Nếu Xảy Ra Chiến Tranh, TQ Có Cầm Cự Nổi Với HK Quá Một Tuần Không?

Một cuộc tấn công giả tưởng của TQ vào Mỹ
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2008/01/airforce_china_strategy_080121/#
Hypothetical attack on U.S. outlined by China
By Patrick Winn - Staff writer
Posted : Monday Jan 28, 2008 16:46:24 EST

In a hypothetical future scenario, the U.S. and China are poised to clash ?" likely over Taiwan.
The democratic Republic of China, commonly called Taiwan ?" which America backs and the communist People?Ts Republic of China considers part of its territory ?" frequently irritates Chinese leaders with calls for greater independence from the mainland. But while the American military mulls its options, Chinese missiles hit runways, fuel lines, barracks and supply depots at U.S. Air Force bases in Japan and South Korea. Long-range warheads destroy American satellites, crippling Air Force surveillance and communication networks. A nuclear fireball erupts high above the Pacific Ocean, ionizing the atmosphere and scrambling radars and radio feeds.
This is China?Ts anti-U.S. sucker punch strategy.
It?Ts designed to strike America?Ts military suddenly, stunning and stalling the Air Force more than any other service. In a script written by Chinese military officers and defense analysts, a bruised U.S. military, beholden to a sheepish American public, puts up a small fight before slinking off to avoid full-on war.
This strategic outlook isn?Tt hidden in secret Chinese documents. It?Ts printed in China?Ts military journals and textbooks. And for much of last year, Mandarin literates and defense experts ?" working for the Santa Monica, Calif.-based Rand Corp. on an Air Force contract ?" combed through a range of Chinese military sources.
They emerged with ?oEntering the Dragon?Ts Lair,? a lengthy report on how the Chinese People?Ts Liberation Army would likely confront the U.S. military and how the Air Force in particular can brace itself. In many cases, the theoretical enemy nation China?Ts officers discuss in these scenarios isn?Tt explicitly named but is unmistakably the U.S.
?oThese aren?Tt war plans,? said report co-author Roger Cliff, a former Defense Department strategist and China military specialist who spoke to Air Force Times from Taiwan. ?oThis is the military talking to itself. It?Ts not designed for foreigners or even China?Ts general public to read.?
Element of surprise
When it comes to conflict with the U.S., Chinese military analysts favor age-old schoolyard wisdom: Throw the first punch and hit hard.
?oFuture conflicts are likely to be short, intense affairs that might consist of a single campaign,? Cliff said. ?oThey?Tre thinking about ways to get the drop on us. Most of our force is not forward-deployed.?
China?Ts experts concede its army would lose a head-on fight, with one senior colonel comparing such a scenario to ?othrowing an egg against a rock.? Instead, the Chinese would attempt what Rand calls an ?oanti-access? strategy: slowing the deployment of U.S. forces to the Pacific theater, damaging operations within the region and forcing the U.S. to fight from a distance.
?oTaking the enemy by surprise,? one Chinese military expert wrote, ?owould catch it unprepared and cause confusion within and huge psychological pressure on the enemy and help [China] win relatively large victories at relatively small costs.? Another military volume suggests feigning a large-scale military training exercise to conceal the attack?Ts buildup.
The Dragon?Ts Lair
Striking U.S. air bases ?" specifically command-and-control facilities, aircraft hangars and surface-to-air missile launchers ?" would be China?Ts first priority if a conflict arose, according to Rand?Ts report.
U.S. facilities in South Korea and Japan, even far-south Okinawa, sit within what Rand calls the ?oDragon?Ts Lair?: a swath of land and sea along China?Ts coast. This is an area reachable by cruise missiles, jet-borne precision bombs and local covert operatives. Air Force bases within this area include Osan and Kunsan in South Korea, as well as Misawa, Yokota and Kadena in Japan. And in a conflict over Taiwan, any nation allowing ?oan intervening superpower? such as the U.S. to operate inside its territory can expect a Chinese attack, according to China?Ts defense experts.
China is designing ground-launched cruise missiles capable of nailing targets more than 900 miles away ?" well within striking range of South Korea and much of Japan, according to the report. Cruise missiles able to reach Okinawa ?" home to Kadena Air Base ?" are in development.
The Chinese would first launch ?oconcentrated and unexpected? attacks on tarmacs using runway-penetrating missiles and, soon after, would target U.S. aircraft. Saboteurs would play a role in reconnaissance, harassing operations and even ?oassassinating key personnel,? according to another military expert.
Chinese fighter jets would scramble to intercept aerial refueling tankers and cargo planes sent to shuttle in fuel, munitions, supplies or troops. High-explosive cluster bombs would target pilot quarters and other personnel buildings.
Because the American public is ?oabnormally sensitive? about military casualties, according to an article in China?Ts Liberation Army Daily, killing U.S. airmen or other personnel would spark a ?odomestic anti-war cry? on the home front and possibly force early withdrawal of U.S. forces. (?oThe U.S. experience in Somalia is usually cited in support of this assertion,? according to the Rand report.) Once this hard-and-fast assault on U.S. bases commenced, the Chinese army would ?oswiftly divert? its forces and ?oguard vigilantly against enemy retaliation,? according to a Chinese expert.
Dumb and blind The PLA also would likely use less conventional attacks on the American military?Ts vital communications network. The goal, as one Chinese expert put it: leaving U.S. combat capabilities ?oblind,? ?odeaf? and ?oparalyzed.?
Losing early-warning systems designed to detect incoming missiles would be, for the Air Force, the most devastating setback ?" one that could force the service to exit the region altogether, according to Rand.
China could also launch a nuclear ?oe-bomb,? or electromagnetic explosive, that would fry U.S. communication equipment while ionizing the atmosphere for minutes to hours, according to the report. This would likely jam radio signals in a 900-mile diameter beneath the nuclear fireball.
The PLA could also employ long-range anti-satellite missiles ?" similar to one successfully tested last January ?" to destroy one or more American satellites. However, the PLA has a host of less dramatic options: short-range jammers hidden in suitcases or bombs and virus attacks on Air Force computer networks.
U.S. Air Force options
Shielding against a swift Chinese onslaught is, according to Rand, as simple as reinforcing a runway or as complex as cloaking the orbit of military satellites.
In the short term, U.S. air bases inside the Dragon?Ts Lair should add an extra layer of concrete to their runways and bury fuel tanks underground. All aircraft, the report said, should be parked in hardened shelters, especially fighter jets.
Parking larger aircraft ?" bombers, tankers and E-3 Sentry Airborne Warning and Control Systems jets ?" in hard-shell hangars would be expensive and difficult but likely worth the cost, according to the report.
U.S. fighter jets remain the best defense against incoming Chinese missile attacks. But, given China?Ts taste for sudden attacks, surface-launched missile defense systems must be installed long before a conflict roils. Because the PLA is expected to strike quickly, the report said, waiting for the first tremors of conflict is not an option.
The Air Force also should fortify itself against Chinese hackers by using software encryption, isolating critical computer systems and preparing contingency plans to communicate without a high-bandwidth network. Though China maintains a ?ono first use? nuclear bomb policy, the U.S., according to Rand, should warn China that nuclear electromagnetic pulse attacks will be considered acts of nuclear aggression and could prompt nuclear retaliation.
Rand insists the Air Force must defend satellites ?" which support communication, reconnaissance, bomb guidance and more ?" against China?Ts proven satellite-killing missiles. This could be accomplished in the Cold War tra***ion of mutually assured destruction by threatening to retaliate in kind if the PLA blasts U.S. satellites.
?oThat might be the one restraining factor,? Cliff said. ?oThey might not want to start that space war.?
Or, Rand suggests, the U.S. could invest heavily in satellite protection or evasion techniques, including stealth, blending in with other satellite constellations or perhaps developing and deploying microsatellites capable of swarming to defend larger satellites, which the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency is working toward.
Could this really happen? The Chinese first-strike strategy is ?omore than hypothetical,? according to the report. But in the near term, at least, it?Ts considered unlikely.
If the most contentious issue is Taiwan, Cliff said, then the likely trigger would be Taiwanese elections, where assertions of complete independence from the mainland can infuriate Chinese leaders. China?Ts current president, Hu Jintao, has built up China?Ts military but also its ties with America. In 2012, however, when Taiwan holds an election and mainland China?Ts leadership is expected to turn over, perhaps for the worse, the risk of conflict could increase.
?oIt really depends on the circumstances,? Cliff said. ?oWould Taiwan be the provocateur? If so, it might be hard for the American public *****pport intervention.?
However, if China moves to capture control of the island, Cliff said he believes the U.S. would face a rocky dilemma.
?oAre we really going to let a small, democratic country get snuffed out by a huge authoritarian country ?" especially when you think about how our own country came into existence?? Cliff said.
As China pours more resources into its evolving and expanding military, it buys the power to more strongly assert itself against America. In November, China denied U.S. Navy minesweepers shelter from a storm and, in another incident that month, turned down an Air Force C-17 flight shuttling supplies to the American consulate in Hong Kong. Experts speculate this was a rebuff to American arms sales to Taiwan, as well as President Bush?Ts autumn meeting with the Dalai Lama, the exiled spiritual leader of another state China claims, Tibet.
?oIf this conflict happened today, I?Tm certain we?Td prevail,? Cliff said. ?oBut as time goes on, that?Ts not a given.?

Giá mà ngày xưa các vị anh hùng ấy không chạy, thì giờ con cháu quàng quạc to lắm nhỉ! Cơ mà không chạy thì mẫu quốc đâu có thêm mấy thằng hippy chống cộng!

China and America - the odd couple
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14699593
"In terms of geopolitical power, China has neither the clout nor the inclination to challenge America. Confidently though Chinâ?Ts leaders now strut the world stage, they remain preoccupied by simmering discontent at home: there are tens of thousands of protests each year. For all the economic progress, all sorts of tensions?"social, cultural, demographic, even religious?"haunt the regime and help explain why it resorts to nationalism so often. So it is odd, and wrong, that Americâ?Ts approach towards China is driven by its own insecurities."
Nói chung cũng không có ý gì m>i. NhỈng 1 bài sau 'ây cũng Y the Economist nói 'ến khía cạnh nguy hifm cho hoà bình hỈn - chủ nghĩa dân tTc:
http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14678579
"The China that many American business and political leaders see is one that appears *****pport the status quo and is keen to engage peacefully with the outside world. But there is another side to the country. Nationalism is a powerful, growing and potentially disruptive force. Many Chinesê?"even among those who were educated in Americâ?"are suspicious of American intentions and resentful of American power. They are easily persuaded that the West, led by the United States, wants to block Chinâ?Ts rise."
Các sự ki?n trong mấy nfm gần 'ây - tàu ngầm TQ lén sau tàu SB Mỹ r"i n.i lên nhỈ 'f cảnh cáo, tàu 'ánh cá TQ xua 'u.i tàu Mỹ, các tuyên b' hiếu chiến của tỈ>ng TQ "lấy Đài loan trong 3 ngày", "'.i 1 nửa nỈ>c lấy 400 thành ph' Mỹ", "chia 'ôi Thái bình dỈỈng", cho thấy có 1 phe phái dân tTc chủ nghĩa trong lãnh 'ạo TQ.
Chủ nghĩa dân tTc luôn là con dao hai lỈỡi v>i chính quyền - d. dẫn t>i mất kifm soát. Do 'ó bifu tình ch'ng Mỹ Y TQ 'i quá mTt chút cũng bi, ngỈ ông thủ lợi, chứ không to m"m lên gân nhỈ LX h"i trỈ>c và Mỹ lâu nay.
Những hành 'Tng khoa trỈỈng gần 'ây khác v>i hình ảnh v'n siêu cỈờng TQ phải có. Quả thực ta nên cầu mong cho TQ càng giàu mạnh hoà bình, nếu có thay '.i chế 'T thì cũng êm ấm. Nếu không phải dùng con bài dân tTc chủ nghĩa 'f 'ánh lạc hỈ>ng dỈ luận trong nỈ>c, rất có thf TQ sẽ cho Đài loan, Nhật, Hàn, Mỹ và VN sẽ fn 'òn 'ầu tiên.
Thành ra cái topic này cũng không phải vô nghĩa rằng TQ-Mỹ chẳng có cái c> nào 'ánh nhau cả. Xung 'Tt to thì tránh, nhỈng xung 'Tt khu vực thì có thf. Khi 'ó, về quân sự ai thắng ai chỈa biết 'Ỉợc. Trong những trận 'ánh gi>i hạn, bên tỈYng yếu vẫn có thf thắng bên mạnh.
Được unknown01 sửa chữa / chuyển vào 09:42 ngày 27/10/2009

giời ạ
Hoa Kỳ không cần căn cứ ở đông nam á nữa thì hắn rút, chứ thua hồi nào. Đơn giản thế mà cứ phải cãi là sao nhể.

Trong các kỹ thuật của TQ, bắn rơi vệ tinh trên quĩ đạo không phải chuyện khó, nhưng đáng sợ nhất là vụ tàu ngầm bám sát TSB Mẽo mà Mẽo không biết. Có thể TQ đã vượt thầy Nga, hồi hùng mạnh nhất Nga cũng chưa làm được như vây.
Tim Keating có nói là lúc đó TSB đang "relax", chắc là bất ngờ về khả năng của TQ, chứ nếu ở trạng thái sẵn sàng chiến đấu thì phát hiện ra ngay.
Tuy vậy cũng có thể chỉ là bào chữa tạm, rồi âm thầm tìm cách đối phó. Vụ tàu Mỹ dùng sonar đi do thám gần Hải nam bị tàu TQ ra đuổi, rồi 1 tàu ngầm khác của TQ phải trồi lên xuýt gây ra tai nạn với tàu Mỹ... chắc là do ảnh hưởng từ vụ trên.

Cái tàu ấy là kilo bác ạ! Tòan dạng tin nghe nói chữ đực chữ cái!

Cái bám theo Kity Hawk ấy ạ? Nó không phải Kilo, mà là Song class, tự làm bắt chước Kilo.

Thật ra có nhiều bác vào đây " thẩm du " quá. Thứ lỗi cho em nói ko phải là thê. Em thấy cái topic này là siêu " thẩm du ", mục đích mở ra cũng thế. Thôi, để cho bác VY tự sướng đi, khổ quá. Già rồi ko lên được nữa đây mà... chẹp. LẦN SAU CÓ CÁI ACC VY MÀ MỞ TOPIC NÀO THÌ CỨ VÀO VIEW CHO CAO RỒI ĐỂ BÁC ẤY TIẾP TỤC SUNG SƯỚNG. Ý em là thế có bác nào ủng hộ ko

Thôi, nhiều lời bàn quá, ngắn gọn là như thế này
- Nếu nước Mẽo là gỏi nước Khựa thì sau 50 năm nước Mẽo thành nước Khựa như lịch sử đã chứng minh với đời Thanh, đời Nguyên
- Nếu nước mẽo không làm gỏi được nước khựa thì sẽ có 600 triệu Hoa kiều chống ++ sinh sống lẫn lộn với 200 triệu dân mẽo. (Mấy bác này chắc sẽ cám ơn Bắc Kinh lắm vì đã tạo điều kiện cho họ sang Mẽo...) -> Kết quả là Mẽo cũng là Khựa
- Nếu dở hơn nữa là Mẽo thua thì " một tỷ người cùng nhìn về một hướng - anh có ngăn nổi không" như Moa chổi xể vĩ đại từng nói. Sẽ thành lập khu tự trị dân tộc thiểu số Bắc Mỹ do đồng chí Ôn Phá Gia là tổng quản.
Đặt lại vấn đề, nếu chiến tranh và di dân, Hoa Kỳ giữ nổi bản sắc với Trung Của quá 5 năm không ????
Cuối cùng thì thấy Mã viện lão gia cũng có cái lý của người mèo

Tổng vệ sinh topic, các bài lạc đề đều đi bụi!
Chủ topic Viet_Youth sau 2 lần được nhắc nhở vẫn tiếp tục ko thể kiềm chế thảo luận Ctrị theo hướng phỉ báng nước VN, người VN (tất tật ko phân biệt phe phái, còn sống hay đã chết). Các bài như vậy theo quy định là vi phạm và đã bị xoá. Xét thấy nick Viet_Youth ko phù hợp với diễn đàn TRÁI TIM VIỆT NAM, ko chỉ ko có trái tim của 1 người VN mà còn thiếu sự tôn trọng tối thiểu đối với nước VN, người VN, mõ Maseo rất lấy làm tiếc phải lót lá tống tiễn nick Viet_Youth đi càng xa càng tốt.
Chào thân ái và quyết thắng!