PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

Michaelsinodef said:

Lol no, confidence in the PLA is rising not falling.

What's more, you should probably spend some time to look into the US military as well as like ROC, JSDF and ROKAF (hint, things aren't looking that good inside).

Still, the expectation is that they will be competent if a conflict should happen (and likewise the PLA as well), at which point we can start looking at equipment, in which we can see that relatively (and also not relatively) the power of the PLA has grown immensely.

Click to expand...

Also we should not look at military factors alone, when considering whether US and their allies would intervene or go into a direct conflict with China. There's also the economic and political impact that can arise from such a decision, and depending on China's military capabilities after the conflict, the countries that got involved especially those in the region like Japan, will have to deal with a more militarily hostile China that could lead to more hostile shipping lanes, declaring no-sail zones for warships, military buildup near their territory or just outright war.

Michaelsinodef said:

Lol no, confidence in the PLA is rising not falling.

What's more, you should probably spend some time to look into the US military as well as like ROC, JSDF and ROKAF (hint, things aren't looking that good inside).

Still, the expectation is that they will be competent if a conflict should happen (and likewise the PLA as well), at which point we can start looking at equipment, in which we can see that relatively (and also not relatively) the power of the PLA has grown immensely.

Click to expand...

Who cares what you think or say. In that pathetic person's opinion China might as well surrender, call it quits and stop pretending it has any sliver of chance against the God's of western countries lead by the omnipotent U.S.

This dude sounds like a surrender Chinese monkey if he's at all Chinese which makes even worse. It honestly makes my blood boil reading his comment because it reads like groveling. Pretty pathetic.

Bellum_Romanum said:

Who cares what you think or say. In that pathetic person's opinion China might as well surrender, call it quits and stop pretending it has any sliver of chance against the God's of western countries lead by the omnipotent U.S.

This dude sounds like a surrender Chinese monkey if he's at all Chinese which makes even worse. It honestly makes my blood boil reading his comment because it reads like groveling. Pretty pathetic.

Click to expand...

Lol dude it's not that serious. I'm simply stating my opinion. I said confidence in the state, not the PLA. I think the government has done a good job with the PLA and I see a bright future ahead. The reality is there is a power in-balance between America and China, which will persist.

There is no surrender if there is not conflict. Taiwan is not going anywhere. China can invade Taiwan tomorrow or 50 years from now. Whether Taiwan is a recognized nation is not relevant. Is it not better to invade when you eventually have the advantage? Let's say the red line is crossed tomorrow and the US and Japan intervene. Who wins? If China is at the disadvantage do you still invade even if the odds are stacked against you?

Reunification is obviously a given. The question is what is the right timing for China. China seemingly, for now, wants to maintain the status quo, but from the US perspective why wouldn't they want to cross they red line when they have the advantage?

FairAndUnbiased said:

China doesn't need to come out on top but China does need to fight. As long as it's not an existential loss, which it won't be because of increasing strategic deterrence and US invading China is impossible, dealing a crippling blow to them is almost guaranteed.

US doesn't need to just win, it has to win overwhelmingly and easily with near zero losses. Otherwise Taiwan gets over half their population starved to death and the rest reduced to medieval conditions when ASM and mines keep blowing up freighters and SRBM keep destroying their ports. There's no way to prevent ASM and SRBM TELs from hitting soft targets in Taiwan even if entire PLAN gets sunk. China would also rebuild a navy faster than the US.

If Taiwan gets destroyed by starvation and USN is crippled the message to the rest of the world is, fuck with China and your country will become a shit hole and btw, the hegemony is crippled, it's now a free for all.

Click to expand...

I think it's the opposite. China, and the rest of Asia, has far more at stake with this conflict. Why would the US need to win with near zero losses? Chinese naval facilities and infrastructure would be the first targets in a conflict. American naval construction is half a world away. The biggest risk for the US is anti-war activism at home, which is slowly being rooted out ahead of time with the propaganda today.

yungho said:

Lol dude it's not that serious. I'm simply stating my opinion. I said confidence in the state, not the PLA. I think the government has done a good job with the PLA and I see a bright future ahead. The reality is there is a power in-balance between America and China, which will persist.

There is no surrender if there is not conflict. Taiwan is not going anywhere. China can invade Taiwan tomorrow or 50 years from now. Whether Taiwan is a recognized nation is not relevant. Is it not better to invade when you eventually have the advantage? Let's say the red line is crossed tomorrow and the US and Japan intervene. Who wins? If China is at the disadvantage do you still invade even if the odds are stacked against you?

Reunification is obviously a given. The question is what is the right timing for China. China seemingly, for now, wants to maintain the status quo, but from the US perspective why wouldn't they want to cross they red line when they have the advantage?


I think it's the opposite. China, and the rest of Asia, has far more at stake with this conflict. Why would the US need to win with near zero losses? Chinese naval facilities and infrastructure would be the first targets in a conflict. American naval construction is half a world away. The biggest risk for the US is anti-war activism at home, which is slowly being rooted out ahead of time with the propaganda today.

Click to expand...

While I am not going to argue with all the points you raised in your rebuttal because what you expressed make sense from the relative balance of power between the rising China and the statusqou power that's U.S.

What am still curious was your criticism or concern with respect to the political system that in your estimation needs reforming. So as I have asked in my prior posts, what is your preferred route and what sort of political reform that China must undertake and why?

Is it your understanding that China's goal of resisting U.S. interference will be best served if China relaxes some, if not all the policies you deemed regressive, and restrictive? What are the specific restrictive policies you find most disagreeable that's actually corrosive to the overall direction and strategic objectives China is trying to arrive at.

What historical presence and empirical evidence do you have to support your corresponding theory or beliefs that such actions (whatever they are) can and will lead to China's greater success. On the flip side, what corresponding evidence do you have besides your opinion to support your previously assertive assertion that China will fail or lead to failure if it's current iteration isn't change to address what you perceived as the country's fundamental weaknesses: is it structural or just needing modification.

I get irritated quite easily whenever Chinese political system is attacked with a rather dismissuve way that everything the system has accomplished would have been easily duplicated, if not surpassed by another political system, namely democracy. Yet, we know this already for a fact that China's material economic rise for the past 30-40 years has been unprecedented in modern history. Which means it's accomplished something that has never been seen or done anywhere else in the world, and that includes all the western world Asian by a good number idolizes as if they're gods. So please, despite my passionate irritation of what you expressed, am still very curious and eager to know, perhaps even learn another thing or two from your perspective.

yungho said:

Lol dude it's not that serious. I'm simply stating my opinion. I said confidence in the state, not the PLA. I think the government has done a good job with the PLA and I see a bright future ahead. The reality is there is a power in-balance between America and China, which will persist.

There is no surrender if there is not conflict. Taiwan is not going anywhere. China can invade Taiwan tomorrow or 50 years from now. Whether Taiwan is a recognized nation is not relevant. Is it not better to invade when you eventually have the advantage? Let's say the red line is crossed tomorrow and the US and Japan intervene. Who wins? If China is at the disadvantage do you still invade even if the odds are stacked against you?

Reunification is obviously a given. The question is what is the right timing for China. China seemingly, for now, wants to maintain the status quo, but from the US perspective why wouldn't they want to cross they red line when they have the advantage?

Click to expand...

I really think it's gonna happen in this decade though, although at the end of the day we really can't do much but wait and see.

yungho said:

I think it's the opposite. China, and the rest of Asia, has far more at stake with this conflict. Why would the US need to win with near zero losses? Chinese naval facilities and infrastructure would be the first targets in a conflict. American naval construction is half a world away. The biggest risk for the US is anti-war activism at home, which is slowly being rooted out ahead of time with the propaganda today.

Click to expand...

Nah don't think the US military can get away with zero losses if it attacks the PLA, whether it be landing forces, ships, bases or infrastructure (such as ship building sites).

Expect US bases and ships within 2000 km of Chinas border to get decimated, and then we a have a hot conflict on our hands, which I really think PLA is gonna come out on top just due to distances as well as equipment. Although right now the question is more of how well the PLA can come out on top.

yungho said:

I think it's the opposite. China, and the rest of Asia, has far more at stake with this conflict. Why would the US need to win with near zero losses? Chinese naval facilities and infrastructure would be the first targets in a conflict. American naval construction is half a world away. The biggest risk for the US is anti-war activism at home, which is slowly being rooted out ahead of time with the propaganda today.

Click to expand...

if the US doesn't win with near 0 losses but gets crippled instead, then it signals to everyone that US isn't invincible and that in fact, inflicting harm upon it in revenge is possible and maybe will be the only chance to do so.

That means Iran might start hitting US forces in the Middle East and they can't do anything about it without invading a country 2x the population and area of Ukraine with GDP per capita 5x higher than Ukraine and the geography of Afghanistan. What are they seriously gonna do about it if Iran decides to sink 5th fleet inside Persian Gulf while its attempting to transit out of the Gulf?

That means Russia might escalate to tactical nukes in Ukraine and they can't do anything about it without using their own nukes, which would lead to MAD. What are they gonna do about it, bomb Russia with the F-35s they're transferring to the SCS?

Everyone everywhere would see it as a green light that they can ignore the wishes of the US because they've lost the capability to project power.

a war with China means also global hyperinflation on almost every product, global famine (), global economic depression, shortage of everything. Sanctioning Russia with a Canada sized economy has led to 50%+ inflation on gas. What do you think is going to happen when an economy bigger than the entire EU is sanctioned, especially when it is the largest fertilizer precursor producer in the world?

they can keep strikes on Chinese shipyards? How if their power projection capabilities are crippled? If in the course of the war they are damaged - such as losing 4-5 carrier groups, bases are damaged to only 20-30% sortie rate and half their strategic air assets like tankers and bombers get shot down, by what mechanism are they going to keep hitting a highly hardened delayed effect target?

And the shipyard is only the final assembly point, the actual module fabrication happens elsewhere. The shipyard is just concrete and steel.

They also don't have the capability to hit Chinese aerospace or ground force industries without nukes, since they're all 2000+ km inland. Range of tactical air means they'll have to refuel over China to even launch missiles, B-1s and B-52s have no chance of surviving long enough to launch against inland targets, B-2s that do anything other than hit nuclear silos will alert fighter intercepts with IRST, hitting one set of nuclear silos means full strategic launch. so SAMs, ammunition, fighter parts, etc. will keep being built and keep inflicting damage on them.

Basically, the end result will be the real world version of what they think Ukraine is doing to Russia - destroying the global economy, grinding their military into oblivion, making them look like a giant joke, and emboldening their enemies.

Bellum_Romanum said:

While I am not going to argue with all the points you raised in your rebuttal because what you expressed make sense from the relative balance of power between the rising China and the statusqou power that's U.S.

What am still curious was your criticism or concern with respect to the political system that in your estimation needs reforming. So as I have asked in my prior posts, what is your preferred route and what sort of political reform that China must undertake and why?

Is it your understanding that China's goal of resisting U.S. interference will be best served if China relaxes some, if not all the policies you deemed regressive, and restrictive? What are the specific restrictive policies you find most disagreeable that's actually corrosive to the overall direction and strategic objectives China is trying to arrive at.

What historical presence and empirical evidence do you have to support your corresponding theory or beliefs that such actions (whatever they are) can and will lead to China's greater success. On the flip side, what corresponding evidence do you have besides your opinion to support your previously assertive assertion that China will fail or lead to failure if it's current iteration isn't change to address what you perceived as the country's fundamental weaknesses: is it structural or just needing modification.

I get irritated quite easily whenever Chinese political system is attacked with a rather dismissuve way that everything the system has accomplished would have been easily duplicated, if not surpassed by another political system, namely democracy. Yet, we know this already for a fact that China's material economic rise for the past 30-40 years has been unprecedented in modern history. Which means it's accomplished something that has never been seen or done anywhere else in the world, and that includes all the western world Asian by a good number idolizes as if they're gods. So please, despite my passionate irritation of what you expressed, am still very curious and eager to know, perhaps even learn another thing or two from your perspective.

Click to expand...

I see the burden of communism and Maoism that still looms large over China today, when in reality the country has largely moved on from that era. The party still bears the burden of the 'bad' that occurred under Mao, which they haven't been able to shed despite the 'good'. I think there needs to be a soft reset to correct this, so the government can fully say X,Y,Z was bad and we learned from it instead of doing so in a roundabout way. The elite still holds power, but under a different guise leaving the messy history behind. Now, people will argue that the communists have succeeded in this already, but I don't see it.

Essentially I'm arguing for a re-branded government, rather than a seemingly left wing party that still bears the burdens of the past. This will give China a government that more accurately reflects the changes in reality and prevent any detractors from referring to 'oh you actually this 50 years ago and it was bad'. I see Russia as an example of this, where they can confidently address the faults of the USSR (like giving Crimea to Ukraine), but still maintain the same agenda.

Now regarding elections or not, I don't think it really matter ironically.

yungho said:

Completely agree. Confidence in the communists are deteriorating, partially due to outside demoralization and increasingly restrictive government policy. The red line is not important anymore. The US will continue to deteriorate the Taiwan Relations Act, until crossing the 'red line' is just a formality. The US will obviously intervene, that's not even a question anymore. It's obvious the US wants a 'military operation' as well, because they think they will win.. and I think they will.

I don't have confidence China will come out on top in a conflict. I don't think it needs to either. Getting baited into a conflict by a more power adversary with better allies, equipment, numbers, and experience is a mistake. Taiwan is not going anywhere. Let's say Taiwan crosses the red line tomorrow. What do you gain by jumping into the conflict now vs 10 years from now? While I don't think the power balance is major, the 'house' is not stable. I don't have confidence in the communist system and believe political reform is needed before talking about conflict.

I think Japan intervention is guaranteed. Japan today is constructed by the US and relies on the US, to an extent, for legitimacy. Any Chinese military action in the east will be viewed as an existential crisis for the Japanese. Japan leaders have long desired to revise Article 9, despite resistance from the populace. Korea is more questionable.

Click to expand...

10 years after the red line, the US would probably have a giant base in Taiwan.

"The US will obviously intervene"

No, that doesn't make any sense. That is pure fantasy. Such a crazy idea can only be believed by an Ukrainian.

The only question here is (1) whether Washington is as crazy as it seems and whether they will be able, driven by their delirium, to whip up and provoke the Taiwanese Gambit (as the Ukrainian Gambit) and (2) whether the Taiwanese will be fooled like good Ukrainian pawns.

This is the real question. And I don't know what to think.

yungho said:

I see the burden of communism and Maoism that still looms large over China today, when in reality the country has largely moved on from that era. The party still bears the burden of the 'bad' that occurred under Mao, which they haven't been able to shed despite the 'good'. I think there needs to be a soft reset to correct this, so the government can fully say X,Y,Z was bad and we learned from it instead of doing so in a roundabout way. The elite still holds power, but under a different guise leaving the messy history behind. Now, people will argue that the communists have succeeded in this already, but I don't see it.

Essentially I'm arguing for a re-branded government, rather than a seemingly left wing party that still bears the burdens of the past. This will give China a government that more accurately reflects the changes in reality and prevent any detractors from referring to 'oh you actually this 50 years ago and it was bad'. I see Russia as an example of this, where they can confidently address the faults of the USSR (like giving Crimea to Ukraine), but still maintain the same agenda.

Now regarding elections or not, I don't think it really matter ironically.

Click to expand...

yungho said:

'. I see Russia as an example of this, where they can confidently address the faults of the USSR (like giving Crimea to Ukraine), but still maintain the same agenda.

Click to expand...

But how did the marketing change anything of substance to Russia? Has it's repudation of it's past system, namely, the Soviet System brought about a legacy that can be remembered positively by the Russian people? Poll after poll showed in Russia that Russians actually saw their Soviet past in a positive light in comparison to the death, destruction, mayhem, and criminality the new "democratic oligarchic" Russia has been ushered into which as you must know why Putin the very product and result of the Soviet system has essentially remain in power for this long. He brought order out of chaos; respect and fear for Russian power when it was debased, ridiculed, and bastardized by the powers preceded him.

If what you're asking for China is to repudiate it's system, the man, and the party that brought China out of the doldrums so that in your estimation and perception will somehow garner some brownie points from your western patrons, then am afraid you're sorely mistaken. Such assumptions are based on surrender monkey theory where our approval has to be wrested and approved from the very western countries that led to the destruction of the country to begin with. I am sorry but I ain't buying what you're selling.

What's next on the menu? We need to adopt the English language as another official language of China so that maybe just maybe western remaining ambivalence, disinterest in learning Chinese language is one of the key obstacles to understanding China or China being misunderstood? Or perhaps, China should then shut it's trap whenever U.S. and her minions send ships, planes in and around China's periphery; or maybe China should stop investing in her defense, gut it's R&D, allow U.S. and western demands in "reforming China's" so-called unfair trade practices...I mean where's your limit? Once you cave in to their dumb dumb demand that's not only demeaning, but a repudation of what Mao Zedong, and the party along with numerous Chinese sacrifices did for the country by essentially doing away with the name What's next? And where does it stop? Have you not learned anything at all from the bitter history of your country?

Are the sacrifices of your ancestors that worthless to you? I mean, it sounds to me that you're life is perhaps being inconvenient by the tensions emanating from the current rivalry created and amplified by the West led by the U.S. this is my interpretation and reading off of your expressed written posts. And if this is the case am sorry dude, yours and mine inconvenience are immaterial to the historic long held goals by the majority of Chinese which is the rejuvenation of China and the ultimate reunification of Taiwan back to the mainland under one unquestioned roof.