"Chad Irby" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Kevin Brooks" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
. com...
In article ,
"Kevin Brooks" wrote:

Oh, a mere 1200 to 1400 miles up the Yangtze River, maybe 1500 miles
from Taiwan; piece of cake, right? Let's see, F-16's (the most
potent
potential ground attack platform the Chinese possess), lugging
weapons heavier than anything the F-16 has ever lugged, on a 3000
mile round trip,

...because nobody would ever send a number of planes on a one-way
mission to destroy something that's a major part of the enemy's
infrastructure, right?

The above is about what one would expect

...from the United States. In WWII. Like when the US "threw away' a
handful of medium bombers in a *symbolic* attack on the Japanese home
islands.

No, you must have mistakenly snipped ('cause you sure as hell did not note
the snippage) the little bit about your predilection for proposing
outlandish and unworkable "options"; here it is again for you:

....from the guy who earlier postulated
that maybe a *really* big shaped charge would do the trick, before
meandering off into the world of Supercommando underwater demolition attacks
1400 miles up the Yangtze with a few *tons* of explosives toted along for
the purpose...or were you going to just have these Rambos mix their own demo
on site? (Gawd, you'll probably argue they should submerge a few tons of
ammonium nitrate... LOL!)


No, the idea of Taiwan sacrificing a goodly portion of its best
fighters,
when faced with a growing PLAAF threat themselves, does not make much
sense.

...to someone who thinks the attack would never work, since he doesn't
have any idea of the size of the target, the effects and accuracy of
modern weapons, or what people will do when pushed by a big threat.

The burden of proof lies with you--thus far you have claimed it could be
done with one honking BIG commando raid toting a few tons of explosives in
and placing it upstream of the dam, which is located as we have seen *well*
within the confines of the PRC, or maybe bombs that can't be hauled by
anything in Taiwanese service (and only by MC-130's in *US* service), or
perhaps with a truly gargantuan shaped charge (ignoring that whole
water-screws-up-shaped-charges bit). Excuse me for recognizing that none of
these are workable military solutions, and one of them (that Mongo Shaped
Charge theory of your's) is even a physical impossibility (congrats--you
have now joined the ranks of Henry in the "clueless yet limitlessly
hardheaded" category). And BTW, where are those precise dam measurements you
keep alluding to but never produce when repeatedly asked for them, huh?

Brooks


--
cirby at cfl.rr.com