PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

supersnoop

Colonel
Registered Member
Possibility 1: this is just disinformation or nonsense put out by amateurs. If so, we can just dismiss it.

Possibility 2: the US really believes this is a good strategy. That reflects poorly on their judgment.

Possibility 3: the US believes only suicide tactics like this can crack China's AD bubble. If that's their mindset, then what does it mean when they are considering late-war Imperial Japan tactics when the war hasn't even started yet?
Possibility 4 (courtesy of another poster, not my original idea)
USMC is desperate to get continued funding. Must come up with some kind of Anti-China strategy that is somewhat feasible.

As you pointed out, USMC are just infantry. They are not going to invade Mainland China. They may land on Taiwan proper before the bulk of the fighting to prop up resistance, but if resistance collapses, can we really count on US Marines to land and defeat an entrenched PLA? Doubtful at best… this makes USMC basically useless against the US so-called main enemy.
 

mshrief303

Junior Member
Registered Member
Possibility 4 (courtesy of another poster, not my original idea)
USMC is desperate to get continued funding. Must come up with some kind of Anti-China strategy that is somewhat feasible.

As you pointed out, USMC are just infantry. They are not going to invade Mainland China. They may land on Taiwan proper before the bulk of the fighting to prop up resistance, but if resistance collapses, can we really count on US Marines to land and defeat an entrenched PLA? Doubtful at best… this makes USMC basically useless against the US so-called main enemy.
the funding part is very true, and you can see the army is doing the same, advocating for missile batteries and new capabilities for long range attacks - even Hypersonics - and they don't advocate for it to be used in Europe as a first target but the pacific is their first target, then Europe is second.
 

bsdnf

Senior Member
Registered Member
Possibility 4 (courtesy of another poster, not my original idea)
USMC is desperate to get continued funding. Must come up with some kind of Anti-China strategy that is somewhat feasible.

As you pointed out, USMC are just infantry. They are not going to invade Mainland China. They may land on Taiwan proper before the bulk of the fighting to prop up resistance, but if resistance collapses, can we really count on US Marines to land and defeat an entrenched PLA? Doubtful at best… this makes USMC basically useless against the US so-called main enemy.
They have given up their plan to land on Taiwan, knowing full well that a large-scale intervention would be intercepted by the PLA in the air or sunk at sea before it even arrives.

They only dare claim to send some FPV operators for "non-contact" support, fantasizing that some kind of ROCA cannon fodder just sent to their deaths while the American knights safely reap all rewards.
 

Sinnavuuty

Captain
Registered Member
I don't disagree about the "systems" argument in all of this (after you getting warned by Blitzo). But you are diverting from the original point on the usefulness of MLRs. Do you notice how futile the land-launched aspect is and how logistically cumbersome it is to deploy MLRs to middle of nowheres compared to fires readily available by USN ships and air squadrons?
You quoted me in a post where I was responding to a specific comment about the Tomahawk, but the scenario involving the USN, USMC, and USAF goes far beyond a single missile model—which was exactly the point I raised.

The scenario may be complex, but the Marines' reform makes it quite clear that their objective is precisely what is being discussed in this thread: creating multiple A2/AD pockets on various islands to contain the PLAN and PLANMC within the 1st Infantry Command. Everything is being modernized and restructured to allow the Marines to be logistically supported in this environment, although this logistical capacity is still far from what is needed to make the concept of FD a full reality in the short/medium term.
Enviar feedback
Also, there is no need to list them all in a 报菜名 fashion to make them sound scary. They are not.
I list this for awareness purposes, noting that when the Americans were relying solely on Harpoon anti-ship missiles, they were in a far inferior position to the Chinese, but the scenario is now changing and the capabilities of the USN/USMC are strengthening.
Tomahawks and air-launched LRASMs might be the only options that don't put the launch platforms at serious risks of PLAN anti-ship fires. And even those ranges are being (or already have been) closed in by PLAN fast, plus Tomahawk being a nonLO subsonic target. All the other options are so laughable and futile in a Taiwan contingency (Quicksink, Harpoon and SM6? Are you kidding LMFAO?). You even had to repeat SM6 3 times, Tomahawk 3 times, Harpoon 3 times and NSM 2 times to make up the big scary list. Please stop and get help.
As I said, the USN/USMC's capabilities are strengthening. I mentioned some missiles more than once because the Americans determined that these missiles would have different launch modes, meaning it will be a distributed lethality for all branches of the DoD, which will ultimately strengthen and enhance American anti-ship fire, which was previously confined only to the Harpoon when the LRASM was exhausted.
 

Sinnavuuty

Captain
Registered Member
This seems laughable.
You expect to fight what is potentially the biggest war in decades and not lose any naval assets? Simply not realistic. If American war plans are basically fantasy, then Taiwan's government better unban 5-star flags.
Their objective is not to carry out forced entries and landings, but to contain the Chinese within the 1st Industrial Zone, requiring various C4ISR resources, different launch platforms, and various types of long-range missiles with anti-ship capability.
 
Top