PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency
- Thread starter pugachev_diver
- Start date
You're using your own definition of war crime that is not in line with even the highest standards and conduct of any major military across the world. And yet you insist China must exceed all present and historical standards and act as an angel. You're a troll, a bot, or a child.
Your certitude lacks real-world merit and examples to back up your incredible yet confident assertion that the PLA must, under any and all circumstances, take such strategic measures for human rights considerations and the eventual deep-seated psychological trauma successive generations may hold—thereby further complicating Phase IV operations in Taiwan.
My answer to your admirable principle is GERMANY AND JAPAN. The former was bombed to kingdom come by the U.S. (Dresden and other industrial heartlands of Germany), while Japan tasted nuclear weapons twice—on top of the Tokyo firebombing raid that made Curtis LeMay giddy!
The main interest and strategic goal of China is to have Taiwan firmly and squarely back where she belongs!
I'm fairly certain he's a Westoid troll, a child, or a bot. The most Westoid trolls on Chinese English-language forums like to hide behind alias and location that suggests they are Chinese. Just like that old Westoid pro-HK independence psyop operative on X during their active color revolution efforts. Pretending to be a young HK female if I remember correctly. It was then revealed he was a balding middle aged white guy from Europe being paid to push Western psyop objectives.
My definition of war crimes is what the Geneva convention says, and not bombing every power station or fuel depot isn’t acting like an angel.
We can agree to disagree on the way to do it, but I don’t think it’s necessary for China to bomb every power plant and fuel depot in Taiwan to achieve the goal of AR and I’m not saying don’t anything I’m saying it shouldn’t be do whatever you want it doesn’t matter what I think that’s where the disagreement is.
lol do you even know what's in the geneva convention?
- Protects wounded/sick soldiers
- Safeguards prisoners of war
- Shields civilians in conflict zones (note: shield civilians, not their infrastructure).
- Prohibits torture and inhumane treatment
- Requires distinction between combatants/civilians (again, civilians, not civilian infrastructure).
- Protects medical personnel and medical facilities
I notice that a lot of coverage has been given to the PCL-191 this round. I guess the PLA need no other weapon to inflict damage that there is no return from.
Lol you don't even know what you're talking about. Civilian infrastructure loses their protected status if they become military objectives - meaning if they make an effective contribution to military action and their destruction offers a definite military advantage. In order for the civilian infrastructure to retain protected status, it would have to mean that the loss of them does not create a disadvantage for Taiwan's military. Good luck proving that.
You are aware before I did say that, but not every dual use infrastructure is a legitimate target, if Taiwan uses every single one and every one if destroyed creates a massive advantage for China then yes, but if not then you can’t. All I’m saying is you can’t just do whatever you want in AR.