Valid points. I think we'd be OK logisticaly, but it might take a minute to really ramp up for actual combat attrition rates. Would china allow the US to maintain Japan as a FOB ( in effect) or do they widen the conflict? What if we lose a carrier? When does the US go full on "Midway/ Leyte Gulf" to disable Chinas war fighting capability?
I think parts of the US government are drooling at a chance to go to war. It's probably their best way to take back some control from the internationalist faction, which gets a lot of money from China. That faction (Pelosi is one) would prefer to go with China against Russia, but China can get a lot more use out of Russia than us. Russia's economy is almost purely about raw materials, food, energy, minerals, etc which is what China needs most. Hence the silk road.
China wants to saber rattle to unite their population while their economy is tanking. Having America as the big bad (Century of Humiliation) furthers their goals, but an actual war would break their economy, especially if it got far enough to go to sanctions. They're not even close to self sufficient in any category, and the vast bulk of what they get comes by the sea. Even if the entire US carrier fleet was wiped out, a dozen submarines could block all sea traffic and cause mass starvation. If it came to a non-nuclear full scale hot war, 1 cruise missile on the 3 Gorges Dam would make 100 million people homelesThese things historically leads to rulers heads on pikes.
For that reason, a sinking aircraft carrier is the last thing China wants, the last thing the Democrats want, and exactly what would save Taiwan from assimilation. Pelosi is probably telling them to knuckle under while saving face. She's probably negotiating a surrender that will take place in 2.5 years.
(post is archived)