Dispersion won't likely save fling wing.  Why?  PLAAF will own the air except for a region over the east of the main island(where an air base built into the side of a mountain, shielding it from BM thereby, exists and will be able to contest AS).  Good luck trying to get out to sea with extended range tanks with MIG and Sukhoi all over the place with AEW birds up.  You still gotta get thru all that other stuff, yknow, and without decent fighter protection you're hosed.  Yeah, hiding out in cities where the manufacturing is keeps you pretty safe, but then you've gotta leave to get at the enemy.  There's not a whole lot of ports on the east side of the island, and all that food has to come in from the west, you've gotta push the PRC off or they siege you into capitulation.

So you're back to 'how do I toss them back from the beach'?  Or more likley the three major ports on the west side.  US is in a bad position until GUam gets built up to handle the necessary sea and air assets---no political string with a more managable distance.  Flying fighters out of Alaska or Hawaii is really damn far and taxing.  The optempo is bad for getting at theose transports.  The stright isn't a happy place for our big nuclear subs, even if they're ina position to insert themselves there at the start of hosltilities.  

Okay, and what do you do about the PRC adopting an airborne attack only followed up by the heavies?  They've got the lift capability to do it and sustain it.  With the control of air that the PLAAF is likely to have they can do this.  Take airports near Taipei or elsewhere and conscript all commercial air to support existing military lift.  

The first three days are going to be critical, and if Taiwan can easily fold in the first 72 hours.  Which is why a ground force to stiffen or even help in the repulse is there makes that less likely.  A carrier might not be in position to get there in 3 days.  This ground force would be.  

The BM strikes arn't going to be a 'dump' so much as targeted.  There's stuff that's critical to hit, like air bases, long freeways, naval bases, etc, which given 5-15k missiles(depending on whose estimates you believe) can do so with minimal harm to everyone else.  They want the factories and they want the people to work in them.  They aren't stupid and going to employ scorched earth.  Give them, and me, wome credit. 

And if you realy want to talk about strategic deterence, well, then we should be talking about things like a)  helping Taiwan with their LACM program so they can hit Three Gorges(kill us and we kill you back, MAD kinda stuff) b)  selling Taiwan the stuff it needs to be a serious threat(none of these 50 year old Kidd destroyers and block 2 F-16s, give them the good stuff and the AD equipment to lessen the effect of a BM strike strategy) c)  building up Guam to handle a regional RRF composed of all three elements(air, sea, land) that can impose its will quickly(what PNAC was all for back in the early days of Bush 43). 

John, yeah, that's come up before.  look at the eastern mountain airfield, okay, it's not officially there, but it's there..  That's a place to land, a nice place to defend, and a place likely to remain in operation since it'll take planes to hit whic the ROCAF can contest from the earliest moments.  THe ROC needs something IF this goes off to even remain in the fight.  Taipei will likely go the first day.  Teh gov't needs some reason to stay in the fight until major US assets can get on the seen(maybe a day but probaly closer to five, and that's only one carrier with more coming online closer to a week to ten days.)  So, iv'e given you an airfield.   FCS could be used to keep that hardpoint operational(while enjoying persistent air cover), and that's what I'd recommend since that keeps some forces alive and a secure place for the ROC gov't to hole up in.     Otherwise, well, the gov't surrenders. 

Sure, PRC can use EMP.  And become a parraih in doing so.  Who's going to mind if JPN ditches its pacifism clause in response to that and builds up hard core?  Taiwan isn't an end in itself for PRC, but a stepping stone in a larger strategy called 'String of Pearls'.  They've gotta take it in a way to keep the rest of the 'Pearls' in play or it ws a useless move. 

The ROCN is in the same position.  That's not a whole lot of sea to hide in.  Subs, ROCN are diesels!, are going to get a lot of attention---not to mention the historical folly of using subs on the strategic defensive.  Everything else will see lots of air attacks.  How are these torpedoes going to be around to be delivered in numbers to matter given the superiority in numbers and capability the PLA has, please?  

Okay, so fine, cable works.  So the secret to defending against amphib invasion is lots and lots of cable.  You devious man, Chief.  Why'd you hold out for so long on that? 

The end run is what I'm saying China's already done, Unk.  Without a deployable in high speed formation China's doctrine wins---and there goes anyone who decided to stand against them(ROC, ROK, Japan(in a decade or so, when the PLAN is modern enough and large enough to make a landing on Honshu likely), VNM, and a host of other E Asia and Western pacific nations).  They get to nibble and then hold, that's their doctrine.  Take a bite, sue for peace(with new borders), and then repeat.  They've decided to make it hard for anyone outside the BS to get in(like all those subs coming out of bases all over Asia(that Pak base for instance)) to harrass and delay anyone deciding to come play by sea), and move fast in the BS(that whole 'friction' deal).  So, having nothing means we're just ceeding conditions to them.  And worrying about some idjit banker making something critical to the plan go away just reduces us to sitting on our thumbs.  Or do you have some other solution in mind, eh? 

It's easy to poke fun when you defend nothing, Chief.  (Dont think I haven't noticed you like using that against me, a lot.)  So, what's the solution then, Unk?   They've set the table for themselves and so how do we ruin the first course?

Me?  I'm liking the pre-po this stuff on Guam, which means we NEED ABMD by the way, and move it quickly to anywhere in East Asia, with F-22 protection as it transits, in under 24 hours idea, alot.  It might not be that this stuff wins on the battlefield but in the Staff Meeting cause it so complicates the battleplan(what're the kwazy American's going to do and in what numbers?).  Y'know, that whole strategic deterence rationale. 

THe reality is that getting all of those bases in the potential hot spots are very hard of late.

THere's also another problem not looking at.  Being heavy isn't the end all be all.  Fine, you're armored up the wazzooo.  Great.  What's your ground pressure look like?  Oh, too heavy to work just about anywhere?  Too bad.  Can't get across a bridge because you're too big or too heavy?  Too bad.  You're so big your accoustical wake makes you stick out like a 15 year old's boner?  Too bad.  There's a lot of factors that go into this, and there's no perfect answer.  Little can have advantages and big can have advantages, but they both can suck @55 heavily if taken too far.

Getting inside the enemy's OODA loop?  Now that's an advantage.  Though, is it a war winner in and of itself?  no.  Info-overload can cripple an army(see WW1).  And who cares if you think faster than an enemy if you can't imflict damage?  But, if you can be really dangerous to him and really fast?  Well, there's a reason why people always want the initiative, right? 

Though, why one simply can't implant much of this tech in existing platforms is something I don't understand.  WOuld a slightly larger turret on M-1/M-2/LAV really be a deal breaker? 

I'd rather than go whole hog to FCS see a bit of specialization.  FCS becomes the bulk of what we use, but we've still got a core section we can build around if it comes to Old School grudge matches. 

And, hey, let's not forget that we also have to compete against enemy doctrines.  Being big and heavy might matter if it comes to slugfest, but what if the enemy decides a nibble and hold strategy is the way they're gonna go(for 50 years)?  A dude with a rapier can kill a dude with a claymore if the conditions are to his advantage, after all; and doctrine's as much a blue print about setting conditions as it is a common verbage. 

I mean, has anyone looked at PLA doctrine lately?  To fight less than 21 days in high tech conditions BEFORE the US can intervene?  Nah.  THere's no reason to believe that anyone would go for such a thing(except for all those monograms and white papers that come out of China every year on how they intend to do exactly that). 

I like the idea of FCS.  Let's see what it does in serious testing and wargames.  Then we'll know whether it was worth it or not.  I know money's tight, and has been for almost twenty years now, but you need the ability to experiment too.  Even negative results lead to further understanding, y'know.

I've read it all, and helped conduct some of the studies.

Color me not interested in the Kool-Aid.  I'll stick to tequila.

The system relies on the network to be always there, and always work.

Since when is that a basis on which to plan a war?