What is the point of bringing up motivation? Was the ROCA motivated enough to stop the Red Army from taking over the mainland? Are you assuming that valor and commitment is a one way street and a monopoly to the Taiwanese side only? They were outsmarted outfought and outvalored plain and simple. You can go to the US Army college and find the open source documents pertaining to the battle fought in the Chinese civil war and see how the Nationalist Army lost them.
The Politburo's and Air Force will likely be a little bit more political than professional as the PRC's Politburo relies upon its armed forces and intelligence agencies to protect itself from its own populations, desire for change. Therefore much more strict adherence and obedience to authority is stressed and much less creative thinking on and off the battlefield is tolerated. The history of put highly political military forces against highly professional military forces has not been kind to the more political force of the two. This is been as much true when we compare the Spartans to the Persians as when we compare the Iraqi army against that of the United States in the first Gulf War.
This is another piece of nonsense that has been debunked in actual case situations from the various encounters with the PLA from the Korean War all the way to the clashes with the Vietnamese. Go check the history section of this forum for starters.
The Persians and the Spartans were neither political or professional. They are just Persians and Spartans, the former actually
religiously tolerant---go check the Bible and find out who Queen Esther is while the latter were notorious slave drivers. If anything the Spartans were truly totalitarian, and the Greeks were certainly not religiously tolerant---ask the Jews again, they wrote that in their history of Judas Maccabeus. This is as far as I would go with discussing politics or the "human element" because in the history of warfare there is nothing pertaining that individual soldiers in "political" armies would fight with less valor and courage than "professional" armies as if it really meant anything to a Roman legion or a Mongol horde.
Now going back to the air warfare, and of army organization, I think you need to read up a lot. The PLA is not the Soviet Army and does not model or pattern itself with such. It's a very unique entity to itself and will take note of concepts from both West and the Russians, while adding their own ideas.
Hordes of aircraft, not. If you think air warfare is still fought WWII formation style, I guess you need to learn something. Modern air warfare will be about small unit skimishes, with four plane flights as the basic fighting formation. It is very likely that battles will be hit and run on both sides, like ongoing guerrilla battles. This is not the BoB. Its difficult to cram that many planes in a small corridor for both sides, so the PLAAF will try to disable what is left of the ROCAF air bases that has survived SRBM volley attacks while cutting off their communications and infrastructure through small, quick and fast attack with precision guided munitions and missiles. The theme is a quick decapitation.
Likely the main target is to kill the government heads that were pushing for independence, allowing for other factions to take over through a military coup. The ROC armed forces is still an important legacy of the Kuomingtang. This will withdraw the declaration of independence de jure, though it will maintain independence de facto, keeping the status quo.
And this one for Violet, I will warn you not to use the term ignorant or any provocative language. If you are to comment, comment with class.
) decades in the past would be quite bold indeed. Meanwhile I'm beginning to suppose just that...
