[Someone]

Ukraine apparently uses remotely operated drone boats that are cheap, can loiter, and aren’t easily detected because they need not be high above the waterline (Theirs probably are noisy, but only when moving)

If all you want is defense against an enemy deploying an airfield (aka aircraft carrier) close to your border, I think you could build thousands of them for the price of an aircraft carrier.

A bit like a minefield with mines that can target ships passing by.

An attacker would have to use mine sweepers to destroy them, protecting them with their carrier further out, but, these things being mobile, you could keep replacing them. Not invincible, but I think it is something planners are looking at.

[skhunted]

In the future such things as you describe will be a problem but not at this time. China can’t invade Taiwan because it doesn’t have the ability to deal with carrier fleets.

[simonblack]

China can’t invade Taiwan because it doesn’t have the ability to deal with carrier fleets.

(No such animal as a country called Taiwan. However there is an island called Taiwan.)

China doesn't need to invade the Republic of China. They just need to blockade it, just like Britain blockaded Germany in WW1 and WW2. The island of Taiwan would be out of fuel and food within weeks.

China invading the Republic of China would be like the US invading Hawaii. Why would you blow up your own stuff? You'd only have to spend perfectly good money to replace it.

[skhunted]

You have a tenuous grasp on reality. Regardless of your views on Taiwan being a country it is indisputably true that U.S. carrier fleets are a primary reason China can’t invade, blockade, or otherwise disrupt the integrity of Taiwan.

[JohnBooty]

It's less that China can't destroy or seriously threaten US carrier groups, and more that China attacking a US carrier fleet would result in nothing less than instantaneous full-scale war with the US and it's allies that would result in massive destruction and throw the world economy into chaos.

It's World War III that deters China, not a carrier group or two.

[simonblack]

In 1942 the US had the largest manufacturing capacity in the world. The US also had a large population of military-age men.

Today that position is held by China. How long do you think that the US could replace its lost materiel and men against a country that is four times larger in population and probably ten times larger in manufacturing capacity?

The WHOLE OF THE WEST (5 eyes, Europe, and Japan) is smaller than just China alone in population and in manufacturing capacity.

We in the West won't know what's hit us when WW3 comes along. It'll be a lot worse than Germany's disastrous war against the Soviets in WW2.

[JohnBooty]

I'm not arguing that the US and its allies could defeat China and its allies in a hypothetical WW3. I'm also not arguing that they couldn't.

I'm saying that China would like to avoid WW3.

It would not be good for business, and it also might sort of end humanity via nuclear war.

[skhunted]

Taiwan means a lot less to the U.S. than it does to China. The U.S. is so afraid of confrontation with near peer adversaries that it puts many restrictions on Ukraine when Ukraine uses U.S. weapons. Ukraine and European defense are much more important to the U.S. than Taiwan.

Neither the U.S. or China is going to engage in a nuclear confrontation with each other and any war over Taiwan between the two nations would be conventional (though China is waging a rather successful cyber war against the U.S.).

I believe carriers are essential to deterrence against China attacking Taiwan. I could be wrong though.