Lessons for China to learn from Ukraine conflict for Taiwan scenario

Sardaukar20 said:

I'm not overly concerned about China defending itself from conventional US attacks. I'm much more concerned about the risk of the US opting for nuclear strikes. Because if the US loses thousands of men, and unacceptable quantities of warships and airplanes. I don't trust the unhinged American leadership to not consider nuclear retaliation on Chinese industrial zones, which are in the major cities. Especially the more crazed Republican-aligned warmongers, who think that nuclear war with China is 'winnable'. That is why, China's nuclear deterrence must play a much bigger role now, more than ever.

Click to expand...

China has to finish those nuclear subs Type 095 and 096 just for that reason for more nuclear deterrence.

I think that's a big part of why China is still waiting on the Taiwan issue. Then that new H-20 bomber too.

But I think either way China probably already has enough nuclear potential to mutually destruct with the US.

I don't know what is with those elites in America, but they are lying to themselves on every issue possible.

Sardaukar20 said:

I'm not overly concerned about China defending itself from conventional US attacks. I'm much more concerned about the risk of the US opting for nuclear strikes. Because if the US loses thousands of men, and unacceptable quantities of warships and airplanes. I don't trust the unhinged American leadership to not consider nuclear retaliation on Chinese industrial zones, which are in the major cities. Especially the more crazed Republican-aligned warmongers, who think that nuclear war with China is 'winnable'. That is why, China's nuclear deterrence must play a much bigger role now, more than ever.

Click to expand...

I like your post. Good thinking. But I have a different opinion regarding US opting for Nuclear Strike against China.

I don't think that US will ever opting for a nuclear strike against China. Not only because China can retaliated. But it also will destroy the purpose of why United States antagonize China to begin with.

Now, look at what is United States objective to China?
1. They want to defend their hegemony status, with everything they got.
2. To weaken China economically, and to prevent China from take over their place as the hegemon.

Basically, US wants to defend their hegemony status, and to prevent China to become the next Hegemon. But if they opting to use nuclear strike against China, then it will go straight for US to lose their hegemony status. Why?

Simply because a nuclear exchange with China will make US unable to left unscathed. It will destroy their economy for sure, as their cities, etc will also become a radiated ruins. At that time, not only China, but US will also become poorer faster than anybody else. And it will give a huge benefit for another country to replace them as the next hegemon on our Earth.

So nope, opting to use Nuclear Strike will not give any benefit to United States. Rather than nuclear, US will try with their best to surround China, and bait China to be trapped into a prolonged war, like Russia in Ukraine. But their only option is Taiwan. So they will do whatever they can to bring PLA to Taiwan, so China will lose their economy and industrial power, because of the war.

But it seems, rather than China, it is them who got trapped in Ukraine right now. It is because they have a new obligation that force them to pay the war at the scale of Ukraine war. I they're not careful, the war will affect their economy in the long run. And China, a neutral country can produce more wealth than US. Simply because they don't have any obligation to pay for the war.

Brainsuker said:

I like your post. Good thinking. But I have a different opinion regarding US opting for Nuclear Strike against China.

I don't think that US will ever opting for a nuclear strike against China. Not only because China can retaliated. But it also will destroy the purpose of why United States antagonize China to begin with.

Now, look at what is United States objective to China?
1. They want to defend their current hegemony, with everything they got.
2. To weaken China economically, and to prevent China from take over their place as the hegemon.

Basically, US wants to defend their hegemony status. But if they opting to use nuclear strike against China, then it will go straight for US to lose their hegemony status. Why?

Simply because a nuclear exchange with China will make US unable to left unscathed. It will destroy their economy for sure, as their cities, etc will also become a radiated ruins. At that time, not only China, but US will also become poorer faster than anybody else. And it will give a huge benefit for another country to replace them as the next hegemon of our Earth.

Click to expand...

Well I hope you're right. That the US elites won't go nuclear. But there are a few problematic issues:

1) There are those US nuclear war plans on China from the Cold War until now. All of them are first-strike plans.
2) There are those W76-2 low yield warheads (5-7kt) deployed on Trident missiles. Designed to nuke someone from afar with nuclear firepower below the imaginary 'nuclear war' threshold. A 5kt nuclear blast can easily level a Chinese industrial zone and irradiate the area for years to come. Nevermind the murder of Chinese citizens living nearby. China can only reply with strategic nukes, which will advance into full-scale strategic nuclear exchange. Those American nut jobs who justified those low yield warheads, assumed that China won't do that, because China has a much weaker strategic nuclear arsenal than the US.
3) There is rhetoric from Republican-aligned military men, that China can be defeated in a nuclear war at an 'acceptable cost' to the US. They think that a nuclear attack on China today is 'worth it'.
4) The US military have never experienced a devastating defeat against an Asian adversary in its history. If the US is defeated by China, and loses thousands of men, thousands of tons of warships, and hundreds of warplanes in rapid succession. Can the unhinged leaders in the US today swallow that kind of humiliation? Can they resist the call for blood by the angry America-1st, white-supremacist crowd? Can the current generation of the top brass resist the order to go nuclear?

Nuclear war may not happen. But there are still too many uncomfortable uncertainties. Better for China to build a nuclear deterrent force can truly scare the US to quell that uncertainty altogether. The Russian nuclear arsenal was big enough, and that kept NATO from directly going to war with it.

Sardaukar20 said:

Well I hope you're right. That the US elites won't go nuclear. But there are a few problematic issues:

1) There are those US nuclear war plans on China from the Cold War until now. All of them are first-strike plans.
2) There are those W76-2 low yield warheads (5-7kt) deployed on Trident missiles. Designed to nuke someone from afar with nuclear firepower below the imaginary 'nuclear war' threshold. A 5kt nuclear blast can easily level a Chinese industrial zone and irradiate the area for years to come. Nevermind the murder of Chinese citizens living nearby. China can only reply with strategic nukes, which will advance into full-scale strategic nuclear exchange. Those American nut jobs who justified those low yield warheads, assumed that China won't do that, because China has a much weaker strategic nuclear arsenal than the US.
3) There is rhetoric from Republican-aligned military men, that China can be defeated in a nuclear war at an 'acceptable cost' to the US. They think that a nuclear attack on China today is 'worth it'.
4) The US military have never experienced a devastating defeat against an Asian adversary in its history. If the US is defeated by China, and loses thousands of men, thousands of tons of warships, and hundreds of warplanes in rapid succession. Can the unhinged leaders in the US today swallow that kind of humiliation? Can they resist the call for blood by the angry America-1st, white-supremacist crowd? Can the current generation of the top brass resist the order to go nuclear?

Nuclear war may not happen. But there are still too many uncomfortable uncertainties. Better for China to build a nuclear deterrent force can truly scare the US to quell that uncertainty altogether. The Russian nuclear arsenal was big enough, and that kept NATO from directly going to war with it.

Click to expand...

You're right. But I want to add, not sure if Americans understand this, even if China can't destroy the whole of America, right away, in one go, with its strategic nuclear strikes and aftershocks. What gets supposedly left of the US will then be turned back into the stone age where there will be civil wars, hyperinflation, no economy, and people of various races, ethnicities, and ideologies, killing themselves on the street like some kind of zombie apocalypse movie. Americans already deeply hate themselves, in many different layers, they are more divided than African tribal states today.

Russia also probably won't let China get destroyed like that. If they don't fear China, they should fear Russia. But in my opinion, China hides its nuclear capabilities to not scare the rest of the world, for a better international image, however, American secret agencies should be aware of the true picture. Not just the sheer size of their nuclear capability that China is hiding but some strategies as well, like launching them from their extensive network of high-speed trains, etc.

btw, I read somewhere that Taiwan defense minister claim that China is learning from Ukraine war, and will doing quick strike to win the isle. What do you think about it?

Sardaukar20 said:

Well I hope you're right. That the US elites won't go nuclear. But there are a few problematic issues:

2) There are those W76-2 low yield warheads (5-7kt) deployed on Trident missiles. Designed to nuke someone from afar with nuclear firepower below the imaginary 'nuclear war' threshold. A 5kt nuclear blast can easily level a Chinese industrial zone and irradiate the area for years to come. Nevermind the murder of Chinese citizens living nearby. China can only reply with strategic nukes, which will advance into full-scale strategic nuclear exchange. Those American nut jobs who justified those low yield warheads, assumed that China won't do that, because China has a much weaker strategic nuclear arsenal than the US.

Click to expand...

Simple solution: Declare to the world China will respond with "city-busters" nukes if anyone use nuke against China, regardless of the yield.

Brainsuker said:

btw, I read somewhere that Taiwan defense minister claim that China is learning from Ukraine war, and will doing quick strike to win the isle. What do you think about it?

Click to expand...

Massive strike to take out most of ROC capabilities quickly seem to be one of PLA plan to take Taiwan all along.

Although, PLA could learn to not hesitate like Russia in the beginning of SMO which end up prolonged the conflict and didn't give them good optic to western media either.

Sardaukar20 said:

Well I hope you're right. That the US elites won't go nuclear. But there are a few problematic issues:

1) There are those US nuclear war plans on China from the Cold War until now. All of them are first-strike plans.
2) There are those W76-2 low yield warheads (5-7kt) deployed on Trident missiles. Designed to nuke someone from afar with nuclear firepower below the imaginary 'nuclear war' threshold. A 5kt nuclear blast can easily level a Chinese industrial zone and irradiate the area for years to come. Nevermind the murder of Chinese citizens living nearby. China can only reply with strategic nukes, which will advance into full-scale strategic nuclear exchange. Those American nut jobs who justified those low yield warheads, assumed that China won't do that, because China has a much weaker strategic nuclear arsenal than the US.
3) There is rhetoric from Republican-aligned military men, that China can be defeated in a nuclear war at an 'acceptable cost' to the US. They think that a nuclear attack on China today is 'worth it'.
4) The US military have never experienced a devastating defeat against an Asian adversary in its history. If the US is defeated by China, and loses thousands of men, thousands of tons of warships, and hundreds of warplanes in rapid succession. Can the unhinged leaders in the US today swallow that kind of humiliation? Can they resist the call for blood by the angry America-1st, white-supremacist crowd? Can the current generation of the top brass resist the order to go nuclear?

Nuclear war may not happen. But there are still too many uncomfortable uncertainties. Better for China to build a nuclear deterrent force can truly scare the US to quell that uncertainty altogether. The Russian nuclear arsenal was big enough, and that kept NATO from directly going to war with it.

Click to expand...

Those low yield weapons are garbage, they only exist because cold war accuracy is terrible. If they try to use them similar to strategic ones by targeting cities, then China would just hit them with its own higher yield weapons.

US cannot be "truly scared" because some oligarchs among them believe it is a life or death issue for themselves, they believe they and their families will literally get slaughtered if China wins. So they may weigh MAD no matter what because they think either way they get destroyed. If a soldier is more scared of being executed by his own, no amount of guns from your line can scare him from suicidal charge.

That is a fear Russia is never going to inspire because they don't have a comprehensively stronger nation than US has.

The only way to help against the most lunatic (which I don't believe are anywhere near a majority, but that could change) is to offer them some sort of relief and comfort, should America be completely defeated.

Biscuits said:

Those low yield weapons are garbage, they only exist because cold war accuracy is terrible. If they try to use them similar to strategic ones by targeting cities, then China would just hit them with its own higher yield weapons.

US cannot be "truly scared" because some oligarchs among them believe it is a life or death issue for themselves, they believe they and their families will literally get slaughtered if China wins. So they may weigh MAD no matter what because they think either way they get destroyed. If a soldier is more scared of being executed by his own, no amount of guns from your line can scare him from suicidal charge.

That is a fear Russia is never going to inspire because they don't have a comprehensively stronger nation than US has.

The only way to help against the most lunatic (which I don't believe are anywhere near a majority, but that could change) is to offer them some sort of relief and comfort, should America be completely defeated.

Click to expand...

Remind the more rational ones that England is still doing fine, and that China is not the US.

And finally that the US is still a strong country, even if 2nd place.

If anything, initiating a war, even 'if' we say US gets a pyrrhic victory (cuz let's face it, that the very best 'realistic scenario' that they could hope to achieve), could still lead to massive civil unrests and possible civil war.

Not to mention consequences if a loss.

Biscuits said:

Those low yield weapons are garbage, they only exist because cold war accuracy is terrible. If they try to use them similar to strategic ones by targeting cities, then China would just hit them with its own higher yield weapons.

Click to expand...

Well, my guess is that the W76-2 warheads have an original non-warfare purpose. The US probably did that to lower their nuclear stockpile maintenance costs. I think that these warheads are actually the same W76 warheads with their secondary stage removed. The primary stage is usually quite small, so a 5-7kt yield should be around that range. The secondary stage costs more to maintain, especially because the tritium in it.

Nevertheless, the human factor is the main problem. Due to the existence of 'low-yield' warheads, American war mongers and defence planners started thinking about using it creatively. Such as using them as 'conventional weapons' because they explode below an imaginary 'nuclear war threshold'. And then the rest of this insane concept with regards to China, as I have explained before.

Biscuits said:

US cannot be "truly scared" because some oligarchs among them believe it is a life or death issue for themselves, they believe they and their families will literally get slaughtered if China wins. So they may weigh MAD no matter what because they think either way they get destroyed. If a soldier is more scared of being executed by his own, no amount of guns from your line can scare him from suicidal charge.

That is a fear Russia is never going to inspire because they don't have a comprehensively stronger nation than US has.

The only way to help against the most lunatic (which I don't believe are anywhere near a majority, but that could change) is to offer them some sort of relief and comfort, should America be completely defeated.

Click to expand...

The problem for the US is that losing its unipolar hegemony is the existential threat. The American elites have never thought about losing that. I don't know if they can ever find comfort in defeat.

The biggest lesson that China must learn from Russia, is its journey from the fall of the Soviet Union to the present Russia-Ukraine war. Never ever trust the US and the West. If they offer you a way out of a Cold War, its probably a poison pill. China has no choice other than to build hard power parity with the US and its allies for its own security. The US elites must be decisively convinced, that any nuclear war with China is essentially game over, with no chance of survival.