Wouldn’t they be able to resupply the island from the east?
plan ships on the east would be exposed to the threat of us submarine force
Fourth Taiwan Strait Crisis
- Thread starter sndef888
- Start date
- Status
plan ships on the east would be exposed to the threat of us submarine force
I would caution against wishful thinking. There are a lot of factors in your scenario that depend on other actors behaving correctly, so to speak. NATO has been flooding arms into Ukraine yet Russia has not struck even a single transport. Vietnam suffered massive bombing campaigns and chemical warfare resulting in generations of birth defects. I guess my point is that humans do not behave the way you expect them to; they are fundamentally irrational beings. Counting on them to act rationally is going to bite you in the ass.
Well, we've got the following GDP projections if there is a US-China war.
China: 25%-35% decline
USA: 25%-35% decline
I'm assuming Japan and Australia actively join hostilities against China.
So Japan, Taiwan would presumably suffer even more given their position. At least a 40% decline in GDP then.
Australia would be worse off than the US, but not appreciably. Say a 30-40% GDP decline
SE Asia, South Asia and the Middle East will probably be neutral and not support a blockade against China. So a 10-20% GDP decline for these countries.
Africa and Latin America would also be neutral. So call it a 10-20% GDP decline as well.
---
But that assumes the US will attempt a comprehensive blockade of Chinese trade. However:
90% of all raw ingredients for antibiotics come from China. That extends to raw ingredients for pharmaceutical products in general.
China accounts for 28.7% of global exports of medical products overall.
If the US attempts to block these exports, hospitals and doctors will face a global catastrophe.
This argument alone will blow a hole in any attempt to sanction China.
---
I'm also looking at a list of critical minerals production, where China accounts for a huge percentage of global production. That includes: Gallium, Magnesium, Bismuth, Tungsten, Graphite, Silicon, Germanium, Vanadium, Flourspar, Rare Earths, Tellurium, Indium, Aluminium, Antimony, Barite, Zinc, Tin etc.
Then China also dominates in the midstream processing for an additional set of minerals and raw materials such as Lithium, Cobalt, Nickel, Copper, etc etc
Overall, the EU quantifies China with a 45% global market share of critical raw materials.
Then there are the downstream manufactured components and products which I'm not even going to attempt to quantify. One example is antibiotics and other pharmaceutical products already discussed. But in a nutshell, factories everywhere in Europe would shut down. The same applies to the US and Japan.
If the US is seen as at fault in provoking or engineering a China-Taiwan war, would the EU actually commit suicide (literally) by placing sanctions on China?
And what could a "workable" sanctions regime against China actually look like?
So I suppose now you support solving the Taiwan issue this year? Or do you still support the idea of waiting till the west recovers and then wait several more decades till China's economy is far much larger than that of the US and only then would you feel it's safe enough for China to invade Taiwan?
See my avatar for something 1000x smarter than sanctions on China for EU/SK/Japan or joining a certain war of aggression against China.
Is this the first time PLA came so close to Penghu Islands ? I cannot remember seeing (in this Forum) any prior flights near Penghu being reported by China or Taiwan.
Last edited:
I take it you disapprove of my views?
I don't think anything in what I wrote marks a departure from my beliefs or notes any change in the power dynamics. Yes, China is still getting stronger and the US is still getting weaker and so long as that holds true, China should not start a war. This isn't one of the interminable Middle Eastern squabbles where every hyena is looking for any tiny opening to get one over on another hyena - China is planning to wage and win World War III. "Taiwan" is merely a label put on the struggle over who will run the world for the next century.
A nation (a successful nation, anyway) doesn't go to war to avenge an insult or to right a historical wrong. The only reason a nation should go to war is to win.
There are other non naval assets besides ships that can prevent enemy convoys trying to reach Taiwan. The amount of supplies needed to sufficiently to maintain troops and a large civilian refugees will be immense.
Say a ship did manage to reach a port in Taiwan. Then either sink it or damage it enough in port that it cannot move. The ports will be clogged at some point and thousands of smaller ships will be needed to keep the troops and civilians supplied.
I made a note on soft power failure in portraying China's reunification with Taiwan. It's here
sinodefenceforum.com/t/chinese-soft-power-and-media-discussion-and-updates.8988/post-876107
Chinese Soft Power and Media Discussion and Updates
Loveleenkr reacting on every post is one of the funniest things I've seen on SDF.
www.sinodefenceforum.com
sinodefenceforum.com/t/chinese-soft-power-and-media-discussion-and-updates.8988/post-876107
So you think China would lose if they invade this year? If so when do you think it would feel safe enough to invade? Like 10 years from now? Or 20 or 30 years from now?
- Status