Lessons for China to learn from Ukraine conflict for Taiwan scenario

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mohsin77

Mohsin77

Senior Member
Registered Member
OmG... @FairAndUnbiased tell me something, are you a girl?

Because you really argue like one.

I hope for your sake that you're a girl, because otherwise you have serious issues.

Case in point:

FairAndUnbiased said:
You brag about a few undergrad courses?
Click to expand...

Brag?! Dude, you started lecturing me on physics randomly, just to try and wiggle your way out of your "Air Supremacy = 0 sorties" statement.

FairAndUnbiased said:
I work in semiconductor.
Click to expand...

Wow.... do you want a medal?

FairAndUnbiased said:
.....since your implication is that Russia has failed to get air supremacy and is failing in Ukraine because of it
Click to expand...

Yet another strawman. I clearly said that Russia hasn't done most of the things in my opening list, not just 1. Both on the strategic and operational side. All of them are clearly contributing to Russia's current conundrum.

You've made similar mistakes multiple times now e.g. you also claimed that movement of naval/land units in the opening phase is not allowed by my statement, which is completely untrue, and another one of your many misunderstandings.

After all the corrections, and when all else failed, that's when you randomly started lecturing me about physics and limits, because your ego demanded I take you seriously. Which now leads us to this gem:


FairAndUnbiased said:
Incidentally, I also had a discussion about physics recently. A few days ago me and @Stealthflanker had a discussion on whether jets can be seen taking off with IR satellites. He had a model that showed a geosynchronous satellite could indeed pick up a 1m2 radiator at afterburner temperatures, as a toy model of a jet plume.

I point out a problem with the assumption of an ideal blackbody: jet plumes aren't optically thick.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that an ideal blackbody radiator only applies to optically thick sources, not optically thin ones. In the process I explained the derivation for the optically thin limit, which was not given (it used a Taylor expansion).

Hmm. How come I can point out problems with real world modeling? How come I can think of optical thickness as a blackbody radiation parameter and explain the derivation without being told what it is? How come I instantly can see that the derivation used a Taylor expansion? None of that is taught in basic undergrad physics, yet it is physics.

In the end, he provided a citation that said yes, at least IR events could be seen. And I presented a plausible scenario that would explain both the derivation and the citation. I learned something, hopefully he did too.

I don't need to assert my degree or what classes I've taken. To even talk about individual classes is laughable to me. Hope you understand.
Click to expand...

... Why are you giving me your resume?

Like... it's cute, but why?

If you hadn't started talking about physics and limits to try and salvage all your basic errors, you wouldn't be in this mess.

Is all of this drama really worth your time?
 
Last edited:
Mohsin77

Mohsin77

Senior Member
Registered Member
weig2000 said:
@Mohsin77 @FairAndUnbiased:

I suggest both of you either stop these useless arguments or just take them to PM. What started as an interesting topic has now degraded into mudslinging and mutual insults. It's beneath both of you. I've seen you two can certainly contribute a lot more positively to the forum than wasting everyone's time.

Please.
Click to expand...

Fine, but just for the record though, he engaged me. I didn't start this.

However... I guess it takes two to tango, and this has gone off the rails completely.

Apologies... I'll declare a unilateral ceasefire lolz.
 
Last edited:
A

Abominable

Major
Registered Member
FairAndUnbiased said:
Sometimes situations are forced on you. Say that tomorrow Taiwan tests a low yield WW2 style nuke. Give up? Let them get second strike?
Click to expand...
If Taiwan tested a simple WW2 type nuclear device tomorrow, they would be asked to undergo a Chinese supervised denuclearisation and would be expected to agree by the end of the day. China may not even need to say anything, it would be at the insistance of America as they have done in the past.
If they refused, all mainlanders and foreigners residing on the island would be urgently evacuated for what was about to happen.

There was a reason why Taiwan quickly abandoned their attempt to acquire nuclear weapons. Unlike the Ukrainians they are not suicidal.
 
R

Richard Santos

Captain
Registered Member
Actually, I would be curious about whether the training of most Ukrainian reservists during the year leading up to the Russian invasion was any more strenuous and realistic.

I think the first part of the cardinal lesson offered by Russia’s Ukrainian experience is how tempting it is to succumb to confirmation bias in moments of chauvinistic ferver, and over estimate the value of any evidence that seem to suggest fatal ineptitude and lack of resolve on the part of the enemy, and dismiss or trivializing the implication of any evidence which might suggest the tempting goal of glittering national triumph might actually be uncomfortably difficult to attain with means at hand. The second part is how important it is to resist this temptation.

One usually suffers much less if one happen to overestimating the enemy than if one happen to underestimate the enemy. The only thing lost in the former case is the mirage of a glorious triumph floating just above the horizon. The things lost in the later case would be lives, treasure, influences, and often the war itself.
 
Last edited:
siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Richard Santos said:
Actually, I would be curious about whether the training of most Ukrainian reservists during the year leading up to the Russian invasion was any more strenuous and realistic.

I think the first part of the cardinal lesson offered by Russia’s Ukrainian experience is how tempting it is to succumb to confirmation bias in moments of chauvinistic ferver, and over estimate the value of any evidence that seem to suggest fatal ineptitude and lack of resolve on the part of the enemy, and dismiss or trivializing the implication of any evidence which might suggest the tempting goal of glittering national triumph might actually be uncomfortably difficult to attain with means at hand. The second part is how important it is to resist this temptation.

One usually suffers much less if one happen to overestimating the enemy than if one happen to underestimate the enemy. The only thing lost in the former case is the mirage of a glorious triumph floating just above the horizon. The things lost in the later case would be lives, treasure, influences, and often the war itself.
Click to expand...

I think that reservists in Ukraine had to pass basic physicals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top