If you had asked me 10 years ago, I would have stated with confidence that the U.S. would support Taiwan- with military force- if necessary. But quite a bit has changed. Revisionist powers are attempting to remake the world; authoritarianism is on the march- even in almost inconceivable places. By the end of 2027, hard-right parties could be in control in GB, France and Germany. Donald runs his administration as if the US is a revisionist power, even though the established world order was to the great advantage of the US.
I also have much less confidence in Donald than others. Iâve always found him to be a blowhard and a poser; he tries desparately to project strength, but when the chips are down and thereâs real risk at the table, he always folds. TACO. There certainly are China hawks within whatâs left of the Republican party, but oddly enough, I donât really think Donald is among them. He wants a deal. He always wants a deal- to make money and to make himself look good. He isnât going to war with China. He wants to attack people who canât shoot back.
Perhaps you are correct, and a world that seems to be spinning apart will somehow unite on their own around punishing a major world power for unprovoked aggression, even though it will cost them dearly. I hope we donât get to find out.
Yes and no. As I mentioned earlier, someone develops a capability. Then someone else develops a counter to that. Ad infinitum. If China were to go ahead, they would be sure to have anti-drone hardware with them. Drones have not made every other weapon system obsolete. Itâs just another tool/weapon.
You donât. The initial wave is a lot smaller. Eventually you get 1M. But the storming of the beaches on an island like that is probably in the tens of thousands with naval artillery and air support. Going forward, any aggressor is going to have to factor in possible drones. And factor that in, they will.
Alas, war is not obsolete. We will just adapt to the state of technology and tactics.
China is dump product on all other countries. The world likes China less than us. China is destroying their home grown industry. We donât see it because of the tariffs.
Sometimes. Sometimes, though, advances in technology make prior ways of waging war completely ineffective - and they never come back. Castles, shields and edged weapons, longbows, armor, cavalry, battleshipsâŚ.those all used to be important military technologies. None of those remain in use today, because technological change rendered them ineffective. And no counter was ever developed.
Ukraine has completely upended the balance of naval power in the Black Sea with their drone technology. Basically, they have completely neutered the entire Russian Navy. Russiaâs had to not only stop operating in the Black Sea anywhere near Ukraine, they had to basically abandon their main naval base at Sevastopol in the Crimea and retreat.
There might not be a counter to this. We may have entered a time where technological advancements have again changed how war is conducted, in a way that allows coastline defenders to effectuate sea denial against naval forces near their shore that cannot be countered. Russiaâs Navyâs had since 2023 to try to come up with countermeasures, and have failed so farâŚ.
Yes and no. Castles are just fortifications. We still use those today. Extreme examples would be Cheyenne Mountain. Hardened missile silos. Heck, in Ukraine they are doing trenches (which is a centuries-old fortification).
Armor? What do you think soldiers (and police) wear? Not as clunky as before, lighter and more effective, but intended for the same purpose.
Cavalry? It evolved. There is âair cavâ and âarmored cavâ. Not horses so much, but the horses were just the mode of transport. The modes evolved.
Absolutely. And Russia has not yet evolved. They may not be able to. But that is a Russia issue (specifically their navy), not a âeveryone elseâ issue. Russia couldnât even keep their aircraft carrier in good repair. Itâs been 9 years for ârepair and modernizationâ, and they keep pushing the date out for completion. Many knowledgeable sources doubt it will ever return to service.
In terms of drones, Russian ground forces are adapting. There have been several iterations already. The latest is using fiber optics to prevent EM interference. Someone will probably figure out a counter to that. And it just continues.
I think it very brave to say âcannot be counteredâ. History shows that isnât really how warfare happens. Better to say âno counter yetâ. I repeat, drones have not made warfare obsolete.
Oh, Iâm not at all saying that âwarfareâ is obsolete. Not even very much of warfare.
But naval drones appear to be a big change in the ability of coastal defenders to deny sea access to the area near their position. And that has a huge impact on the ability of countries to launch large scale naval invasions. Because while you can probably protect very large warships from being damaged by naval drone swarms, thereâs not an obvious solution to protecting the smaller and weaker ships that are normally protected by the larger ships and which are essential to landing an amphibious force.
That wasnât a problem in the past, because the way that you would try to defend against the logistics carriers would be to blow âem up either with other ships or with land-based missiles. The former could be kept away with air power and larger naval vessels, and the latter would either be destroyed by your air power or shelling the coastal areas. Or at worst, you just have enough ships to exhaust your enemiesâ finite supply of surface to surface missiles. But naval drones donât work that way.
And thatâs the point of my analogy. The concept of fortifications hasnât disappeared from warfare, but castles as an effective aspect of war defense are no longer useful. Similarly suits of plate armor, edged weapons entirely, longbows, battleships, and a host of other formerly effective mechanisms of war. Changes in technology have eliminated certain specific military strategies altogether - we donât use trenches any more, because theyâre now completely useless.
Will we figure out a way around naval drones? Certainly in the very broadest sense - weâll still have warfare, of course, and weâll still have navies. But the types of ships that China currently has in its navy and is expanding on building in hopes to be in a position to launch an amphibious invasion against Taiwan in the next few yearsâŚ.will those specific naval assets still be useful for their intended purpose? Very possibly not. The development of naval drones at this size and cost may very well have rendered those particular types of naval assets completely ineffective, as they have for the Russian fleet. Not because the Russian fleet was in disrepair, but because there does not appear to be a viable solution to remote guided naval drones that are strong enough to destroy green-water sized ships on their own but cost less than $300K to make.