Is China capable of crippling US CSF's in Chinese ses?

[Thumper]

A china beligerant enough to launch military operations against Taiwan would be unaceptable to Japan, South Korea, Australia, the Philipines, Singapour and practically the rest of south east asia. Thats a big chunk of the rest of the world,

Exactly. Regardless of what you think of the US motives and reasons for removing Saddam, an invasion of ROC by the PLA is in no way similar to it. It is much more similar to Saddam's invasion of Kuwait in 1990 claiming it was his 19th province. Regardless of what the PRC thinks Taiwan is an independent nation (just like Kuwait) to which it has no right to invade. World reaction would be similar to Saddam's invasion of Kuwait.

Do you find it even slightly hypocritical to say attacking another country out of unestablished, phantom fears, with the result of 100,000 people killed, is any acceptable behavior?

But once again you are rewriting history. The attack was merely a resumption of the 1991 hostilities. Right or wrong Sadam was in violation of numerous UN resolutions. Sadam killed, and maimed millions. Sadam aided and abetted terrorism (no not 9/11). Sadam still had every intention of resuming his WMD program once the sanctions where lifted. I don't want to get ideological but you need to go into the reasons why things where done to see that there is no equivalance.

So, has Taiwan threatened the PRC. Is Taiwan even a renmote threat to the PRC. Is Taiwan a threat to its neighbors. Does Taiwan have a brutal rerpressive regime that regularly kills and maims thousands of its own people?

There is no hypocrasy here Goldenpanda, only the PRCs skewed morals.

Look at Iraq as a warning. The PRC would be set back 50 years over this stupid folly. People on this board have been trying to show you the stupidity of it and you keep comeing up with fairy tale solutions.

China has made great progress, but she still has a long way to go. Threatening Taiwan is just a huge waste of resources.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Lets have a look at this senario in general terms. You've got a island to take, 200km of ocean to sea lift from friendly ground. About 5-600 000 enemy troops in the theater and probably 100 000 at the invasion area. Only a few suitable beaches, each one heavily defended with massive amounts of pre targeted artillary, hundreds of rockets and tubes. Limited sea lift capacity for 1 heavy brigade at a time with 12hr turn around in theoretical terms (meaning perfect sercumstances ie not war) so 2 a day so two thirds/1 division. So in a perfect scenario, 50 brigades, but when you add traffic problems and atrittion you could probably say 10 div on the first day. The probability of air superiority, maybe air supremacy but only in the face of stiff resistance. Naval threats are probably extensive minefields, Land launched AShM's, and possibly USN SSN's or even a CVN battlegroup or two. An unfriendly population at the landing area, and the objective generaly. An enemy that has the advantages of a small island to defend which although deprives them of depth, gives them mass and shortens their lines. It also means that ammo dumps will be close to the front lines easing the logistical situation for the defenders. The attackers have all the problems of supplieing their forces over beaches, due to the lack of a usable port, with around 50 medium vessles that can not be effectively used without a working port, not to mention a larger merchant marine which also can't be used without port facilities. So the 10 division deployed on the first day need to be supplied over ivasion beaches under heavy artillary bombardment.

Compare this to operation overlord, the single largest amphibious operation ever. The possible landing areas were over 1000km of suitable beaches that have to be defended. 5 infantry divisions and one armourd division in the vecinity of the beaches so 70/80 000 combat personell, with 59 in the theater, spread across france. The allies have compleat air superiority and have effectivly isolated the beachead area and made travel by day impossible for large formations. Total naval supremacy with e boats, u boats and mines as the primary naval threats, but massive ASW and minehunting assets to secure the sea lanes. Sealift capability for 5 divisions at a time, 5 in the initial assault and around 11 on the first day, less after that. Also had to supply over the beaches. But 2 mullburry artificial harbours to allow merchant marine to be directly utilized with two ports, le harve and brest within the invasion area.

Spot the difference? More advantages for the defender, the main ones being logistic and the build up fase (smaller distances to move units to reinforce the beachead area and no french resistance to contend with). Less potential landing areas to defend and more heavily defended landing areas (not beach defences but artillary). Manny more problems for the attacker, totally inadequate sea lift capability. 10 div on the first day. All need to be supplied over the beaches which are all within range om masses of pre targeted arty. Air superiority could be acheived by the PROC if the USAF/USN didnt intervien, but they dont have the assets or time to secure the sea lanes properly and would be under AShM attack from the sure, thats if the USAF/USN does not intervien. The most importand problem is the build up. The PROC doesn't have time to effectivly isolate the beachead with airpower, they can at best lift 10 divisions on the first day although they can only supply over the beach using amphibs, and therefore the more units deployed the more amphibs needed to cart supplies over the beaches. The Taiwanese have less space to move units to re enforce the beachead and would soon outnumber the PROC forces on the beachead. They would have enough forward logisical baces to keep all deployed units well supplied even during high intencity operations. Supply for PLAN would have been a total nighmare. Normandy had massive traffic jams on the beach and it wasn't constantly raining MLRS's. Basically it is so unrealistic to think that PROC can achieve anything but a total f*#king bloodbath. They dont have the naval assets, the sea lift assets, the air assets, the logistical assets, the terrain is bad, the defences are formidable, the enemy is strong determined and well equiped, they dont have time, the enemy has many allies with a more effective navy and airforce in deployable baces close to the theater. mission impossible or what???? let me know if theres anything i've missed.

 

[DarthAmerica]

To those of you who are interested in the logistics involved with an operation like this. I suggest googling the word "railhead" and "tank" or Fort Riley. The link below can sort of give a brief look at what's involved...

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030121-riley01.htm

...Notice three things. The very high level of activity which would be very unlikely to go unnoticed. The numbers of troops being moved and most importantly the time it takes. Implied is the experience of the DoD at conducting these types of operations. And they are dealing with far fewer troops than China would have to in the event of an invasion attempt. And unlike the United States, Chinese forces mobilizing would always be under the threat of air attacks from Taiwan, the USA, Oz and possibly even Japan/Singapore/SK if they chose to do so. Whether or not you think China could successfully defend its embarkation points. It would have to take force protection measures while simultaneously conducting the "mobe". This will slow the efficiency of the operation even more. In the event of an attack, a single successful hit in the mobilization area could seriously disrupt and delay operations. Take a cruise missile or JDAM strike that hits a critical part of the rail system or POL for example. Even a nearby EA-6B jamming the radio frequencies used to coordinate the movement could cause the PRC timeline to slip by hours or even days.

All this and I haven't even got into advanced naval mines and UUVs lurking about the harbors. Gentleman its fun to discuss these things but I think a lot of people misunderstand the magnitude of the difficulty. Think about it.




DA

 

[tphuang]

Nice try but it still would not work. Do you think the US would sit still and allow you to basically starve 23 million people? What do you think would happen to Chinese rice paddies? All of China's external trade would stop since they would be blockaded. All of her coastal cities would be fair game for B2s and cruise missile strikes.

I think you misunderstood me. Starve out Taiwan the contemporary style, which means not having electricity and deny the high level of living standard that Taiwanese are used to. (ie: without the electricity to operate appliances, TVs and having to walk to work and such).
And try not to get bombing civilian population in this, it just disintegrate a "I nuke you, you nuke me" kind of discussion.

What method would this be accomplished? Use of PGMs, special forces insertions or fifth columns? Also, what would the timeframe be to achieving this kind of interuption or disruption?

I can see how this could easily transition from something covert, into overt operations that US and/or other forces might be inclined to intervene in. Similarly, depending on the covert nature of the operations, it could be branded the work of "terrorists" not unlike the IRA bombing campaign or the actions of some "Red" brigade militant groups operating in Western Europe during the Cold War. The fallout from something like this happening could be interesting...

conventional meanings + whatever possible way to make lives uncomfortable for Taiwanese government from maintaining day to day operation.

It would be good in a world where China was the dominant world power able to generally influence/intimidate other nations and defend against any conventional attack. Of course we don't live in that world. In the real world, such a Chinese stunt would be viewed as an unprovoked barbaric attack on a much weaker nation. Further, it would infuriate the Japanese, Australia, probably South Koreans and most importantly Americans. Even if no direct military intervention was to occur. The resulting economic sanctions would utterly destroy the PRC economically.

If ANY of the neighboring regional powers or the USA decided to get involved militarily. Any of them individually or a combination could cut off the PRC SLOC. Some of them could directly retaliate on the mainland itself. There are just too many military options to cover them all. But none favor a PRC outcome. A bombardment of Taiwan and severing of its communications infrastructure would have to be IMMEDIATELY exploited to have a lasting effect. Otherwise the PRC loses strategic surprise and Taiwans allies would assemble a massive force task organized for counter offensive operations and MOOTW.

Hypothetically speaking lets assume the USA/Allies decided that escalation wasn't in anyones interest but also decided that Taiwan should remain free. Oil ports that supply the PRC could be cut off diplomatically and Naval /Air assets could enforce this out at sea turning back shipping bound for China. USAF fighter squadrons could establish "no-fly-zones" over Taiwan and the Straight except for PRC maritime waters with the USN and strategic bombers acting as a mobile reserve ready to strike an overwhelming blow on order. Meanwhile, Patriot, THAAD, AEGIS and F-15/22 missile defenses could significantly reduce PRC BM/bomber effectiveness over Taiwan. ROE could limit hard kills to BM's/CM's only while EW assets could be brought to bear against the full spectrum of PRC targets. International aid would also pour into Taiwan. While all of this is going on the Taiwanese acting in legitimate self defense, could retaliate on the PRC militarily. The only way out of this for the PRC would be to dramatically escalate its attack and face the consequences of those actions in a degraded state due to attrition and after telegraphing its strategy and against fully alerted defenses. It's not hard to see this strategy as a huge failure.

It all sounds nice on paper, but the reality is that this is beyond the PRC's means to do at this time. For a very long time to come Taiwan's fate is Taiwan's to decide I'm afraid. If the PRC really wants Taiwan back anytime soon, that battle needs to be fought in the hearts and minds of the Taiwanese and not a battlefield where PRC defeat is almost a given.

can we keep this politics out of this? As for the battlefield, I do recognize that you have formed good arguments against a Chinese invasion (although nothing I have not read before), you have also severely underestimated indigenous Chinese systems and Chinese MilInd that have led to underestimating the overall PLA combat capability.

Have export of any of these systems been contemplated? Downgraded versions?

The only one is J-10, but that won't happen for a while (until it equips plaaf to a satisfactory level). And that will be an export version too similar to what China did with FBC-1 and F-8IIM.

Are there other reasons to them not being exported, like sensitivity issues or that all the output is to be absorbed by the PLA (-N/AF)?

both of these reasons are part of the equation.

Iran is effectively being embargoed by half the world, so they will have to do with what is being offered, the baseline is very low. Even then they apparently were not interested in the downgraded platform. Chinese ASM's do meet the baseline in their lesser versions, though.

my point is that China will not raise the standard by giving the best they have even if it that means loosing an export deal. C-802 meets more than just Iran specs, it's probably China's best export. And in relation to the topic, YJ-83 is the main missile threat against US CSF.

Considering that ROCN will have to upgrade combat system and some of the sensors if they wont to upgrade weapons suite on Kang Ding class I doubt that type054 combat system will be so superior.

Are you expecting Taiwanese defense industry to produce better combat system than Chinese one? Kang ding will need a comprehensive sensor system like what 054A has with sea soal, sea eagle, the FCRs, SR-64, lightbulb copy datalink. And to be honest, I see 054A successors coming out far earlier than any kind of upgrade on kang ding.

From what I have seen YJ-83 is really modern and capable system(probably one of the best SSMs today) but HF-3 seams to be in that liege too. Also we will have to see how this systems will perform in real life environment... On other hand we still cant judge HQ-16 since currently we don't have any knowledge about it other then obvious fact that it is VLS launched...

well, you are comparing a missile that's been around a while to a missile that is not even in service yet. And in terms of ASuW, 054A will not only have a surface search radar, but Sea Soal, Y-8s and other ships for OTH targetting. As for HH-16 (HQ-16 doesn't exist to the best of my knowledge), China certainly seems to think its VLS version is better than shtil or klinok.

Honestly nothing... Looking at quantity and quality of systems ROC and PRC have and variety of scenarios outcome can be different. On other hand most of people who advocate PRC side have tendency to minimize ROCN capability to inflict loses to PLAN modern assets...

well, knowing that most modern PLAN modern assets are equipped with 2 type 730 CIWS, it's hard to think that ROCN missile would be able to penetrate that. And I don't think ROCN is capable of the kind of mass attack needed to penetrate that.

And that is not so simple task as some think; ROC defenses are quite well prepared and If you don't destroy them (and I didn't see any proof that PRC can achieve that in limited time line they have) they will pose serious treat to any invasion force. They could save enough assets to decimate any invasion force and if that happens invasion is failed even with PLAF air superiority...

are you talking about SAMs or ground based missiles now?

 

[Schumacher]

A china beligerant enough to launch military operations against Taiwan would be unaceptable to Japan, South Korea, Australia, the Philipines, Singapour and practically the rest of south east asia. Thats a big chunk of the rest of the world,

Might as well add Timbuktu to the list.
You do show serious lack of understanding of the situation in Asia. Jpn & Aust may support US in some kind of military response, even that is not certain depending on the time of such a conflict.
As to SK & the rest of SEA, given they have either declared neutral on the issue or oppose Taiwan independence, I'm real interested to know how you come up with your claim.

 

[csq]

China Security Quarterly: Winter Edition on China's ASAT Test

Click here to view the latest issue of China Security in electronic version

http://www.wsichina.org/cs5_all.pdf





China Security Winter 2007
"China's ASAT Test and Space Deterrence"
China's anti-satellite (ASAT) weapon test on Jan. 11, 2007, was a defining moment for the security of outer space. Three articles in the current issue of China Security explore China's motivations behind the test, U.S. and international reactions, and implications for the delicate strategic balance in space. Complementing these analyses, this issue also discusses the rationale for China's robust deterrence in space.


"U.S. Nuclear Primacy and China's Nuclear Challenges"
The global strategic nuclear environment is rapidly changing. A PLA Senior Colonel surveys the threats that China faces and its future choices in meeting those challenges. A second analysis by Keir A. Lieber & Daryl G. Press revisits the issue of U.S. nuclear primacy with the debate shifting to its consequences for China's minimum nuclear deterrent and the future stability of China-U.S. strategic nuclear relations.


"Crisis Management in China"
China's domestic crises are rising. From SARS, avian flu, and HIV/AIDS, to coal-mining accidents and social unrest, these non-traditional security challenges will play a critical role in defining the future of China's stability. A Chinese scholar closely examines how China has fared in undertaking this monumental task and the path ahead to better crisis management strategies.

China Security is a policy journal that brings diverse Chinese perspectives to Washington on vital traditional and non-traditional security issues that impact China's strategic development and its relations with the United States.


Deterrence Revisited: Outer Space, by Bao Shixiu

"China cannot accept the monopolization of outer space by another power." Bao Shixiu is a senior fellow at the Academy of Military Sciences.

U.S.-Sino Relations in Space: From "War of Words" to Cold War in Space?, by Theresa Hitchens

"If the intent of the Chinese test was to deter the United States from building space-based missile defenses, it may well backfire." Theresa Hitchens is the director of the World Security Institute's Center for Defense Information.

China's ASAT Test: Strategic Response, by Eric Hagt

"The ASAT test itself implies that the military option is beginning to win out over a diplomatic one in China as a solution to head off U.S. space control ambitions." Eric Hagt is the director of the China Program at the World Security Institute.

Nuclear Challenges and China's Choices, by Wang Zhongchun

"China should avoid sacrificing its interests to satisfy U.S. nonproliferation requests." Wang Zhongchun is a professor at the National Defense University and senior colonel of the People's Liberation Army.

U.S. Nuclear Primacy and the Future of the Chinese Deterrent, by Keir A. Lieber & Daryl G. Press

"America's drive for nuclear primacy is primarily driven by concerns about future relations with China, rather than Russia." Keir A. Lieber is an assistant professor of political science at the University of Notre Dame. Daryl G. Press is an associate professor of government at Dartmouth College.

Crisis Management in China, by Zhong Kaibin

"Crises increasingly spill over national borders and affect regional and international actors." Zhong Kaibin is a Ph.D. candidate at the School of Public Policy & Management at Tsinghua University.


Eric Hagt
Editor
China Security
World Security Institute China Program
1779 Massachusetts Ave NW
Washington DC 20036
Tel 202 332 0600
Fax 202 462 4559
WWW.WSICHINA.ORG

About the World Security Institute (WSI):
WSI is a 21st century global think tank and a leading not-for-profit media organization committed to independent journalism and research, and the development, production, and marketing of impartial news and information to a global audience. Through a variety of publications and services, in several languages including Chinese, Russian, Farsi, and Arabic, WSI provides a unique news and research-based approach to communications, policy development, and cooperation focusing on the social, economic, environmental, political and military components of international security and interdependence. WSI's divisions include the Center for Defense Information, International Media, the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting, Azimuth Media and International Programs with offices in Washington, D.C. (founded in 1972), Brussels (founded in 2002), Cairo (founded in 2006) and Moscow (founded in 2001), and a Beijing program (founded in 2004).

Visit our website:
WWW.WORLDSECURITYINSTITUTE.ORG
WWW.WSICHINA.ORG


To cancel subscription to this message, click here or email [email protected]. To subscribe to the electronic version of China Security, click here or email [email protected]. You may request a hard copy by emailing [email protected].
---

 

[goldenpanda]

Thumper I'm amazed at the contortions you go through to justify yourself. Your entire attitude lacks respect for the interests of other nations and resorts to hostility to achieve your narrow goals. You've already lost a friendly post Soviet Russia. I'd love to see how your approach gets you *anywhere* with Iran or North Korea.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Might as well add Timbuktu to the list.
You do show serious lack of understanding of the situation in Asia. Jpn & Aust may support US in some kind of military response, even that is not certain depending on the time of such a conflict.
As to SK & the rest of SEA, given they have either declared neutral on the issue or oppose Taiwan independence, I'm real interested to know how you come up with your claim.

You really think that the whole of sea would declare neutrality, in the WW2 sence of the word, if china started a shooting war with taiwan, and then invaded??? dude thats pure fantasy! Neutral, as in you guys do whatever you want its not our business? That may have flown in 1939 but i'm sorry to say we live in a very different world nowadays. All of SEA would get involved politically because of one fact. A chinise government whom is anserable to none, as well armed as they are, beligerant enough to invade taiwan is a REAL threat to the rest of us. The rest of the world would be furious, i can asure you Australia would get involved, and its more than likely japan would. China IS the major threat to the region to ALL of the nations listed, and i would have no problem seeing most if not alll of the 5 powers getting involved, singapore, the UK at least politically or with naval assets. It is in SK's interest to see China defeated in such a senario, a powerfull china with the balls to take on the west is a real threat to ther existence. Just because individual nations oppose taiwanese indipendance doesnt mean that they would allow a chinise invasion, at least politically. In an extended conflict over taiwan you would seee were SEA's loyalties lay. Its not hard to see the US, Aus , Japan, the UK (maybe token) SK and Singapore all being directly involved, everyone else, politically. But that really doesn't matter because as several posts prior to this one by many members have logically and rationally argued, a PROC invasion attempt would fail without anyones involvment.

 

[Schumacher]

You really think that the whole of sea would declare neutrality, in the WW2 sence of the word, if china started a shooting war with taiwan, and then invaded??? dude thats pure fantasy! Neutral, as in you guys do whatever you want its not our business? That may have flown in 1939 but i'm sorry to say we live in a very different world nowadays. All of SEA would get involved politically because of one fact. A chinise government whom is anserable to none, as well armed as they are, beligerant enough to invade taiwan is a REAL threat to the rest of us. The rest of the world would be furious, i can asure you Australia would get involved, and its more than likely japan would. China IS the major threat to the region to ALL of the nations listed, and i would have no problem seeing most if not alll of the 5 powers getting involved, singapore, the UK at least politically or with naval assets. It is in SK's interest to see China defeated in such a senario, a powerfull china with the balls to take on the west is a real threat to ther existence. Just because individual nations oppose taiwanese indipendance doesnt mean that they would allow a chinise invasion, at least politically. In an extended conflict over taiwan you would seee were SEA's loyalties lay. Its not hard to see the US, Aus , Japan, the UK (maybe token) SK and Singapore all being directly involved, everyone else, politically. But that really doesn't matter because as several posts prior to this one by many members have logically and rationally argued, a PROC invasion attempt would fail without anyones involvment.

I asked 'how' u can make those claims and you just went ahead to repeat them without backing them, even when the open declaration of the nations u named are to the opposite. Unless of course u have access to the inside of the diplomatic circles who may have told u otherwise.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1196963/posts

"SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Singapore will not support Taiwan if China attacks the island in retaliation for any push for independence, Singapore's new Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said on Sunday, as tensions simmer on the Taiwan strait.........."

"...If Taiwan goes for independence, Singapore will not recognise it. In fact, no Asian country will recognise it," Lee said. "China will fight. Win or lose, Taiwan will be devastated. Unfortunately I only met very few Taiwanese leaders who understood this."

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

I asked 'how' u can make those claims and you just went ahead to repeat them without backing them, even when the open declaration of the nations u named are to the opposite. Unless of course u have access to the inside of the diplomatic circles who may have told u otherwise.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1196963/posts

"SINGAPORE (Reuters) - Singapore will not support Taiwan if China attacks the island in retaliation for any push for independence, Singapore's new Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said on Sunday, as tensions simmer on the Taiwan strait.........."

What you'ver just stated is in verry specific sercumstances, 'if taiwan pushes for indipendance". This was never outlined in the senario, just a blatant suprise attack. So your example is kind of irrelivent. And the prime minister of singapore now speaks for asia? Sounds like sucking up to the new big kid on the block.

How do i back up my statements? common sence mabye! A threat to regional security! F*#k what do you want written security assurances? If i remember correctly the US or the rest of Europe had no security commitments over Kewait? So if i had have argued in 1989 that if Iraq invaded there be a massive international reaction, and i had no treaties to prove it i would have been wrong???

Anyway all this is irrelevent. PROC would fail in an invasion atempt, and the US would be involved, the rest is accademic.

 

[onslaught]

What would be considered as a "push for independence". The word "push" seems a bit vague to me. Do they mean a statement, some sort of political actions, some sort of military action? Whenever this "push for independence" comes, then Taiwan will have to start watching the other side of the strait even more closely.

 

[Schumacher]

What you'ver just stated is in verry specific sercumstances, 'if taiwan pushes for indipendance". This was never outlined in the senario, just a blatant suprise attack. So your example is kind of irrelivent.

..........

Well, PRC's position has always been they'll only attack if Taiwan declared independence. U thought they'd attack just for the fun of it ?
I thought u knew. It pays to do some research on the subject before commenting on it.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Well, so i guess that position will never change then, right, sorry i had this funny thought that sometimes communist goverments be dishonnest or unpredictable but maybe i'm just naieve. I didnt know the chinese goverment allways told the truth and acted in a reasonable, humane and responsable manner, what was that country called, you know the funny one, hhmmm, oh yeah tibet, liberated by the chinese.

All of the discussion of the scenario to this point was a suprise attack by the PROC, but now its after a push for Taiwanese indipendance. Ok that changes things a bit. Now the Taiwanise are FULLY mobilised so defnding strength rises from 5-600 000 to over a million. USN assets are in place to interdict embarcation points, and the sea lanes, time for extensive ocean minefields to be layed. Does anyone not see how impossible this is getting, they only had a slight chance with a suprise attack, now the Taiwanese are dictating the time of this conflict and are fully prepared. Its twice as bad.

 

[DarthAmerica]

can we keep this politics out of this? As for the battlefield, I do recognize that you have formed good arguments against a Chinese invasion (although nothing I have not read before), you have also severely underestimated indigenous Chinese systems and Chinese MilInd that have led to underestimating the overall PLA combat capability.

No, we can't. But we can limit it to being relevant to the discussion which I did. In fact, all military briefings I have been in involve discussions about how our actions on the battlefield can have consequences off the battlefield. This is part of the process of establishing your ROE and determining threat ROE. This is something that has been largely ignored by the PRC-Centric posters. It would be the same if a US/Taiwan-Centric Poster simply replied to the thread that the USA could simply nuke China into oblivion. While that is definitely true. It isn't representative of the most likely responses to the thread to topic or even in the USA interest initially. Also, there has been no underestimation period of PRC combat capability. Outside of quibbling over minutia, no one has posted any reasonable counter to others and my assessment of how this would turn out. It's time to accept the facts and simply state the obvious. China cannot win this war. In fact, China could not afford to even let it happen. The future could change that but not for a while.

Hearts and Minds. Start with that. At least then the PRC has a slim chance where failure doesn't result in a disaster that would set the PRC back 20 to 50 years and cost hundreds of thousands of Chinese dead and injured with nothing to show for it.



DA

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Well said. It sounds like some chinese posters dont like the reality of the situation and argue over semantics, but no one has adressed the masive fundimental problems in invading taiwan. No dissrespect to the Chinese. As i said before the ADF cant invade Indonesia either, thats no disrespect to us, just the way it is.

 

[Tasman]

It's time to accept the facts and simply state the obvious. China cannot win this war. In fact, China could not afford to even let it happen. The future could change that but not for a while.

DA

In fact nobody could afford to let such a war happen. Nobody would be a winner because even with a PRC failure (which IMHO is probable from my understanding of the evidence I have read in this thread) the economy of Taiwan and other countries in the region would be shattered. IMO it would be a massive lose/lose situation.

Hearts and Minds. Start with that. At least then the PRC has a slim chance where failure doesn't result in a disaster that would set the PRC back 20 to 50 years and cost hundreds of thousands of Chinese dead and injured with nothing to show for it.

Good advice! I think the alternative would set back not only China 20 -50 years, but Taiwan and many others.

Cheers

 

[DarthAmerica]

In fact nobody could afford to let such a war happen. Nobody would be a winner because even with a PRC failure (which IMHO is probable from my understanding of the evidence I have read in this thread) the economy of Taiwan and other countries in the region would be shattered. IMO it would be a massive lose/lose situation.

Indeed. Which is why the PRC would not only have the USA to worry about. But many of it's very powerful regional allies. Even if they "discretely" assisted by providing basing or SSKs for instance against PRC SLOC. It would seriously challenge the PRC probability for success and it would be deniable where convenient.



DA

 

[Schumacher]

Well, so i guess that position will never change then, right, sorry i had this funny thought that sometimes communist goverments be dishonnest or unpredictable but maybe i'm just naieve. I didnt know the chinese goverment allways told the truth and acted in a reasonable, humane and responsable manner, what was that country called, you know the funny one, hhmmm, oh yeah tibet, liberated by the chinese.
.......

Yes, on one hand, you do display a certain level of naivity to respond to what I said with this. On the other, it also explains the motivation behind some of your earlier posts.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Yes, on one hand, you do display a certain level of naivity to respond to what I said with this. On the other, it also explains the motivation behind some of your earlier posts.

ok mate fine. your right. forget about singapre.

that doesnt change the reality of the situation (moral stuff aside). The senario we were discussing was for a suprise attack, not after a push for independance so realy thats not relevent to THIS discussion. If you want to change it to an atack in response to taiwanise actions, then your just strengthening my arguments that such an operation would fail dismally.

so can you explain the relevence of your posts to this senario and hense this discussion?

 

[Schumacher]

ok mate fine. your right. forget about singapre.

that doesnt change the reality of the situation (moral stuff aside). The senario we were discussing was for a suprise attack, not after a push for independance so realy thats not relevent to THIS discussion. If you want to change it to an atack in response to taiwanise actions, then your just strengthening my arguments that such an operation would fail dismally.

so can you explain the relevence of your posts to this senario and hense this discussion?

I was responding to your posts abt the response of other Asian & SEA nations etc. So I pointed out what they stated, which does include the issue of independence. If you want to talk abt an invasion without the act of independence by Taiwan, which I think is not at all a likely scenario, pls go ahead. Pardon my interruptions to the discussions.