A lot of quotes coming in hot and fast, I'll reply to a few select points as I can, if the point of this thread is that lessons should be learnt from Ukraine its that nothing is safe against concentrated long range fires.
The situation facing US and any country unfortunate enough to join the war on their side would be similar to Imperial Japan in ww2. Without raw resources, consumer goods from China and it's allies, the attackers would be fighting a timer towards economical collapse, while PRC gains in strength the longer the war lasts.
As for how South Korea and Japan would be suppressed if they join, Korea would be the first to go, because its so close to China, it can be blockaded far more easily than Japan, and since the Ground Force wouldn't be fighting aside from defending Taiwan Island, the SK army will find itself staring down not just the entire NK and large parts of RU Army, but the brunt of the PLA as well.
But China has quite a bit of prep time, and what stacks things in their advantage is that the Japanese economy will be completely wrecked by energy sanctions, blockade and air raids.
This seems overtly optimistic on China's side and your comparison of Imperial Japan as the West while suggesting that China will have control over mainland Asia is a bit ironic to say the least. Why would Russia support China if China is not support them right now? Additionally to commit troops against Korea will be inviting NATO to get involved in Europe, in which case Russia will be fighting a war on two fronts with limited Chinese ability to aid them.
Lastly there's legitimately no guarantee that the Chinese economy will keep trucking on if their entire foreign economy suddenly drops to a halt aside from importing energy.
As long as China has a clear objective, regardless what reddit strategists wish could happen, Japan would not attack China unless US did it first, and US probably wish Japan would grow a pair and to take on China first. Economics sanctions ? Sure. Attack PRC invasion fleet openly by Japan or SK, highly unlikely, unless Japanese wish their home islands glow at 10,000 degrees for the next 1000 years.
I think pointing to attacking nuclear related facilities is a dangerous game, you're basically advocating tit for tat attacks on civilian infrastructure, which I'm not sure China would come out on top without invoking MAD.
Of course Japan and Korea won't attack first, but if China never fires the first shot then this whole discussion is moot since this whole discussion is about reunification, if Taiwan is unwilling there's only one way for China to take Taiwan, so what is the point of not considering that they will get involved?
Additionally the survival of Taiwan will become a existential concern for both Japan and Korea, if Taiwan falls and the US doesn't stop it, what's stopping China from attacking the other two? Even if those two countries have to expend their entire military they will fight for it, after all this would've been the line in the sand that must not be crossed.
If said missiles accidentally hit civilians, it would lead to a massive escalation where whoever hosted the base the B-2s flew from would likely face reprisal bombing over their cities.
The unspoken rule in war 2 nuclear powers with apocalyptic sized arsenals would likely be that each side's core territory must be kept relatively safe, casualties must be kept contained to the military.
At the point of a Taiwan crisis, civilian casualties are already involved, if you had followed the thread above there are already talks of neutralizing allied forces past to Pearl Harbor, what part of that doesn't involve massive amounts of dead civilians?
The idea of attacking semiconductor fabs to stop PGMs manufacturing is kinda silly. Military hardware account for a tiny proportion of semiconductor use, and chips are incredibly easy to store. Huawei's base station business is still going and they had only a year or so's notice to hoard chips, and I bet a 5G base station uses many, many more exotic customized chips than inertia-satnav guidance system on a PGM, which is basically a more advanced version of what powers the running app in your smartphone. In particular, Beidou is in widespread commercial use with tens of millions of Beidou-enabled devices manufactured each year. Even if military grade Beidou requires different chips, I highly doubt semiconductor would be a bottleneck for making PGMs.
That wasn't my main point, just an aside comparing China's inability to damage the western allies manufacturing centers while the West could conceivably do just that. My point was that strikes on High end chip manufacturing for IOT devices and Smart phones takes years to repair and does not seem to be as impossible as some posters here have implied, this would seriously damage the high value electronic device industry that would slow down the Chinese economy.
There's already examples of dense air defense not being enough to stop strikes in Ukraine, so why is everyone so sure that the Chinese AD is impenetrable?
