They probably think the military has to use latest advanced chips for weapons. Maybe thinking of something similar that Russian missiles are using washing machine chips.
PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency
- Thread starter pugachev_diver
- Start date
They probably think the military has to use latest advanced chips for weapons. Maybe thinking of something similar that Russian missiles are using washing machine chips.
China produces tons of washing machine, TV and automotive chips and is 20% of global capacity, #3 worldwide, by wafer volume.
so how does that help them?
Chinese soldiers on their way to stop fighting a brutal American invasion just because they can't get the newest iPhone from apple store:
I mean joking aside China makes way more high, middle and low end semis than US. Before Beijing hits the KMT with resuming the civil war, they would likely have first sanctioned USA from using any Chinese chips first. So not getting the latest smartphones would be a both sides problem.
I mean joking aside China makes way more high, middle and low end semis than US. Before Beijing hits the KMT with resuming the civil war, they would likely have first sanctioned USA from using any Chinese chips first. So not getting the latest smartphones would be a both sides problem.
FriedRiceNSpice
Captain
You're probably right. The USN, not Taiwan itself, is China's main opponent. Whether a physical invasion is successful or not, it can only feasibly be attempted after the USN is reduced as a threat.
It's eminently logical with the understanding that China either forces the US out of WestPac and makes them comply with non-interference in Chinese affairs, or the US chooses to fight until it burns down the world rather than give up their global power and privilege. That's why my point is either China succeeds with the former or if the US goes full fascist the latter happens, after which full scale nuclear retaliation by China and allied nations becomes the response. Make no mistake, it will be a total war once the fighting starts irrespective of the starting intentions.
Not sure how using Russian bases is "a stretch too far", when you think about the flipside - The US would still have to use airbases in Canada, Australia and across the Pacific in order to get their bombers to China.
Besides, the case for striking Murican targets on mainland Murican soil is actually an appropriate response to US striking at Chinese targets on mainland Chinese soil. As long as China have the means to achieve it, I don't see anything wrong with it. The US can't keep on believing that only they can keep dishing out damages and not expecting retaliation.
In the meantime, Chinese SSNs with VLS tubes (093Bs) or VLS multipack cells (095s) certainly can do the same as the H-20s in terms of striking targets at Western CONUS.
However, compared to risking an SSN, which costs multi hundreds-of-millions, if not billions of dollars to procure and operate, taking years to build and prep for service, and only available in smaller numbers - Using the H-20s, which are often cheaper to build and operate, taking only months to build and prep for service, and are always available in larger numbers can better mitigate and distribute the risks and damages inflicted on Chinese warfighting units when conducting expeditionary strike missions as mentioned in the above post.
Firstly, do you understand the meaning of "unconditional surrender"? That's what the N4zi Germany and Imperial Japan did to the Allied Powers in 1945.
Are you seriously suggesting that the US representatives to sign the document of unconditional surrender while observed by Chinese representatives in Washington DC, with the main streets of all major US cities rolling with PLA tanks and troops? Really?
Your latter option (i.e. the US chooses to fight until it burns the world down) is basically what WILL happen if China choose to push all the way to the CONUS and trying to force Washington DC to unconditionally surrender to China. Because no matter what - Until the US has been throughoutly broken up and collapsed onto itself from within, and/or the entirety of the US nuclear arsenal have been completely destroyed (which is an impossibility) - The US will NEVER AGREE to unconditionally surrender.
The same goes for China (and Russia). China will also choose to burn the world down rather than unconditionally surrender to the US.
The only viable option for China to secure a favorate outcome in the Pacific War 2.0 is by ensuring that both China AND the US co-exists as completely sovereign countries after the war ends, which is part of the former option you have listed (i.e. China forces the US out of WestPac and makes them comply with non-interference in Chinese affairs). This does not necessecitate an outright invasion of CONUS by the PLA, because it is unnecessary, unfeasible, and also risks backing Washington DC into a corner and forcing them to press the nuclear button.
We need to stand on realistic ground.
H-20s are very good but not for that reason. The only reason China would want to strike mainland US at the start is for PR purposes. Just like US doesn't have the sustained fires on mainland China, China doesn't have sustained fire with a sporadic bomber, long range CM or SSN raid. Such fires would be better served securing the pacific.
Once China has ramped up production, started counteroffensives in Asia and begun island hopping, then it is a whole another question, at that point, strategic bombing on the west coast will be viable, as Chinese platforms can take off closer to US. That would be a way to help the American public understand their war needs to be ended.
Smashing the invaders and having a succesful counteroffensive is way more important than sending symbolic attacks on US initially. Once US' capacity to conduct offensives have been destroyed, China can pick up all the small pacific islands and raid the US homeland at its leisure.
H-20s are valuable for their ability to act as stealthy ISR nodes and coordinators within a Chinese counterattack. Not because they can do kerch bridge style attacks on random US mainland infrastructure at the start of the war.
I believe you may have misunderstood my posts.
I did not mention that China should/must strike CONUS at the start of an all-out Pacific War 2.0, let alone for PR purposes. There isn't going to be another Doolittle moment in the 21st-century.
My discussion mainly revolves around the viability and methods of using the H-20s as a platform to conduct expeditionary strike missions against targets on western CONUS which are directly or indirectly involved in and/or assisting the US war effort against China in the Pacific War 2.0 - Regardless of the point in time and/or progress of war at which the H-20s are deployed for expeditionary strikes against western CONUS.