering from full blown schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.

Same applies to nurses, psychologists etc.

My wife worked for a private allied health provider as an admin and they refused to see anyone from a lower socio-economic background or who was viewed as too difficult to treat.

It's positively scary and given ongoing privatisation of health in Australia, it's only going to get worse.

Sorry to hear that. I know since may healthcare is all covered by the VA. My experiences there has always been positive. Including major surgeries e.g. hip replacement and cataracts … Plus very nice hearing aids.

They even have me see a shrink a few times a years. They have not said this … but I suspect I'm a high functioning psychopath … 😁🤩🤪😵🥴

@RI

I have seen zero evidence this ever actually happened.

Good point. I have two anecdotal occasions- my son rang about a minibus of people (perhaps 8?) being refused service in Horsham, then being escorted out when things came close to violence. The other is from a friend that says she saw it- a group of people buying up trolley loads of rice, flour, powdered milk, cleaning gear, etc, at Coles (or was it Woolies?) Goulburn and, when the manager refused to let them go through the checkouts, things got to the shoving stage before the cops arrived. Apparently there's a video on Youtube, but I've never bothered to look for it.

So while not the coaches full of shoppers is probably rumour, I trust Ray and Wendy enough to believe similar did happen. Though Horsham is a long way from Melbourne, so who knows where that lot came from.

@ardo

I mainly work with engineers and technicians, as well as various sorts of grad on rotation, so numeracy failings aren't something I've noticed- the odd checkout person who can't work out change being an exception. However, a lot engineers can hardly put a coherent sentence sentence together in a Skype, let alone an email or maintenance instruction (which is why I have a job). I don't think things are as bad as you say, but it's a margin of error, not complete repudiation.

My wife works in health and she has said much the same as you have WRT some doctors and nurses. The AMA and Nurses Federation have a lot to answer for- neither will let someone be sacked without a fight, unless they have really cocked something up (eg the NSW south coast gynecologist who was taking examinations a lot further than they needed to go).

As for our health system ("If the system is the answer, who asked such a bloody stupid question?") I agree. It's amazing how we've taken the worst aspects of the UK's National Health and the US Corporate Profit systems and combined them to make a greater mess.

China's Propaganda War Against The Australian Military Continues

link

It would be a joke if it was not that serious. Well, it is possible that some Australian did bad things and have to be punish as they deserve, but is China on the best place for talking about "atrocities"? Ridiculous!…

Armand

The PRC/CCP are showing they know even if the story is wrong/propaganda/lies, etc. Some will believe it …

In this case the Chinese are using the actual truth as a weapon against us.

Here's the Australian government link to this if you don't believe me:

link

I'd already posted this up before on TMP:

TMP link

Some members of our Special Forces did allegedly go rogue and initiated a culture of murder.

Some of it was captured on video for some dumb reason – I actually watched one where an Aussie trooper executes some farmer he found in a field a couple of minutes after dismounting from a chopper.

These guys need to be tried and if convicted, gaoled. Plain and simple.

But more importantly our military needs to reform Spec Ops so they perform honourably instead of being a free-for-all that exists outside of normal chain of command.

@ardo

Some of it was captured on video for some dumb reason

They wear helmet cameras, mate. It helps with mission debriefing, the videos are scanned for intelligence data and there's probably a few other reasons they have them.

Fully agree. Find the guilty ones and hammer them, so the rest of the ADF doesn't have to also carry their stench.

I don't agree with the reformation of the SF units (SOCOM reform is another matter).

At most 25 people were involved, a couple more if you count their higher-ups who either chose to ignore what was going on, or didn't know- so weren't doing their jobs. What happened was revealed was because other SF personnel didn't accept what was going on and they took it up the chain. When that didn't work quickly enough they took it to a whistleblower and the media.

The government and the commanders- all the way to CDF, are the ones that need to be reformed. The star ranks for not doing their jobs and also for not forcing the government to stop interfering in operational decisions (didn't want to cruel their chances at a governorship?), the government for interfering operationally in matters they didn't understand by insisting SF be used in place of "normal" infantry, so they could avoid the political consequences of possible higher casualties. As well as setting up the situation for some SF to go rogue (some members spent more time on actual operations then WWI lasted) they also demoralised the infantry, RAE and other arms corps, who were reduced to being nothing but dixie-bashers, duty numbers and odd-job warm bodies.

I'd also reform Brereton out of his job for trying to protect the ADFA-RMC-UR club members from the consequences of their p***-poor leadership and lack of moral courage.

Spot on analysis by Dal Gavan

Thanks!.

Armand

This is going to help them…

A Chinese Airbase Between Hawaii And New Zealand?

link

Armand

Chinese State Media Say Australia Will Be Bombed If They Support US Military Action Defending Taiwan

link

Armand

Great map though !

Glad you enjoyed it my good friend.

Armand

Chinese State Media Say Australia Will Be Bombed If They Support US Military Action Defending Taiwan

Even though I live in Australia, all is fair in love and war. If we get engaged in a war against China, we become a legitimate target.

Australian politicians haven't quite grasped the reality of modern warfare and that China like any major power has massive reach.

They're still basing military strategy here on a 1960s Cold War model including when Australia was not viewed as a strategic target by main enemy, USSR.

So you have an excellent ground based surveillance radar (Jindalee but also joint facilities with US) and a reasonably large (96) fighter fleet (albeit all short range and slow F-35 and F/A-18F).

Australia has no kinetic ground based anti-ballistic/anti cruise missile air defence systems save 3 air warfare destroyers.

Ground based defences are limited to MANPADS and they've now ordered a small number of NASAMS though that is useless against ballistic or long range cruise missiles and they are insufficient in number to protect even a tiny portion of key targets let alone any protection for the cities.

Australian air bases (as well as naval bases) aren't hardened – eg there are no hardened air shelters or tunnels. Again this is due to a lack of appreciation of modern long range firepower (noting any long range firepower was absent in the region since Indonesia retired its Tu-16s in late 1960s).

Time to buy, or develop some nuke missiles for self-defense and deterrence.

Thresher,

Nah, defence is too busy pumping mega billions into job creation schemes such as $80 USD+ billion for 12 subs or now bizarrely buying over 100 more M1 Abrams. Australia will now have the most tanks its had since WW2.

Thanks!

What about your Navy….?

Armand

What's wrong with buying more tanks ?

What about your Navy

The Navy is great compared to third world neighbours like Indonesia or Thailand but it's too small and undergunned to be a match against China.

3 modern Hobart class Air Warfare Destroyers

8 ageing ANZAC frigates – to be replaced by 9 Type 26 "Hunter" class.

6 Collins class subs – to be replaced by 12 brand new subs that cost $80 USD+ billion and won't be ready until 2030s with last delivered in 2050 by which time it will probably be obsolete.

2 Canberra class LHDs – these can't operate F-35s and are so under-gunned they can't defend themselves against any peer level threat.

4 Mine Counter Measure ships

Patrol boats (that should really be assigned to a Coast Guard or Customs but the RAN refuses to relinquish).

What's wrong with buying more tanks ?

We're a sea power. No one's going to be landing anything on our coast anytime soon unless we let them. The only country that could mount an amphibious invasion of Australia is USA!

And our Navy has a mere 11 surface combatants (planned to increase to 12).

We have only 4 Mine Counter Measure ships (2 others are for sale). That's less than Latvia who has a tiny coast line! And the PLAN has the world's biggest inventory of sea mines.

Who said anyone has to invade continental Australia before more armoured capability is needed?

Small to mid-level incursions and extended raids- PL to BN group level- are well within the capabilities of several near countries, including the PRC. Tanks are a major combat multiplier in COIN and low-level conventional actions, as the Canadians, Danes and Germans have shown in Afghanistan.

Even without the above scenarios the increase to 90 or 100 M1's plus Boxer, etc, allows a dispersal of the available armoured power and gets ARes armoured units out of G-wagons and Bushmasters (if their BDE hasn't already grabbed them for other tasks/training), and learning their primary role again. It will also allow the other ARes arms-corps units to train in working with armour- something that hasn't happened since the early '70s (pretending M113's a tanks and IFV every five years doesn't count).

For the ARA it means (hopefully) that they'll be training with full-sized squadrons, not the B Level ORBAT they have to play with now.

Yes, the RAN needs more warships and the RAAF needs more, and more capable, aircraft. If the new frigate and Attack-class sub projects are any indication, we won't have new ships for 15 years if we put the money down today. Unless we abandon reliance on US/UK/EU solutions for aircraft and go to Russia, the same can be said for the RAAF.

The M1's may very well be needed before the blue services get their new toys and they'll be here, ready for training and deployment, if needed, in less than five years.

PRC can't launch any land force orientated excursions outside of the first island chain. An armoured division's worth of tanks is thus a moot point especially when your army lacks basic air defences!

The tanks are wasting 4.3 billion that could be spent on air defences or cruise missiles or something that actually contributes to the defence of Australia.

As for COIN, we need to get out of that business. Last time we won an insurgency was Malaya!

I think the Army felt left out of the current weapon buying spree so got some tanks.

Note Australia already had 59 M1s in service and even some of these were mothballed.

You like exaggeration and hyperbole, don't you? "An armoured division's worth of tanks"? We're not "buying 100", we're buying enough to take us to between 90 and 100, with options for later. You know very well it's not an armoured division- even if we bought 100 more it wouldn't be- 90 is somewhat more than a REGT (BN equivalent for EU and US) once you deduct training and the repair/replacement pool vehicles. As for the "mothballed tanks", look up sustainment, training and equipment rotations. Just because they aren't in a squadron it doesn't mean they're mothballed.

You're also missing a major point- with luck you get to train before you fight. If you don't train then you won't fight too well. The basics don't change with the type of conflict, so training, if effective, applies to both conventional and COIN operations. Well trained troops can do both.

It's not just about the PRC storming Bondi beach, mate. Concentrating on the enemy of the day has long been a good way to not be prepared for the next conflict. Relationships with foreign countries, and even non-state actors or domestic groups, can change very quickly. Besides, if you don't think the PRC could put raiding forces outside the "first island chain" then your research is lacking. The PRC has a large merchant marine- not every ship that carries trouble has to be painted grey and not every force put ashore has to stay there.

Ships, planes and missiles are the forward lines of resistance. Army gives the strategic defence plan depth. The three services are like a three legged stool- if you neglect one of them you'll end up sitting on the floor.

Couldn't say it better Dal … can see that you have lived the dream . I take it you served in 5/7RAR ?

G'day, Stabby.

CMF, 8/9 and 2/4, mate, then RAEME as a boffin (got injured). It wasn't always a dream, but if sent back in time I'd probably do it again.

You seem to have a whiff of green about you as well.

Ardo is right- the ADF is made up of the same token forces that we had before WWII and we rely on the US for our security. However, concentrating on one service or capability isn't the answer- we need a balanced force to give us some strategic depth. With the population and size of country- and the attitude of a large proportion of the population to any work or service- there's not much depth. But it's better than none.

Stay well, mate.

We're not "buying 100", we're buying enough to take us to between 90 and 100,

Currently Australia has 59 Abrams. It is acquiring 160 M1A1 hulls of which 75 will be upgraded to M1A2 SEPv3 and some of the remainder will be used for 29 M1150 Assault Breaker Vehicles, and additional M88 ARVs.

Besides, if you don't think the PRC could put raiding forces outside the "first island chain" then your research is lacking. The PRC has a large merchant marine- not every ship that carries trouble has to be painted grey and not every force put ashore has to stay there.

You won't need heavy armour to defeat raiding forces or infiltrators.

Ships, planes and missiles are the forward lines of resistance. Army gives the strategic defence plan depth.

If anyone lands sufficient enough troops on Australian soil for the Australian army to need to deploy heavy armour, then that means the RAAF is destroyed and the bad guys have total air supremacy and can deploy as many units as they want. It also means RAN is destroyed so the bad guys can land at whatever port they want in which case you need a helluva lot more units!

All those M1s are dead meat too especially as the Australian army is completely lacking in SAMs (acquiring a measly couple of NASAMs batteries).

domestic groups,

Seriously, you'd deploy the ADF against the Australian people?!? What possible threat exists whereby you would have to deploy the ADF including heavy armour against the people of Australia?!?

The Australian population is totally pliant. Some of the stuff the government has done (eg raising pension age to 67 – highest in OECD or cutbacks to services) would elicit riots and carnage in other parts of the world including Europe.

ADF is made up of the same token forces that we had before WWII

You realise the RAAF is the most potent air force in South East Asia and is actually far more potent than most European countries who during the Cold War packed far more capability than Australia.

You're looking at a fully integrated combat force.

As for size 100 fighter supported by AWACS, SEAD, EW, tanker and strategic transport capability is nothing to be sneezed at. Larger NATO countries like Poland or even Germany can only dream of such capability.

The RAN is potent too but it is too small yet except job creation submarine programs, there's no plans for expanding the fleet.

Ardo, it's a phased buy with options. It could be up to 100+, or it could just be the first tranche. Time will tell. And M1's aren't "heavy armour", they're Main Battle Tanks. You continual use of emotive language undermines your veracity.

The use of the M1's depends on the situation- they aren't just useful for taking out enemy armour. They may not even have to load their main gun to be effective.

Seriously, you'd deploy the ADF against the Australian people?!? What possible threat exists whereby you would have to deploy the ADF including heavy armour against the people of Australia?!?

Of course it wouldn't be me making the decision- that's just another emotive red-herring statement- but I know what the provisions are (or were, now).

In certain situations the ADF may be employed against Australians and could include air, naval or armoured units- if the situation was seen by the government and governor-general as warranting that use of force. The situations would have to be extreme but the provisions are there in the constitution. The ADF can't be called out to deal with police matters (ie the rioting to which you allude), as you probably well know.

If you knew more about the capabilities of armour you wouldn't be insinuating I'm advocating a massed tank assault. I think you may and it's just part of your manner of trying to create an argument out of a discussion.

I can find better things to do than argue, rather than discuss, things with an anthropomorphic bridge lurker, so I'll leave you to it.

Cheers.