PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

Nick las said:

Only part I disagree with is that, US will not be weaken that easily. In any near term war (2020s to late 2030s), they have significant chance of winning a conventional war with China. Yes, US will have significant losses. But China wont be able to stand on it’s feet for another century. To make sure of it, US+their accomplices will force unequal treaties on PRC as they had done with Qing Dynasty era China.

US hegemony will not only further strengthen across East Asia , they will also be able to focus on other global issues like Middle East , Ukraine . ( IMO, they will go after India, it is a possible Superpower of the distant future. They wont make same mistake of not containing China in 1990s- early 2000s)

For China to avoid this fate, they will really need to buy more time. If it has to fight a war with the US and it’s accomplices, they better do it in the near late 2040s or 2050s. (IIRC, Original goal of Beijing's world class military was around 2049) . Hide your strength, bide your time still applies.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid you don't realize what warfare between two superpowers look like. It will be a repeat of WW2 but on an grander scale. Which means it will be a war of attrition, logistics and production. Even if we assume US is utterly superior to China in military competence and China is completely corrupt, weak, disorganized, they still have overwhelming number of missiles, planes, ships which are modern. They also have overwhelming capacity to produce steel, aluminium, chemicals and everything needed to continue build more weapons and ships and planes.

So, no matter how awesome US is and how bad China is when it comes to making war, US will suffer, massively. US will most likely lose their entire current standing army, navy and air force before they can attain any kind of "victory" and will be forced to radically mobilize their entire country and vassal states to produce weapons and provide soldiers. I don't even know what this victory even looks like. Because there is no way US can ever really invade China and force it surrender.

US at ww2 was able muster a force of 12 million at its greatest extent. That was when population of the US was 140 million. Now China has 1.4 billion people. They can easily muster a force of 120 million if they want. There is no way you can force such a force to surrender.

The only possible victory I can think of is some kind of ceasefire.

The sacrifice that is required to keep US hegemony in tact in asia after fighting such a devestating war will break the will of their people to further sacrificing for the sake of hegemony. Its how british broke their back after fighting ww2 and simply gave up on all the colonies.


That's assuming US wins and China loses. But the chance of that happening in China's home turf is extremely low. Cause I know china is not incompetent. Chinese are good at logistics, they are good at building massively and also organize for large scale tasks. So, if there is a war, it will be a victory for China, even after massive sacrifices and losses.

But as I said, its not about who wins or loses. US hegemony is gone whether they win or lose. They will break their back to fight such a war and others will take advantage and make massive gains in other regions of the world.

Nick las said:

For China to avoid this fate, they will really need to buy more time. If it has to fight a war with the US and it’s accomplices, they better do it in the near late 2040s or 2050s. (IIRC, Original goal of Beijing's world class military was around 2049) . Hide your strength, bide your time still applies.

Click to expand...

Yeah, right... Heard this quite a few times already.

How do you expect:
1. A 4000-y/o civilization pretending to be a country, with
2. 18% of the world population, having
3. The largest PPP/real economy in the world,
4. The largest industrial powerhouse in the world, and
5. The largest STEM pool and R&D potential in the world -
To "hide its strength and bide its time"??

Really lol?!

ACuriousPLAFan said:

Yeah, right... Heard this quite a few times already.

How do you expect:
1. A 4000-y/o civilization pretending to be a country, with
2. 18% of the world population, having
3. The largest PPP/real economy in the world,
4. The largest industrial powerhouse in the world, and
5. The largest STEM pool and R&D potential in the world -
To "hide its strength and bide its time"??

Really lol?!

Click to expand...

China can no more hide its strength and bide its time, any more than an elephant can hide behind a twig.

@Nick las and everyone else in here.

If you know Chinese (well, if not, gotta somehow get a chinese speech translator).

Here's a very good overview of US carriers and what they 'would' be able to do against Hamas/Gaza and potentially Lebanon:

TL: DR, they can let Israel do another 20 days of indiscriminate bombing, but the actual effect of destroying Hamas weaponry, fighters etc. (or even Hezbollahs) would be very, very low lol.

Sure against, China the problem of finding enemy forces would be a 'smaller one' (Hamas and Hezbollah is underground a lot), but the challenge of penetrating air defense network as well as surviving against Chinese missile is multiple orders of bigger magnitude.

In fact, it's such a big challenge, that it's very questionable if they could survive and even get close to destroy it.

The Canadian education system doesn't teach broader critical thinking skills. That's my main takeaway from all this.

ACuriousPLAFan said:

Yeah, right... Heard this quite a few times already.

How do you expect:
1. A 4000-y/o civilization pretending to be a country, with
2. 18% of the world population, having
3. The largest PPP/real economy in the world,
4. The largest industrial powerhouse in the world, and
5. The largest STEM pool and R&D potential in the world -
To "hide its strength and bide its time"??

Really lol?!

Click to expand...

FairAndUnbiased said:

China can no more hide its strength and bide its time, any more than an elephant can hide behind a twig.

Click to expand...

The hide and bide thing has become a meme, but the logic that China should only initiate AR as far in the future as possible when the balance of power is most in its favour still applies. The only exception is if Taiwan takes actions like declaring independence that necessitate AR.

Nick las said:

Only part I disagree with is that, US will not be weaken that easily. In any near term war (2020s to late 2030s), they have significant chance of winning a conventional war with China. Yes, US will have significant losses. But China wont be able to stand on it’s feet for another century. To make sure of it, US+their accomplices will force unequal treaties on PRC as they had done with Qing Dynasty era China.

Click to expand...

And what kind of deal would that be?

China has enough nukes to end the US several times over. Even if US can win a conventional conflict, any peace deal must still be sufficiently palateble for China, or China will simply destroy invading US forces using nukes and dare US to launch strategic strikes, either leading to extremely bloody white peace (if US backs down) or MAD.

The whole idea of US invading Taiwan is borne out of the insane hubris and chest thumping of American oligarchs. They've talked themselves into thinking there is a viable way they can take a huge chunk of land from a nuclear power, when they neither have the firepower nor the diplomatic ability to seal such a deal.

It's like if China threatened to annex Hawaii. Or even San Fransisco and Los Angeles. Even if we assume battlefield victory, there's no predictable way of knowing how a major nuclear power will respond to such demands.

Most people here are working on the assumption that China will fight conventionally, but that is only true because China is likely to win conventionally. What would America do if on the eve of their invasion, China simply declared that they will use nuclear weapons to defend Taiwan? Because that's what China would likely do, if it didn't think it was in a position of strength.

Why are people still think that US will win a conventional war with China? Last I recalled that PVA (People's Voluntee Army) without tanks, heavy artillery, airforce and navy, pushed the US army to the longest retreat in the history of US military.

The moment US army or navy suffer a heavy casualty in a battle with China over Taiwan, you can bet that there will be anti-war protests all over USA. Ordinary US citizens would not want to sacrfice their lives and lives of their families and friends to fight a war to protect an island populated by mainly ethnic Han Chinese under ROC from a civil war. They won't want to die for a war that will be 100 times worst than Vietnam war.

US adminstration may be comitted to protect ROC but the ordinary US citizens might think otherwise. I can even bet that majority of Americans don't even know where on Earth is Taiwan located.

lcloo said:

Why are people still think that US will win a conventional war with China? Last I recalled that PVA (People's Voluntee Army) without tanks, heavy artillery, airforce and navy, pushed the US army to the longest retreat in the history of US military.

The moment US army or navy suffer a heavy casualty in a battle with China over Taiwan, you can bet that there will be anti-war protests all over USA. Ordinary US citizens would not want to sacrfice their lives and lives of their families and friends to fight a war to protect an island populated by mainly ethnic Han Chinese under ROC from a civil war. They won't want to die for a war that will be 100 times worst than Vietnam war.

US adminstration may be comitted to protect ROC but the ordinary US citizens might think otherwise. I can even bet that majority of Americans don't even know where on Earth is Taiwan located.

Click to expand...

Just shut down this thread then, PRC already won!

Just a fantasy thread, but who knows, people don't always act rationally.

supersnoop said:

Just shut down this thread then, PRC already won!

Just a fantasy thread, but who knows, people don't always act rationally.

Click to expand...

But at what price?