PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

FairAndUnbiased said:

cavalry in ancient times was worth 10 foot soldiers and it indeed takes the calorie equivalent of 10 humans to feed a horse.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Humans only eat 2500 kcal per day.

So you'd actually expect 35k elite cavalry to devastate 200k infantry as the 35k elite cavalry is more expensive.

it is like putting 5 tank divisions against 50 rifle infantry divisions in WW2. would you be surprised if the infantry lost?

Click to expand...

It depends on the battle ground. In open fields, the fully cavalry army almost always has the initiative. It can choose when and where to fight and there's nothing the infantry army can do except play defense.

In more restricted terrain, the infantry can make use of its numerical superiority to block off escape routes and slowly choke the cavalry army to death.

That said, Xiangyu was historically an outlier. His military accomplishments were renowned for a reason.

This means that Japan either definitely will, or definitely won't, get involved in a Taiwan war, but it's not clear to me which yet:


Another example of the crucial importance to PLAN of massively expanding its SSN fleet. If PLAN can credibly threaten Japan's food supplies then Japan won't be intervening.

In related news, 80% oppose tax hikes to pay for increased military spending:

Maikeru said:

Another example of the crucial importance to PLAN of massively expanding its SSN fleet. If PLAN can credibly threaten Japan's food supplies then Japan won't be intervening.

Click to expand...

A simple naval strength comparison video.
It outlines the strength comparison between the East China Sea Fleet and JMSDF. From the video, it can be seen that the East China Sea Fleet has gathered a large number of landing ships, and its combat purpose is very clear.

However, due to the complexity of the situation, the East China Sea Fleet should not rely too much on the support of other fleets, and its current strength cannot form absolute advantage even facing JMSDF alone, this is something worth worrying about(commentator's viewpoint).

From this point, it can also be understood that the attitude of Japanese people 10 years ago would be so arrogant. At that time, their main ship still had certain advantages, coupled with the psychological advantage of "they have been stronger than China for over a hundred years".

zhangjim said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

A simple naval strength comparison video.
It outlines the strength comparison between the East China Sea Fleet and JMSDF. From the video, it can be seen that the East China Sea Fleet has gathered a large number of landing ships, and its combat purpose is very clear.

However, due to the complexity of the situation, the East China Sea Fleet should not rely too much on the support of other fleets, and its current strength cannot form absolute advantage even facing JMSDF alone, this is something worth worrying about(commentator's viewpoint).

From this point, it can also be understood that the attitude of Japanese people 10 years ago would be so arrogant. At that time, their main ship still had certain advantages, coupled with the psychological advantage of "they have been stronger than China for over a hundred years".

Click to expand...

Like one of the commenters said, did you forget about PLARF?

Afaik the Northern fleet is the main counterattack force against an eventual resurgent Imperial Japan. Eastern fleet will defend Taiwan and provide reinforcements to North and South as needed.

And of course the northern fleet would be supported by rocket force at the same time.

An attack on the Chinese eastern border, especially if Japan is part of it, will be China's Great Patriotic War. There would be no fleet or force available that wouldn't be mobilized, along with the general resources of the whole country. Under such context, the ability of Japan to stay in the war would be questionable, as Japanese air defense network may not be able to hold out against strategic bombardment.

I'm not sure it is even in US interest to make the war larger, except China would also not allow a quick Crimea-style operation on its territories, which might leave US with no choice except backing down or going to total war.

Interesting. If true, this is the furthest east that I've seen H-6s fly.

Guys, Taiwan is being armed to the teeth, Washington will not stop until Taiwan is fully armed to cause unacceptable destruction to Chinese infrastructure, and perhaps even coordinate with India to intervene in Tibet in the event of hostilities in the Taiwan strait.


Perhaps its a good move to liberate Taiwan ASAP before more US arms arrive in Taiwan and make the situation more difficult.

PhSt said:

Guys, Taiwan is being armed to the teeth, Washington will not stop until Taiwan is fully armed to cause unacceptable destruction to Chinese infrastructure, and perhaps even coordinate with India to intervene in Tibet in the event of hostilities in the Taiwan strait.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Perhaps its a good move to liberate Taiwan ASAP before more US arms arrive in Taiwan and make the situation more difficult.

Click to expand...

No. The correct method is to respond, not react.

One thing - the Murican imperialists have been continuously arming the Wanwanese separatists with advanced weaponry and platforms (when compared to the PLA's during those times) ever since they fled the mainland more than 70 years ago. And China has never reacted to that by launching AR against Taiwan.

So why bother with this now? It's not like China and the PLA have been standing still either.

Sure, difficulties related to the AR of Taiwan for the PLA will increase and pile on as the US increases armed support for the Wanwanese separatists. However, PLA today is already closing the gap, on par, or even surpassed the US military in multiple domains. The Wanwanese seperatists certainly won't be doing any better than their DC overlords.

Unless those bloodthirsty Muricans attempt a Cuba Missile Crisis 2.0 on Taiwan against China - Or managed to pursuade the Wanwanese into declaring secession from China - It would be more beneficial for China to hold off AR on Taiwan first.

Let the hot soup keep brewing for a while. China will then have enough justification to serve everyone who have wronged China a bowl of soup so hot that it would melt their tongues as well-deserved paybacks.

Besides, the PLA is still in the midst of a massive upgrade and expansion run. There's still a lot of stuffs that need to be worked out:
1. Anti-hypersonic missile system,
2. Fujian + newer supercarriers and 076 catapult LHDs,
3. Better, more comprehensive anti-ballistic missile system,
4. 093B + 095 SSNs and 094B + 096 SSBNs,
5. More DF-17, DF-26, DF-27 non-ICBM missiles and TELs,
6. More DF-5, DF-41 missiles alongside their silos and TELs,
7. H-20 VLO bombers,
8. More nuclear warheads,
9. More powerful loyal wingman and mission-autonomous unmanned platforms (UGV, UAV, USV, UUV etc),
10. A more comprehensive, viable and effective systems-in-systems battlefield management network and capabilities -
Etc.

Not excluding all the other factors at play here outside of the military realm - geopolitics, economy, finance, trade and cooperation, societal influences (i.e. soft power), etc.

If possible, personally, I prefer that the AR be hold off until the late-2020s, with the right-after-year-2027 timeframe at the earliest. Why? Because 2027 is widely regarded as the year whereby the PLA is expected to (mostly) complete its massive all-encompassing upgrade and expansion project in order to become a truly modern and formidable military force that will be second-to-none in Asia and the IndoPac region.

Optimally, though? The early-2030s. Gotta warm up those hands first.

PhSt said:

Guys, Taiwan is being armed to the teeth, Washington will not stop until Taiwan is fully armed to cause unacceptable destruction to Chinese infrastructure, and perhaps even coordinate with India to intervene in Tibet in the event of hostilities in the Taiwan strait.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Perhaps its a good move to liberate Taiwan ASAP before more US arms arrive in Taiwan and make the situation more difficult.

Click to expand...

Nothing the PLA can't handle... HIMARS are trash as the Russian have demonstrated by jamming its GPS, something that China can easily do, and have done recently when the TB-001 patrolled around the island and jammed GPS around Taipei.

Also...

Brainsuker said:

Actually, there are several cases where the bigger army actually got more disadvantage compared to the smaller ones. These are the examples :

Click to expand...

there are such cases, but they are not common, more of exceptional skill of the smaller army's commander or the stupidity of the large army's commander or lack of will to fight.

Brainsuker said:

1st. Xiang Yu (Later Chu) versus Zhang Han (Qin). In this battle, Xiang Yu with his 35.000 elite Cavalry managed to beat Zhang Han with his 200.000 Qin soldiers.

2nd Xiang Yu (Later Chu) versus Liu Bang (Han). In this battle, actually Xiang Yu managed to beat Liu Bang who had 600.000 coalition soldiers.

3rd Qin (at the era of Qin Shi Huang) versus the coalition of 6 kingdoms.

4th Cao Cao versus Yuan Shao in the battle of Guan Du.

5th Cao Cao versus Zhou Yu in the battle of Chi Bi.

Click to expand...

These numbers are hugely exaggerated by history book writters almost always. In 1st and 2nd example, 200,000 and 600,000 soldiers in a single battle is neither economically nor logistically possible in thosed days, NOT even possible in 1940s when PLA fought GMT in all their major campains.

A good example of these kind of exageration of historical story is "Qin Zhao Changping campain". There is a study by PLA academian on the subject. The paper refuted the the notion of "Qin killing 400,000 POW after one battle" by analynizing the size of the populations of the two kingdoms, their logistic capability (6 to 9 men transporting food to support 1 fighting soldier), the conclusion was that at no time in the campain there was 400,000 soldiers from either side, nor was the mountainious terrian allowed such large army.

I also wonder where did Xiang Yu get 35000 good horses since his army is primarily from southern China where there was no horse breeding place. Remember 35000 is a huge number, even for the northern dynasties such as Han who had dedicated horse breeding ground in north-western China, Xiangyu never had access to those places. You can check cavary size of any campain of Western Han against Xiongnu. A recent example was Qing against Dzungar Khanate, the largest size of Qing army was 50,000, more than half of this was infantry (muskteers and artilleries), the other half (less than 25,000) was cavalries, among them, large number was Kalkha Mongoles and surrended Dzungar Mongoles. So Qing's cavalry from "China proper + Mantruria" was less than 20,000. Qing controls much larger land than Xiang Yu.