D
Deleted member 24525
Guest
Patchwork repeatedly stated that present day PLA thinking leans strongly towards a first-strike. That's probably the best we can realistically hope to get on the matter.
PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency
- Thread starter pugachev_diver
- Start date
Where are you getting this from? I have family and relatives who from Guangxi that lived through those times (including a distant relative that actually fought in that war) who would refute your claims.
lcloo
Captain
The big question would be how many modern SAM rounds do ROC have? A small HAMAS force can fire more than 5,000 rounds of rockets to over-whelm Israelis SAM, China could easily deplete 99% of ROC SAM stock within 12 hours by sending up hundreds of thousands cheap decoy drones and suuicide drones.
2025 is a year where a multitude of factors will be converging (new political administrations, economic and military inflections points, industrial developments, etc) that increases the likelihood of conflict from that point onwards especially as these changes will be increasingly unfavorable to the US strategic position. This also makes the possibility of US preemptive action to forestall these changes all the more likely as the US political establishment no longer has sound rational leadership/judgement and is behaving more like the political establishment of Imperial Japan.
For a Taiwan contingency what could a US JASSM do? I'm being deadly serious. Due to the dispersion and hardening of Chinese bases - even if they can through the Chinese coastal SAM network - there is a chance that they will not have any effect. Why is the US so obsessed with procuring these missiles?
I don't really see progressing anywhere way beyond the 2IC to be absolutely necessary, other than the PLA being equipped with the capability to constantly holding the US military presence as far as the 3IC at constant and persistent danger of PLA fires.
In the meantime, while the 2.5IC should be a great-to-have, but only as the outer extreme perimeter for China's defensive strategic depth in the WestPac and CentPac. Otherwise, 2IC should be more than enough.
Sure, conventional strike missions against targets on CONUS should be anticipated (and in fact, worked upon by the PLA towards achieving such capabilities). However, any talk of landing directly on CONUS soil should be immediately archived under the "Fantasy" section.
Last edited:
Even if they overload some air defenses Chinese targets are so distributed and will have enough warning time that they can scatter by the time the JASSM would hit. It might at most be able to take out a few dozen J20s if it gets really lucky but what else could it do?
American procurement can always be explained by economy. JASSM is easily consumed, and relatively pricy compared to basic goods like artillery shell, MLRS rockets. Can be fired easily without maintaining logistic of a ground force(high political cost). It has good profit margin. If it had less margin, company would have went under given their production inefficiency.
It could theoretically also be used in anti-shipping duties, which can be argued to be much safer than using it in an anti-land context against thick Chinese AA due to JASSM's relatively short range. This is a war that is won and lost at the Seas, the destruction of either the western fleet or Chinese fleet would spell a quick end to the conflict.
No Chinese fleet = no invasion of Taiwan
No Western fleet = no way for the West to stop a naval blockade, Taiwan surrenders.