In part one of the essay, I have touched on the critical asymmetries in Chinese and US capabilities in a shooting war.
I discussed China’s asymmetric advantages in geography, will to fight, military preparedness, as well as the knowledge and intelligence of commanders and soldiers.
In this second part, I will focus on the most critical capability gap between the two – the physical capability for war fighting.
This is the material aspect that determines winning and losing, regardless empty rhetorics and biased beliefs.
The term physical capability means what each belligerent can bring to the fight in terms of weapons, their quality and quantity, the speed they can be produced and replenished, and how much they would cost.
In short, we are talking about who can sustain a high intensity conflict with superior weaponry as well as superior industrial scale, speed, and cost.
The winner is going to be the one with the superior physical capabilities in war fighting and war production – the most fundamental material aspect of wars.
Asymmetry in Physical Capabilities
China will prevail, in the final analysis, because it enjoys vastly superior physical capabilities over the US.
The confidence is built upon physical reality – China’s ability to make everything needed for such a war, make a lot of them, and make them cheaply and quickly.
I’ll let data and facts to make the case. To do that, I have inserted a large number of hyperlinks to specialist websites on the technical and military subjects covered.
For those interested in technical details, I encourage you to click on the links. Otherwise, you only need to read the headline summaries......
