China May Soon Have 800 Missiles Targeting Taiwan

yasin_khan

New Member
China is likely to have 800 ballistic missiles targeting Taiwan before the end of 2006, Taipei’s defense minister said Sept. 20 as he pressed the case for an 18 billion dollar special defense budget.

Lee Jye told parliament’s defense committee that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) now operates some 600 short-range ballistic missiles -- mostly deployed in coastal provinces facing Taiwan.

"The number of Dong Feng-11 and Dong Feng-15 ballistic missiles is expected to rise to 800 before the end of 2006," Lee said.

Should war break out in the Taiwan Strait, the PLA could launch five waves of extensive strikes lasting for 10 hours, he said.

"They may also fire 200-odd cruise missiles from bases 1,000 miles (1,600 kilometers) away from Taiwan to attack the island’s key targets," Lee said. "Given missile defensive capabilities, we are hardly able to cope with the threat."

Since pro-independence president Chen Shui-bian was re-elected in March, Beijing has stressed its long-standing vow to take Taiwan by force should it declare formal independence.

Lee said Taiwan’s other armed forces are also inferior to China’s and China’s sustained rise in military spending is expected further to tilt the balance towards the mainland in coming years.

The number of China’s second-generation military aircraft like the Russian-made Su-27 and Su-30 may increase to 400 in two years from 300 now, he said.

China’s military spending, which rose at an average double-digit rate over the past decade, is estimated at $24.5 billion in 2004.

Taiwan’s defense outlays in 2004 were 264.1 Taiwan dollars ($7.76 billion) after peaking in 1999 at 284.5 billion Taiwan dollars.

Military analysts say the island’s military commands, communications, airports and seaports would be vulnerable to surprise missile attacks.

Taiwan has put into service three U.S.-made PAC-2 anti-missile systems to protect the greater Taipei area, and is planning to acquire six more improved PAC-3 systems. The Patriot weaponry is part of a controversial arms sales package offered by US President George W. Bush in April 2002.

The cabinet has approved plans to spend 610 billion Taiwan dollars ($18.2 billion) on the package, which also includes eight U.S.-built submarines and a fleet of submarine-hunting P-3C aircraft, over a 15-year period from 2005.

The deal will go to parliament for approval toward the end of the year.

Li Weiyi, spokesman for China’s Taiwan Affairs Office, on Sept. 29 criticized Taiwan’s proposed arms package. He cited a protest rally staged in Taipei over the weekend as proof that it was not supported by the island’s people.

"For the Chinese people, there is nothing more important or holy than protecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China," Li said.

Tensions escalated over the weekend when Taiwan Premier Yu Shyi-kun threatened to strike Shanghai with missiles if major cities in Taiwan were attacked.

Media reports have suggested Taiwan is involved in research efforts to improve its missile capability, some of which could eventually hit cities on China’s east coast.

The two sides split in 1949 at the end of a civil war on the mainland that was won by the communists.




http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=380724&C=asiapac
 

P.A.F

New Member
china has the right to gain tiawan back. and i don't blame them for aiming 800 missiles at tiawan if they are getting weapons and being friendly with its enemies.
 

srirangan

Banned Member
Who has what right is debatable. But blaming someone for war mongering after talking about military action yourself and aiming 800 odd missiles at them is just plain hipocritical and sad.
 

P.A.F

New Member
yes i know it's sad. but thats what you get if you have a third party involved arming and spiceing up the region so damage can be done to its enemies. it's just sad/evil politics.
 

srirangan

Banned Member
Well we know how it feels about a third party. For years China and US have been the "third parties" in India's case and been continously arming Pak. Pak has also been the "third party" and has been arming and funding jehadi's in Kashmir. China is also propping up Bangladesh against India. It is very sad.
 

P.A.F

New Member
oh come on. since when did pakistan are people to go to kashmir. that is complete and utter B.S and if you think it's true then why don't you go and find me some SOLID evidence.

talking of china being a third party yes i agree. but then again there is russia and isreal. but that is different in this case.
russia isreal arming india. china arming pakistan.
BUT
US arming tiawan and no body arming china. see the difference.

and by the way don't bother bringing pakistan and others into this thread. this only about US china and tiawan. :cop
 

srirangan

Banned Member
Okay let's keep in CHina Taiwan centric.

>> US arming tiawan and no body arming china. see the difference.

A certain Russia has been seeling a lot of stuff to China for quite a while now, how could you chose to ignore that?
 

P.A.F

New Member
yes that is true. i never ignored it but forgot :D:

but the thing is that the US is arming tiawan at a faster rate with better weaponary.
 

yasin_khan

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #10
China will not get Taiwan back by power these types of problems are solved by political manner not by power.
 

P.A.F

New Member
the reason i'm on china's side in this war is because they deserve to get tiawan back. if china went to the US and decided to make hawai or alaska independant then i don't think the US would like it. and thats just how china feels at the moment.
 

yasin_khan

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #13
what will happen if they use missiles?
they will destroy taiwan and if USA take part in the war the postion will change alot.
 

redsoulja

New Member
Well if china wants to reabsorb taiwan, this is because they are the same people except the chinese governments communist rhetoric and the taiwanese nationalist rhetoric stemming for post world war 2 circumstances dont get along with each other.
Thus P.A.F is right that taiwan should be aeabsosrbe
if one applies the same logic to south asia pakistanis and indians are both indians yet dont have one nation because of religious differences that are as stupid as the chinese and taiwanese's differences in ideology. thus india must one day reabsorb pakistan and bangladesh
All indians and pakistanis are brothers, brothers in a fight because of outside powers and religious idiocy have split them.

and if china can arm pakistan :india's enemy
indi msut arm taiwan: china's enemy
 

srirangan

Banned Member
Ah no thanks, brothers we may be but the burden of absorbing Pakistan and Bangladesh into India would be too much for our economy, that has just started looking upwards.
 

redsoulja

New Member
see i meant their absorption overa longer period of time , obviously they have horrible economies. maybe in 75 years, and your economy isnt actually looking that well, the poverty isnt dropping significantly at all, only reason the gdp is growing is because more multi-nationals are moving in to capitalize on your massive markets, i dont think india should completely emulate chinas economic strategy, this would result into the population becoming materialist liek western societies and many would miss out on the economic growth taking place in upper and middle classes
 

srirangan

Banned Member
Dude poverty has been droppin way since the 90's .. India infact is not emulating the Chinese economy at all .. We arew sticking to the basic, giving a sound foundation on principles, hence we are seeing a gradual but steady rise in the Indian economy, whereas China saw a boom, and now faces fears of a crash.
 

redsoulja

New Member
first of all india still has 1/2 of the world's poor people
and china does not risk a crash, their economy risks too much growth, and they haven an economy double that of india, their "shoe industry" alone is larger than india's IT sector
 

srirangan

Banned Member
Sir do you understand economics? I don't think you do so I'll explain in lay man terms.

China drives the production engine of the world, China is producing waay too much. The main player on the consumer side is the US which is not seeing growth. Hence eventually if China keeps producing more and more, then eventually a time will come when no one could buy what they produce. Hence the Chinese don't get any ROI (return of investment), and in just one season the economy could crash back to the middle ages.

Second, India doesn't have half the world's poor, your facts are messed up. Please check them again.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The Chinese economy is actually slowly starting to be recognised as being at risk.

- Only 2 of the 5 main provinces are cashed up - that is generating some ill feeling between the richer and the poorer provinces.

- some provinces are experiencing up to 90% unemployment. As a result some of their unemployed are travelling to to Shanghai seeking work, and are being paid an absolute pittance - in some cases less than $3.50 per week. Shanghai is starting to stare the ugly deja vu problem of the 1920's back in the face. They have escalating crime from those who are unemployed and feel disenfranchised, and they are getting a very real separation of those who are cashed up and those who are bitterly poor.

- A significant amount of Chinas economy is driven by US consumption. If the US decides to shift its purchasing base to other countries (and India and South America are more receptive to US interests as there is less issue of IP theft etc... then the Chinese economy will start to look very very fragile. Logistically it is better for the US to trade with the Sthn American countries than with China. There are less significantly complaints to the state dept about intellectual property theft in India than against China.

- China does not have a depth of stability, churning sales is not the same as having a stable and robust economy. The notion that the Chinese economy is strong is really not a basis in fact.

- There is a growing perception that India will be able to compete with China on more equitable terms within 10 years. If India had not taken a hit in 1997, some economists and strategists believe that she would be even closer to achieving parity.

Chinas economy is overheating, couple that with some significant social separation, she could go through a revisit of 1949 in a worst case scenario.
 
Top