alt Hacker NewsThere is noise for years that China will eventually take over Taiwan. Date set to be 2028 or so. How else to prepare for that than run this war, figure out your weak points and work to fix them.
So maybe US got taught a lesson, but saying it will take years to replenish seems extreme. If that's what it takes, then maybe US was never a superpower and then the 2028 war (hypothetical) would have been a shock. If it got taught lessons, it should use these lessons to improve its capabilities - building drones, resupplying weapons, and fix whatever else is needed. And I am not sure I understand the meaning of phrase "air superiority". It does not mean bombing everything below and taking un-necessary risks. The fact that 7-20 soldiers got killed (and similarly low numbers on Iranian side compared to the Iraq war), is a testament to their ability to reduce risk. Any war will have deaths, but this provided US a stress test like the bankers should have received in 2008.
The question is whether the military and political leadership can learn those lessons or will they pass it on to the next administration. If what is being said is true, this requires a Covid level mobilization effort.
I don't accept the premise that China intends to invade Taiwan. Or, rather, that claims certainly requires some proof. This is an idea that the US has been pushing but maybe, just maybe, we shouldn't take fearmongering from the guy who runs the protection racket and sells all the weapons.
The first problem is that China simply doesn't have that military capability. Water is an incredible barrier, even in modern warfare. There are roughly 100 miles of open ocean between mainland China and Taiwan. China would need to transport somewhere between 500,000 and 1 million troops at a minimum with all th elogistics, air support, etc that that entails. They don't have that Navy. They're not building that Navy. Do you have any idea how badly Taiwan or the US could disrupt supply lines over 100 miles of ocean?
At its height, Nazi Germany's army was something like 8 to 10 million soldiers IIRC. You can see the white cliffs of Dover from Calais on a clear day. It's a distance of 17 miles. And that was completely impassable in an era without radar where the Germans essentially had air superiority. Now nobody has that military, not the US, not China, for a large-scale amphibious landing.
Second, China has no need to invade Taiwan. China thinks very long term. They believe this issue will be resolved in the future, possibly far in the futrure. And all but 10 countries agree with them. This is the so-called "One China" policy. It's the official policy of some ~180 countries including the US and all of Europe.
If they had the military and they chose to use it, it would do untold damage to them diplomatically and economically when the world already agrees with them. Think of it like Russia invading Ukraine. Suddenly formerly neutral countries like Finland and Sweden and lining up to join NATO. Do you think that helped Russia's security situation, economy or diplomatic relations?
Lastly, and this is the point where people really get in their feelings for some reason, China has no modern history of imperialism and military intervention. The standard rejoined is "But Tibet!!!". Yeah, that was 1950. There were some other minor border disputes with Vietnam and I think the USSR. This is all projection because the US loves doing imperialism and military intervention. China doesn't have that history.
So, for a country that can't invade, has no need to and has no history of doing similar, one really should question where this idea is coming from.