In recent years, the U.S. attitude toward China's rise and the Taiwan issue has attracted much attention. In response to the suggestions put forward by some think tanks, the new plan of the RAND Corporation has once again attracted attention around the potential strategic action of the US Air Force against China. However, the practical viability of these proposals is a hotly debated topic.
The five-step attack model and the bombing of China's coastal industries in the proposal may seem strategic, but they present enormous challenges in implementation. The RAND Corporation emphasized China's industrial power and strategic superiority, but it also hinted at America's dilemma in the continuation of the war. The U.S. needs to transport from its own homeland**, while China is able to rely on its domestic advantages to continue to produce and deliver supplies, making protracted warfare an unaffordable option for the U.S.
However, these proposals have also raised questions about their practical feasibility. A devastating strike on an industrial target, while considered a strategic option, can face practical limitations. Critical industrial facilities often have tight defenses, which makes the effectiveness of conventional ** limited. Furthermore, the destruction of large factories or industrial zones often requires the use of tactical nuclear **, and the risk of nuclear war that could be provoked by such an option is unbearable for either side.
The United States has many restrictions on its military means. The United States currently lacks medium-range ballistic missiles, and strikes on China's coastal industries mainly rely on air force or sea-based aircraft at Asia-Pacific bases, as well as cruise missiles. However, these tactics do not have a clear advantage over China's anti-access area denial combat system. China has advanced defense systems, including advanced radar technology and a vast early warning system, making it difficult for U.S. tactics to break through.
RAND's proposal may seem strong, but its practical feasibility has been substantially challenged. The PLA's triple interception system constitutes an effective deterrent to US operations. China's fighter jets, maritime air defense systems, and ground-based anti-aircraft missiles form a well-developed defense network, making any attack on China's coastal industries a formidable resistance.
Even if a small number of attacks can break through defenses, China has the ability to recover quickly. The speed of China's rebuilding and reliable supply chain means that even if it is damaged, it can quickly return to normal operations.
Although the U.S. military-technical equipment is impressive, there are still huge limits to its potential impact on China's coastal industries. For example, the U.S. military is equipped with missiles with a long range, but it also faces challenges from China's advanced countermeasure technology. Although the United States has a large number of cruise missile nuclear submarines, it is difficult to form a sufficient superiority in actual operations.
To sum up, although the United States has a certain strategic thinking about China's coastal industry, it faces huge challenges and constraints at the practical level. RAND's proposal may only be a strategic thinking, but in practice, its feasibility and effectiveness need to be more in-depth and examined.
This article, which deals with the US attack on China's coastal industries, touches on many aspects of international military strategy and practical constraints. The article provides an in-depth analysis of the possible U.S. strategy in response to China's rise and the Taiwan issue, as well as suggestions put forward by think tanks such as the RAND Corporation. However, in practice and in real situations, these proposals face significant challenges and limitations.
First, the article elaborates on the five-step attack model proposed by the United States and a possible bombing scheme against China's coastal industries. This kind of strategic thinking is part of the analysis of military strategy, but the factors that need to be considered in practice are far more complex than the theory. A devastating blow to an industrial target is not an easy task, and industrial facilities often have tight defenses and protections, and it is often difficult to achieve the desired results with conventional **.
Second, the article points out the various constraints faced by the means of the United States. The United States currently lacks intermediate-range ballistic missiles when launching attacks on China's coastal industries, and mainly relies on air force or navy-based aircraft at Asia-Pacific bases, as well as cruise missiles. However, these tactics are difficult to gain an advantage under China's defense system, which has advanced defense systems and anti-stealth radar technology, making it difficult for American tactics to break through.
Finally, the article also mentions China's advantage in quickly recovering and rebuilding its industrial capacity. Even in the event of disruption, China was able to quickly return to normal operations. This was crucial to maintaining industrial production and the continuity of the war, which made it strategically difficult for the United States to attack Chinese industry.
Overall, the article delves into the potential U.S. strategy for China's coastal industry, as well as its actual constraints. However, with the development of military technology and strategic systems, the article also hints at the challenges and limitations of these proposals in practical operation. This review** objectively analyzes the relevant issues when presenting the content of the article, which is worthy of in-depth consideration and discussion.
Disclaimer: The above content information is ** on the Internet, and the author of this article does not intend to target or insinuate any real country, political system, organization, race, or individual. The above content does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. The author of this article is not responsible for any issues arising from the above or related issues, and does not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.
If the content of the article involves the content of the work, copyright**, infringement, rumors or other issues, please contact us to delete it. Finally, if you have any different thoughts about this event, please leave a message in the comment area to discuss!