Fourth Taiwan Strait Crisis

5unrise said:

Taiwanese independence forces may well be emboldened by the events of this crisis, but this is not to say that they will certainly go ahead and cross the red line. There is still a big risk that China will deviate from its usual risk aversion and simply react with lethal force, particularly given the domestic cost of inaction for Beijing. So formal independence will be deterred for the time being. However, the risk I see is that Taiwanese independence forces will continue to salami slice right up to the red line, to test Beijing's resolve. They may undertake further provocations, e.g. inviting more foreign leaders to Taiwan, changing the RoC flag, changing the anthem, disavowing Sun Yatsen, disbanding/renaming the KMT, further desinicisation policies, stationing sizable foreign troops, or making military agreements. The lack of a strong reaction by Beijing to any of these moves, particularly the lack of lethal response, could very well convince the independence forces that Beijing's red line is just a bluff. They would then cross it and declare independence if they have reliable confirmation of US military support. This is where I see the danger to both sides of the Taiwan Strait, and especially more so for Taiwan, in the medium term.

Click to expand...

Couple of comments.

1. Stationing US troops on Taiwan would be a red line. It automatically means a China-Taiwan war involves the US, which makes a unification scenario far more difficult. So China would go to war immediately if this starts to happen

2. There are lots of economic and grayzone activities that China can impose on Taiwan. Suppose military exercises and a soft blockade keep running for longer and longer times whenever there is a visit? That should be a suitable deterrent against many activities and signal on red lines.

In summary, I see China has many economic and grayzone actions that it can use to signal lower levels of displeasure

Oh man this seems pretty significant:

efficient_kiwi said:

Just saw a cool pic of PLAN type 052C 'Changchun' with ROCN Cheng-Kung Class escorting. Thought it was relevant.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1555465281874558977

Click to expand...

That ROCN Cheng-Kung class frigate crews are probably having a cordial chat with the crews of the PLAN Changchun. Possibly chatting on shortwave radio to avoid getting picked up by HQ.

PLAN captain: Hey ROCN ship, this is a restricted area, don't get too close! State you intentions!

ROCN captain: Hey chill out PLAN ship! We come in peace. We are the Chinese Navy too. We are just checking your ship out. We don't have many opportunities like this. Wow! How is it to like to be sailing in that? We are so jealous man. We are sailing in this rusting, non-Aegis, knock-off of the Oliver Hazard Perry class USN relic. Our ship class is actually more relevant today as target practice than an actual frontline combatant.

PLAN captain: Yeah I can feel for you guys, having to sail around in that relic. Our ship is ok for today's standard, she's not the latest one though, but she is definitely not a relic. Too bad you can't come onboard for me to show you around. You are still technically an 'enemy'. Thanks to your crazy politicians.

ROCN captain: Yeah bro, its too bad. Let's pray that we can reunify peacefully one day. So that we can be on the same team. We are Chinese navy sailors. We deserve better than to be cannon fodder for an imperialist power sitting half-way around the world.

PLAN captain: But I dunno bro, looking at the way things are going, we could be fighting you guys one day. Your leaders and the US leaders are getting crazier each time they appear on TV.

ROCN captain: Oh, don't worry bro. When the shooting starts, we are thinking of surrendering to the PLAN. Better to surrender and live, than to go down with this relic. Maybe some of us can join the PLAN too. We are gonna reunify at the end anyway.

PLAN captain: Cool. Let's exchange some gifts for now. We can set up our dinghy in a hurry. Make sure the cameras are not watching.

ROCN captain: Sure bro.

Reclaimer said:

Why Taiwan is important to China, according to Douglas Macgregor, former Senior Advisor to the Secretary of Defense

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1555019724509089792

Click to expand...

Wow, Tucker Carlson inviting the Col. Doug Macgregor and having that kinda conversation? I thought he might invite Gordon Chang first. LOL!

ashnole said:

Reading posts on this thread, posts vastly overestimating relatively newly acquired, unproven and still undergoing maturity PLAN assets, massively underestimating USN assets and USN's three quarters of a century of global Blue Water dominance... ah, what do I say.

There is a thing called Naval rock-paper-scissor. SSNs are the rocks that smash every kind of surface & subsurface warships; Airborne ASW assets (fixed-wing or rotary-wing) are the paper that can cover SSNs and can either mission kill them or totally destroy them; Carrier-based Tactical Aviation is the scissor that can cut through enemy Airborne ASW assets.

To be a global kickass Blue Water Navy, you need to be kickass in all three of these departments *equally*. If you are found lacking in rock, the enemy's paper will ruin your chances; similarly if you are found lacking in paper & scissor, enemy's scissor & rock will punish you.

So until PLAN achieves this Naval holy triad, it's advisable to underestimate the enemy only at your peril.

Click to expand...

ashnole said:

Reading posts on this thread, posts vastly overestimating relatively newly acquired, unproven and still undergoing maturity PLAN assets, massively underestimating USN assets and USN's three quarters of a century of global Blue Water dominance... ah, what do I say.

There is a thing called Naval rock-paper-scissor. SSNs are the rocks that smash every kind of surface & subsurface warships; Airborne ASW assets (fixed-wing or rotary-wing) are the paper that can cover SSNs and can either mission kill them or totally destroy them; Carrier-based Tactical Aviation is the scissor that can cut through enemy Airborne ASW assets.

To be a global kickass Blue Water Navy, you need to be kickass in all three of these departments *equally*. If you are found lacking in rock, the enemy's paper will ruin your chances; similarly if you are found lacking in paper & scissor, enemy's scissor & rock will punish you.

So until PLAN achieves this Naval holy triad, it's advisable to underestimate the enemy only at your peril.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone believes the PLAN to be successful if the fight takes place in the middle of the pacific. In a Taiwan scenario though it would the PLAN assisted by the PLARF vs at most 5-6 CBG (best case scenario where the u.s have weeks/months of early warning) and more realistically 2 CBG. The u.s air force would assist as well of course but any airbase close enough to be useful is also close enough to be in range of the massive Chinese cruise and ballistic missiles inventory.

NeutralWarrior said:

7. Suspend China-US cooperation in drug control.

Click to expand...

Fan-fucking-tastic!

latenlazy said:

Where did he say that. Quotes please.

Click to expand...

Ok. From 習五條 speech：我們不承諾放棄使用武力，保留採取一切必要措施的選項，針對的是干涉和極少數「台獨」分裂分子及其分裂活動，絕非針對台灣同胞。
He says that the reason why they don't promise to give up AR is due to Taiwan independence people and their separatist activities.
From last year's videoconference with Biden: 大陸是有耐心的，願以最大誠意、盡最大努力爭取和平統一的前景，但如果「台獨」分裂勢力挑釁逼迫，甚至突破紅線，將不得不採取斷然措施。
The mainland will do everything they can to pursue peaceful unification, but if Taiwan separatists provoke us and break the red line, we will be forced to pursue drastic measures.
Also from 2017 military day(建軍節): 我們絶不允許任何人、任何組織、任何政黨、在任何時候、以任何形式、把任何一塊中國領土從中國分裂出去，誰都不要指望我們會吞下損害我國主權、安全、發展利益的苦果。
This does not explicitly threaten force, but given the context it seems apparent that military force is impled if the DPP declares independence.

ashnole said:

Reading posts on this thread, posts vastly overestimating relatively newly acquired, unproven and still undergoing maturity PLAN assets, massively underestimating USN assets and USN's three quarters of a century of global Blue Water dominance... ah, what do I say.

There is a thing called Naval rock-paper-scissor. SSNs are the rocks that smash every kind of surface & subsurface warships; Airborne ASW assets (fixed-wing or rotary-wing) are the paper that can cover SSNs and can either mission kill them or totally destroy them; Carrier-based Tactical Aviation is the scissor that can cut through enemy Airborne ASW assets.

To be a global kickass Blue Water Navy, you need to be kickass in all three of these departments *equally*. If you are found lacking in rock, the enemy's paper will ruin your chances; similarly if you are found lacking in paper & scissor, enemy's scissor & rock will punish you.

So until PLAN achieves this Naval holy triad, it's advisable to underestimate the enemy only at your peril.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but you do you even understand what your words mean?

Where are Arleigh Burkes and Nimitz carriers proven and matured? Which capable naval power has fired on them in anger?

Slaughtering the defenseless doesn't make you battle proved. Ask the Europeans who spent three quarters of a century battle proving their machine guns on African women and children how useful that maturity was at Verdun and Somme.

During WW2, relatively newly acquired, unproven and still undergoing maturity Essex class smashed through Japan's battle hardened Kido Butai who had before that dominated the Pacific. And the Japs had actual combat experience, not shooting afghan and iraqi fish in a barrel that don't even have short range air defense.

Modernity and preparedness trumps legacy every time.

Even USN's own reports on whether they can take Taiwan from China are almost always very gloom. China doesn't have the numbers to fight the whole US navy deep inside the pacific, but that isn't what is being discussed here.

How many millions of her assets are in Chinese firms?

ashnole said:

Reading posts on this thread, posts vastly overestimating relatively newly acquired, unproven and still undergoing maturity PLAN assets

Click to expand...

So they need to test them against Talibans? Or in Afghanistan?

ashnole said:

massively underestimating USN assets and USN's three quarters of a century of global Blue Water dominance... ah, what do I say.

Click to expand...

Where? In middle of Atlantic?

There is no such thing as blue water dominance. No one on face of galaxy can dominate ocean,even if they line up 1000s of carriers. Such power doesn't exist. It is another term bred by western fertile fantasy. There is a category called blue water navy, which more or less dominating the trade routes & power projection.

I remember once a person saying, even if human had turned all the uranium on earth into nuclear bombs, they cant really do shit to Earth. Yes, the environment will be gone. All life with it too. Nature has taught human how to harness the power. Human can either choose it to benefit themselves, or they can choose it to screw themselves. However, they can only screw themselves. They ain't gonna "destroy the planet", because they are just tiny creatures used to mental m--t--b----n. They shouldn't really over burden themselves with "responsibility of planet savings by using nukes responsibly".

I fail to see how USN has been "dominating blue waters", unless we regard two submarine playing soccer with each other as domination


I am more inclined to call it USN's blue water irritation.