Twilight 2025

[3catcircus]

Wars can go slow-fast-slow-fast- etc. World War 2 did that -- fast in Hitler's early "acquisitions," and the invasion of Poland to the "sitzkrieg" when it was a couple of more months before the Nazi's moved against France and the Low Countries and then Britain, slow again while Hitler massed his forces against Russia, etc.

Afghanistan has been on a slow burn since about 2005, but before that was a quick action.

I would think that the Twilight War would be fast action until about a year into the war, when production of ammunition became important. About 6-8 months later, it would be quick action again until the countries' leaders began to think more and more of nukes, and tried to save as many of their troops as possible until the nukes had already fallen -- then for 4-6 months, more hot action. Then we are at the rulebook timeline.

The T2K timeline has never really matched up all that well with what most people have speculated about modern war, it seems.

I agree that most any prolonged war is only going to be prolonged because of major periods of low-intensity fighting, and WW3 could certainly be no exception -- especially when it gets to the broken-back aspect that makes up the meat of the setting.

It's up until then that's the problem. Soviet plans relied on taking the Rhine within 2-3 weeks. If the war in the Atlantic went on for more than a month or two, they knew they would not win. T2K settings usually flip the script on this somewhat and aren't about the usual Fulda offensive setup... nonetheless, we know that attrition rates of men and materiel would be astronomically high. Even by 6 months in there's not likely to be many if any planes left flying and all the good mech divisions will already be seriously depleted if not outright invalidated. Fuel is probably short by then. The smart munitions are all gone. Lots of other ammo is probably in short supply.

So on the one hand, yeah, that gets you into your slow phase of the war, while you wait for T-55s to show up from Kazakhstan and put every M48 left around into service. On the other hand the hand-waiving of "the first year of the war" has always seemed pretty silly to me. Even before the nukes it starts seeming absurd. Domestically it would probably be impossible to sustain. Etc. etc.

It seems that there are some real world things going on that I could possibly see resulting in some slow burn turning into a shooting war..

Belarus' forced landing of an airliner and claiming NATO massing of trips along they're border followed by Russia stating they'd defend them. Threats to NATO in response to troop movements along the border with Ukraine.

Chinese threats against Australia.

Israel and Gaza.

I could see some skirmish in Belarus/Ukraine/Poland.

Turkey and Iran invading Iraqi Kurdistan with some Syrian side action.

China naval duels with Vietnam, S. Korea, Australia.

Crazies turning protests into shooting wars with local LEO leading to federal involvement.

[unipus]

True enough. None of those things are "World War 3" though, at least not in the sense of "the balloon has gone up in Europe!"

They are points of tension that could, conceivably, somehow, lead to war. In the context of T2K though, it has always been about mass conventional-then NBC-then conventional warfare directly between superpowers. To put it even more clearly in T2k terms, you're talking about 1995-1996 events. I mean, right

[pmulcahy11b]

There's also India vs Pakistan, probably with help from China. If China helps Pakistan, the US may help India. Which may lead China to launch against the US and vice versa. And of course the Indians and Pakistanis will also use their nukes. There's also a good chance the Russians will go to India's aid, leaving the Chinese to launch against Russia.

And then they see the US sitting pretty, and launch against the US (if they can) to put the US out of the conflict.

Or, Taiwan sees the chance to become independent and, with the help of the US and others, try to throw off their Chinese opponents. Then, you have the Chinese fighting three opponents -- and they basically expend all their remaining nukes on everyone they even think is an enemy. And those enemies who received Chinese nukes shoot back....and the world goes down in flames.

[3catcircus]

There's also India vs Pakistan, probably with help from China. If China helps Pakistan, the US may help India. Which may lead China to launch against the US and vice versa. And of course the Indians and Pakistanis will also use their nukes. There's also a good chance the Russians will go to India's aid, leaving the Chinese to launch against Russia.

And then they see the US sitting pretty, and launch against the US (if they can) to put the US out of the conflict.

Or, Taiwan sees the chance to become independent and, with the help of the US and others, try to throw off their Chinese opponents. Then, you have the Chinese fighting three opponents -- and they basically expend all their remaining nukes on everyone they even think is an enemy. And those enemies who received Chinese nukes shoot back....and the world goes down in flames.

Yep. But I don't necessarily see Russia aiding with India if it means going against China, although it does make it easier to play out the whole Sino-Russian exchange as in 1e/2e.

Unfortunately, China mops the floor with Taiwan if it's just a land invasion - a more likely regional skirmish nowadays is going to involve (initially) Aegis ships in S. Korea and Japan protecting sea lanes in S. China sea, backed by US 7th Fleet and Aussie Aegis ships. The whole "we're building artificial islands near your border and declaring sovereignty" is pissing off every one of the other nations in the region.

[Ewan]

Possible Start of a Twilight 2025 Scenario

Russian jets and ships target British warship https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-57583363

[3catcircus]

Russian jets and ships target British warship https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-57583363

Just one piece...

China threatened Australia and the US recently over "meddling in internal Chinese matters" over Taiwan, nine dash line, and belt and road.

Belarus's forced diversion of a flight to arrest an opposition journalist.

Ukraine raid on ransomware gang associated with Colonial Pipeline.

Iranian ships and facilities being mysteriously destroyed or disabled.

Lebanon military asking for foreign aid amidst EU threat of sanctions if they can't form a government.

EU sanctions on Myanmar.

North Korean edict to "housewives" to do fieldwork in rice paddies.

Naftali Bennett saying Israel's patience with Hamas has run out.

Canada-US border closures over COVID.

China crackdowns on Hong Kong.

Japan rejecting summit with South Korea at G7.

Turkish and Iranian attacks on Iraqi Kurdistan.

Russia in Syria.

Russia in Crimea.

Ongoing investigations into if/how China covered up origins of COVID - and any involvement from various private and governmental entities external to China.

Lots of tiny little things that, if they went just a little pear-shaped, could all contribute to Twilight 2025.

You could start with putting together a timeline starting last year (or earlier) of all the things that happened - and then tweak them...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List..._and_millennia is a good starting point.

A few examples from 2020:

1. What if the Russia-Saudi Arabia price war ends differently and OPEC doesn't cut production

2. What if the STC in Yemen doesn't accept a Saudi-brokered peace deal and doesn't end it's self-rule aspirations

3. What if the attempt to remove Maduro from office in Venezuela was successful

4. What if Greece bailed from NATO over the statements that they support the GNA in Libya,

5. What if the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict blew out of control

6. What if India/China clashes along the border escalated into a shooting war

7. What if Trump supporters killed congress people on Jan 6th and took over govt

I think the most likely of these as potential fuses worried be Nagorno-Kabarakh and India/China.

Azerbaijan has relationships with NATO and the EU. Saudi and Pakistan don't recognize Armenia. Armenia is in the Eurasian Union and has ties with China. Armenia recognizes Kashmir to be part of India. Armenia is friendly with Russia. India is friendly with Russia.

That big ball of twine can easily draw countries into conflict at the behest of allies...

[Raellus]

How War With China Begins

I'm not sure that I agree with the validity of this article's thesis, (essentially, "this is when/why China has gone to war in the past, so China will continue to follow this pattern in the very near future") but this piece is interesting nonetheless.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/11/us-china-war/620571/

-

[Olefin]

"China naval duels with Vietnam, S. Korea, Australia."

Add in Taiwan or Philippines as well - then US forces try to intervene to get China to back down and in the scrum a US ship gets targeted by the Chinese (possibly accidentally) - and the US ship fires back and sinks the Chinese ship

That could very rapidly build into one hell of a regional conflict - and you could see Putin or his successor taking advantage of that to go into Eastern Europe to settle old scores with the Ukraine and Baltic States - and bingo - WWIII

[pmulcahy11b]

I personally think we'll be at war with China by the end of the decade. It won't be nuclear -- neither side is that stupid -- but it will be primarily naval in nature, with the occasional special ops raids in mainland China. Taiwan -- well, as one earlier poster said, China will mop the floor with Taiwan after a tough fight that is ultimately lost. After that, it will be a matter of whether China can KEEP Taiwan.

Two items that will be war zones that have never been before -- cyberspace and the space above us. China's been experimenting with killer sats, we can shoot down satellites as well warheads, and well, just imagine the capabilities of the X-37. And what if had more of them (Hunch: I'll bet we do!)

[bash]

True, but apart from the causes what else would be different

The Satellite War would now have to be fairly involved and, as usual, possibly causing a Kessler Cascade where all the satellites in orbit are destroyed by debris. This means there will be no future satellite launches either for those 2300ad people. Goodbye GPS targeting, one of the most important artillery advances. Also good bye to instant map updating.

GPS satellites (of all varieties) are in MEO. They are not trivially destroyed as you need a launch vehicle with similar capability to the satellite's own launch vehicle to deliver a ASAT vehicle to it. There's a finite number of launch facilities in the world capable of handling such launch vehicles. The same goes for GEO communication satellites. If launch and construction facilities were disabled early in a conflict where ASAT warfare is a concern there's a lot of stuff out of reach.

What would be vulnerable to ASAT weapons would be LEO satellites. This includes things like IMINT and MASINT satellites. Lower altitude LEO satellites can be hit with some air and surface launched missiles.

The chances of a Kessler cascade are a bit overblown though. If a satellite is destroyed by an ASAT weapon it goes from being a solid hunk of satellite in orbit to a slightly less solid hunk of satellite in the same orbit. An ASAT weapon isn't going to provide so much energy as to majorly change the orbit of the mass of the satellite and definitely won't provide enough energy to send pieces into significantly higher orbits. Small bits of debris deorbit more readily than larger bits. They have less momentum and lose relatively more energy as they smack into molecules of the atmosphere.

Even if MEO and GEO satellites were successfully attacked, the surface of the Earth is a well measured place. INS navigation is also extremely advanced and accurate. Even without GPS there's lots of ways to accurately navigate (and target things). GPS is nice but not strictly necessary for a lot of things.

[Targan]

Taiwan -- well, as one earlier poster said, China will mop the floor with Taiwan after a tough fight that is ultimately lost. After that, it will be a matter of whether China can KEEP Taiwan.

China could devastate Taiwan right now if it wanted to. Invading and pacifying Taiwan is probably within China's capabilities right now too, but the buildup of forces couldn't be hidden and would invite intervention by the US and its allies. Every year that goes by though, China's ability to mount a large-scale amphibious invasion will improve.

Thing is though, it comes down to what China's priorities are with Taiwan. If the primary priority is gaining Taiwan's industrial base, smashing it to bits in the process of conquering it kind of defeats the purpose. If the primary priority is ideological/making a point, then all bets are off.

We in the western world talk up a good game about human rights and military aggression and all that, but the proof, as they say, is in the pudding. We will invade and intervene and violate human rights when it suits us, it just comes down to how well the media story can be massaged and how much criticism we're prepared to take internationally. Given that reality, and what massive hypocrites many of our countries have been, trying to lean on China not to invade Taiwan on a moral basis is farcical. So, just like the US and other powerful nations, China won't make its decisions on Taiwan based on moral imperatives (and morally they think conquering Taiwan is righteous anyway). All they'll care about is cost-benefit, and how much international pushback they'll have to manage.

[ChalkLine]

What would be more likely to precipitate a war would be if a nation changed the international consensus that Taiwan is part of China and called it an independent state. This would force the PRC to invade Taiwan.

Australian politicians are calling for just that.

[Raellus]

Worth Your Time

If you haven't already, I really recommend that you read the Atlantic article I linked to. It presents several scenarios for how war with China could begin, each focusing on a different region/flashpoint.

Taiwan (Taiwan Straits)
Japan (Senkaku Islands in E. China Sea)
Philippines (S. China Sea)

It also explains why China might feel like their window of opportunity to seize territorial claims by force could be closing soon, due to increased military spending by Australia, Japan, Vietnam, and Indonesia. Arms races in the name of national defense deterrence often result in armed conflict. It's a dangerous game.

-

[ChalkLine]

If you haven't already, I really recommend that you read the Atlantic article I linked to. It presents several scenarios for how war with China could begin, each focusing on a different region/flashpoint.

Taiwan (Taiwan Straits)
Japan (Senkaku Islands in E. China Sea)
Philippines (S. China Sea)

It also explains why China might feel like their window of opportunity to seize territorial claims by force could be closing soon, due to increased military spending by Australia, Japan, Vietnam, and Indonesia. Arms races in the name of national defense deterrence often result in armed conflict. It's a dangerous game.

-

I'm sorry but I didn't want to comment on that article, it's pretty awful. The author is writing some pretty sensationalist stuff and from a historical perspective he's on very shaky ground. I mean, his opening comments wish to frame a power as a real and present danger but the nearest phase of belligerence he can come up with was 50 years ago. In comparison I think every power arrayed against China has indulged in a lot more regime change, coups and outright illegal invasions since then
As for small scale actions, once again we're far more likely to pull egregious shit like shooting down airliners to make a point than China since then.

Don't get me wrong, China is no shrinking violet or choir of angels, like every large power they're a bully and can be a particularly nasty one. However they're up against a concerted alliance of bigger bullies. As Charles de Gaulle once said "Great Powers are Cold Monsters". However when we start shrilly pointing to China's very real abuses it asks the question why we aren't also doing it about places like Turkey and Saudi Arabia. It's obvious that our concerns aren't their behaviour or threat of expansion, it's due to the fact that the West will not tolerate a rival in any situation.

The reason I say this is because China is already winning and all it has to do at far less risk is continue what it is doing now; outproducing the West. In fact the West is doing one of the weirdest things in history in that they are strengthening an enemy while trying to contain it by continuously offshoring manufacturing to China and then rattling sabres like crazy. The logical assumption is they want to have their cake and eat it too.

The whole reason the USA was an unassailable superpower was that it contained the three key ingredients of modern power; a large population, a massive manufacturing base and large resource deposits. Inexplicably the entire West have decided to convert themselves to 'service economies', in essence middlemen, when the obvious fact is sooner or later middlemen get cut out was ignored in the face of big fat profits. Worse, they shifted that manufacturing to a potentially hostile power and assumed they could keep it in check through military threats. It was a losing 'diplomatic' assumption and we're paying for it now.

Worse, we've so gamed the WTO that no one trusts it. I'm afraid the US has blocked the appointment of every member of the World Trade Authority Appellate Body so now there is no body to mediate trade concerns. The West can hardly tout it's allegiance to a 'rules-based order' when we try and game it like this.

China is seeing what we're doing to it, 'containment', because it has both experienced this before earlier in its history and been part of the process when they pulled it on the USSR in conjunction with the West. Since then they've been quietly watching. In 2003 when we went and unilaterally invaded an admittedly despicable regime on trumped up charges and to China's concern suffered no repercussions it was then China started rapidly remilitarising from a power capable of bullying regional rivals to a power capable of defending itself against the West. Sure enough here we are.

So what do I think the flashpoints will be

Well, none in that article although obviously we should prepare for them. The flashpoints will probably be the same dangers of the Cold War; some hawk bungling an action what he thinks the other side will tolerate and sparking a peer to peer war.

[Raellus]

You make some really good points, Chalk. I don't disagree that the west has been playing a dangerous game for far longer than the PRC, and that the west has been applying a double-standard to China when it comes to violations human rights and/or international law.

Inexplicably the entire West have decided to convert themselves to 'service economies', in essence middlemen, when the obvious fact is sooner or later middlemen get cut out was ignored in the face of big fat profits. Worse, they shifted that manufacturing to a potentially hostile power and assumed they could keep it in check through military threats. It was a losing 'diplomatic' assumption and we're paying for it now.

It's not inexplicable. It's the natural result of free market capitalism. Manufacturing shifted from the west to China because of lower labor costs in the latter. Similarly, China could charge less for its steel and heavy machinery because it spends less on labor. That trend began in the 1970s. Western corporations could/still can reap higher profits because they could/still can spend less on labor in China. We are seeing the geopolitical, as well as economic, consequences of that short-sighted, single-minded approach to business.

That said, labor costs are rising in China. It's going to be difficult to keep "winning" at heavy industry long-term, without artificially suppressing wages for their industrial workers. Doing so could lead to serious social unrest. Manufacturing is already much more dispersed in the developing world now than it was 20 years ago because other countries allow their factory workers to be paid even less. Today, China is being undercut by El Salvador and Bangladesh, the same way China undercut the West for most of the last four decades.

So what do I think the flashpoints will be

Well, none in that article although obviously we should prepare for them. The flashpoints will probably be the same dangers of the Cold War; some hawk bungling an action what he thinks the other side will tolerate and sparking a peer to peer war.

I agree that a war sparked by clashes over the Senkaku Islands in E. China Sea (v Japan) is highly unlikely, ATM. That said, flashpoints in the S. China Sea have already seen threats and use of force in recent times.

China has clashed with Filipino fishermen and naval forces on multiple occasions over the past five years or so.

PRC intrusions in Taiwan airspace have increased dramatically as of late.

Articles about recent Chinese saber-ratting re Taiwan:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42620/a-record-setting-56-chinese-warplanes-flew-into-taiwans-air-defense-zone-today

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42722/major-construction-underway-at-three-of-chinas-airbases-closest-to-taiwan

Yesterday, I read an article claiming that many Chinese are stocking up on essentials because they believe that recent government encouragement to do so indicates that a war with Taiwan is forthcoming.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/05/economy/china-food-security-mic-intl-hnk/index.html

-