Wednesday, September 19, 2012

Air-Sea Battle.

This is coolbert:

From the Chicago Tribune editorial page not so long ago now:


. . . .

"By all means the U.S. should take China seriously . . . As far as potential challenges to global stability goes, the territorial disputes in Asia are arguably more dangerous than an Iranian nuclear weapon." - - Greg Scoblete, The Compass.

Those territorial disputes to include those islands, shoals and reefs of the South China Sea and other waters and contested areas of the far western Pacific. Territorial disputes China has with various Asian nations [other than Taiwan] to include:

* Philippines. * Malaysia. * Brunei. * Vietnam. * Japan.

Territory the sovereignty of which is contested to include:

* Spratly Islands. * Paracel Islands. * Scarborough Shoal. * Senkaku/Daioyu Islands. * Any land "mass" and those waters within what is defined as the "Nine Dash Line" [waters of the South China Sea the waters of which are beyond the 200 meter depth].

Here a Chinese radar installation reputedly only fifteen miles [twenty-five kilometers] beyond the EEZ [Economic Exclusion Zone] of the Philippines. The radome, heliport, living quarters, the "land mass" visible only above the water line perhaps during low tide, otherwise submerged totally!

 Territorial disputes having not even gotten to the stage of push-comes-to-shove but having the potentiality to escalate even further, the United States legally bound by bi-lateral defense treaty with Japan and the Philippines [Taiwan also], military action a possible under the worst case scenario.

A SSN type of warfare as envisioned and made popular by the book and computer name of the same name thanks to Tom Clancy.

Pentagon planners calling this the Air-Sea Battle. China and the United States in conflict, war if occurring primarily if not almost exclusively naval and air combat,  the role of ground forces minimal at best, THAT MOST IMPORTANT OUTPOST OF AMERICAN MILITARY MIGHT IN THE WESTERN PACIFIC BEING GUAM!!


Air-Sea Battle the concept of which has been studied and "war gamed" as a simulation for a period of TWENTY YEARS NOW ALREADY!!

"What is Air-Sea Battle?" [thanks to the article in the Washington Post by Jaffe, Thorp, and Webster!]

"China has invested heavily during the past decade in precision missile systems and sophisticated radar designed to keep U.S. ships and fighter jets beyond the inner island chain shown below. Air-Sea Battle is the U.S. military’s concept for disabling those systems using long-range bombers and submarines. The concept is designed not so much to fight a war as to convince the Chinese that any conflict with U.S. forces would be long and costly."

A war waged by anti-ship missiles, submarines, long-range aircraft, littoral warships, DDG-1000 destroyers, net-centric capacity. A "clean war" as best that term understood civilian casualties kept to a minimum naval warfare generally speaking sans atrocity?

Land masses, territory, sovereignty, natural resources, inter-locking and legally binding treaty obligations, big power politics, hegemony, expansionist ambitions, all in various combinations as existing now leading to eventual conflict as in the historical and traditional sense the scenario and concept of war-fighting by either side well worked out on paper the preparations on the ground in the air and under the water being made as we speak, that proverbial push-to-shove at some point not merely words but reality?

Read further from the Washington Post regarding the Air-Sea battle with graphic: "U.S. model for a future war fans tensions with China and inside Pentagon".

"On your mark, get so, go!!" Am I wrong or what?


1 comment:

Anonymous said...

You mean all three of the DDG 1000s, only one of which will be at sea at a time?