An anti-submarine missile blasts off from a frigate during a military drill near Hualien in Taiwan in May 2019 [Tyrone Siu/Reuters]
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. national security adviser warned China on Wednesday against any attempt to take Taiwan by force, saying amphibious landings were notoriously difficult and there was a lot of ambiguity about how the United States would respond.
Robert O’Brien told an event at the University of Nevada in Las Vegas that China was engaged in a massive naval buildup probably not seen since Germany’s attempt to compete with Britain’s Royal Navy prior to World War One.
“Part of that is to give them the ability to push us back out of the Western Pacific, and allow them to engage in an amphibious landing in Taiwan,” he said.
“The problem with that is that amphibious landings are notoriously difficult,” O’Brien added, pointing to the 100-mile (160-km) distance between China and Taiwan and the paucity of landing beaches on the island.
“
It’s not an easy task, and there’s also a lot of ambiguity about what the United States would do in response to an attack by China on Taiwan,” he added, when asked what U.S. options would be if China moved to try to absorb Taiwan.
Read more ....
Update: US warns China against Taiwan attack, stresses US ‘ambiguity’ (Al Jazeera)
WNU Editor: I would have used more forceful language. And I would not have used the word "ambiguity".
4 comments:
Andrew Jackson,
Am I correct in remembering that Dov Sar stated that he was a pilot? Now you can be very good at your MOS and not so good at seeing the combined arms picture. There have been people, who have been good at leading sizable units like battalions or brigades and failed miserably, when they commanded larger units. So Sar may be off base, I don't think he is, but he is worth listening to.
Sar is a vet his opinion is as good as any and better than most.
Is Dov Sar a troll? Could be, but I doubt it.
Anon suck my you know what!
What I said AJ was that e person like Dov could be good at their MOS (they really don;lt have an MOS, but you get what I mean), but they could be bad at strategy in general or bad strategy in regards to other branches. I did not say they were bad. I acknowledge that they could be bad. What I did say in the affirmative and without any caveats was that they were a vet and that perhaps you should take them a little more seriously. They are also a vet that apparently vote the same way you do but without the bravado.
To shit the other half of the comment, we did bypass Taiwean after we strangled everything.
The Japanese had no air fleet outside the Home Islands after the Marianas Turkey shoot. We kept it that way by doing a drive by with out carriers. The had no naval fleet except for small boys patrolling the mine infested waters between Korea and Japan. Taiwan could project no air or sea power.
If the Chinese go into Japan they will set up missile defense in a few days. They will also set up their Henderson Fields X 5 or 11. That is not something that you can bypass.
We could bypass Taiwan in 1944/45 because we had more ships and planes. Now, it is the other way around. I am not looking froward to your reply, but it will be like water off a duck's back.
We vote the same way, but I mostly look up at the ceiling when you talk and let you tire yourself out.
To talk about the other half of the comment*
Post a Comment