PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

bsdnf

Junior Member
Registered Member
The US has a lot more military experience, a lot more 5th gen planes, 11 aircraft carriers, they also have access to ally bases, to say the US absolutely can’t win if war started today is just wrong

when I did say nuclear exchange? I just said if war happened today the US has more of a possibility of winning

how so? Why do you think the US can’t win if war happened today.

We’re just going to need to agree to disagree but simply put the US still has the ability to beat China if war happened today, past 2027 that gets much harder, and if we’re talking about nuclear exchange than both China and the US are destroyed
I would like to remind you of the following:

1. In recent years, there have been multiple instances where no a single US CSG active in Asia.

2. Allied bases and other facilities are not untouchable targets for the PLA.

3. base on the 1 & 2 point, there are not many US fifth-generation fighters can break into the theater of operations outside the PLA's A2/AD zone. The "tyranny of distance" provides security but also hinders reinforcements. Do you really believe that launching F-35s from the second to third island chains, then refueling multiple times to reach Taiwanese airspace, is a feasible, sustainable operation on a large scale?

4. I have mentioned countless times everywhere, not all combat experience gained from fighting any opponent can be directly transferred and helpful; it can also mislead and hinder the development of the troops.

For example:
Former French pilot Ate Chuet claims that two-thirds of his career was spent dealing with asymmetric targets, namely bombing African/Middle east militias that had little to no manpads.

What significance does this experience have for the May 7 India-Pakistan air battle? Would such French pilots really perform much better than Indian pilots when facing PL-15?

I don't think so, because at least the air combat capabilities of both India and Pakistan are relatively balanced. The PAF needs to worry about the IAF gaining air superiority, while the IAF needs to worry about losing air superiority when facing the PLAAF. Both sides will place greater emphasis on a2a combat.

This is why I think the May 7 India-Pakistan air combat is the most important one since the Bekaa Valley air war. This, rather than bombing the Taliban, can truly provides guidance for a possible air war between China and the United States.
 
Last edited:

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
The US has a lot more military experience,
No it doesn't. It has no experience fighting peers. You may work at an animal shelter with stray cats but if you think you can take that "experience" to wrangle a tiger, you're gonna get mauled, even worse than if you entered cautiously assuming you know nothing about tigers.
a lot more 5th gen planes,
Not in the area. The fighters it can bring to a Taiwan scenario are very limited. It's actually fairly close to none after all carriers are sunk or taken out of range and all allied bases are struck by Chinese missiles.
11 aircraft carriers,
China has quite a bit more than 11 carrier killing missiles. As Hegseth said, opening 20 minutes sees all of America's carriers sunk. They wouldn't even dare bring them to that slaughter.
they also have access to ally bases,
That's included in the calculations or they'd have nothing. All allied bases are in China's missile range.
to say the US absolutely can’t win if war started today is just wrong
No, everything you said above is inapplicable and/or wrong.
when I did say nuclear exchange? I just said if war happened today the US has more of a possibility of winning
Which is wrong due at least to tyranny of distance. As Donald "Bone Spurs" Trump said to John "I-didn't-want-to-die-in-a-Viet-rice-field" Bolton, "This desk is China. This pen is Taiwan. We're all the way out in the hall. If China invades, there's not a damn thing we can do about it."
how so? Why do you think the US can’t win if war happened today.
Can't as in 0% chance, or can't as in far less chance than China? It's the latter.
We’re just going to need to agree to disagree
That's what wrong people say when they can no longer defend their statements
but simply put the US still has the ability to beat China if war happened today,
No, with the desperation in Washington, if that were true, they would have already tried. They know they're getting run down by time but they can't move because it's already too late.
past 2027 that gets much harder, and if we’re talking about nuclear exchange than both China and the US are destroyed
K
 
Last edited:

tokenanalyst

Brigadier
Registered Member
The US has a lot more military experience, a lot more 5th gen planes, 11 aircraft carriers, they also have access to ally bases, to say the US absolutely can’t win if war started today is just wrong
Fighting goat keepers in the desert doesn't count as the same experience as fighting near peer nuclear powers. For the scale and density of a war that could happen, those bases are nowhere close or enough. Basically sitting ducks. And if the war becomes a grinding forever war, is over.
when I did say nuclear exchange? I just said if war happened today the US has more of a possibility of winning
The only way that the US could barely managed itself is that case of a war is with nukes but that means nuclear retaliation.
 

bebops

Junior Member
Registered Member
The US has a lot more military experience, a lot more 5th gen planes, 11 aircraft carriers, they also have access to ally bases, to say the US absolutely can’t win if war started today is just wrong

How many 5th gen planes US has compared to China? U.S only has 650 5th gen planes. They have produced 1k+ but most of them delivered to their customers.

How many 5th naval planes are equipped into those 11 carriers total?
 

PLAwatcher12

Junior Member
Registered Member
No it doesn't. It has no experience fighting peers. You may work at an animal shelter with stray cats but if you think you can take that "experience" to wrangle a tiger, you're gonna get mauled, even worse than if you entered cautiously assuming you know nothing about tigers.

Not in the area. The fighters it can bring to a Taiwan scenario are very limited. It's actually fairly close to none after all carriers are sunk or taken out of range and all allied bases are struck by Chinese missiles.

China has quite a bit more than 11 carrier killing missiles. As Hegseth said, opening 20 minutes sees all of America's carriers sunk. They wouldn't even dare bring them to that slaughter.

That's included in the calculations or they'd have nothing. All allied bases are in China's missile range.

No, everything you said above is inapplicable and/or wrong.

Which is wrong due at least to tyranny of distance. As Donald "Bone Spurs" Trump said to John "I-didn't-want-to-die-in-a-Viet-rice-field" Bolton, "This desk is China. This pen is Taiwan. We're all the way out in the hall. If China invades, there's not a damn thing we can do about it."

Can't as in 0% chance, or can't as in far less chance than China? It's the latter.

That's what wrong people say when they can no longer defend their statements

No, with the desperation in Washington, if that were true, they would have already tried. They know they're getting run down by time but they can't move because it's already too late.

K
I said agree to disagree not because I can’t defend because I don’t want to get banned again
How many 5th gen planes US has compared to China? U.S only has 650 5th gen planes. They have produced 1k+ but most of them delivered to their customers.

How many 5th naval planes are equipped into those 11 carriers total?
each can carry 14+.


To answer everyone’s questions the US can bring an good amount of F-35/F-22 to the pacific they don’t need to use Guam to launch, they can use Japan, yes China has carrier killer missiles but that doesn’t mean the US carriers are useless. My overall point is it’s possible that if war started today the US could win and it would be more likely it would than if war started in 2027. But I won’t discuss this anymore to avoid getting banned. We can agree to disagree
 

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
The US has a lot more military experience, a lot more 5th gen planes, 11 aircraft carriers, they also have access to ally bases, to say the US absolutely can’t win if war started today is just wrong

when I did say nuclear exchange? I just said if war happened today the US has more of a possibility of winning

how so? Why do you think the US can’t win if war happened today.

We’re just going to need to agree to disagree but simply put the US still has the ability to beat China if war happened today, past 2027 that gets much harder, and if we’re talking about nuclear exchange than both China and the US are destroyed
US only has subsonic cruise missiles and short ranged glide bombs as air to ground strike munitions.

Based on existing data, subsonic cruise missiles get shot down easily and short ranged glide bombs require getting well within visual range while weighing down the plane.

It is basically a Cold War era munitions layout.
 

tokenanalyst

Brigadier
Registered Member
I said agree to disagree not because I can’t defend because I don’t want to get banned again

each can carry 14+.


To answer everyone’s questions the US can bring an good amount of F-35/F-22 to the pacific they don’t need to use Guam to launch, they can use Japan, yes China has carrier killer missiles but that doesn’t mean the US carriers are useless. My overall point is it’s possible that if war started today the US could win and it would be more likely it would than if war started in 2027. But I won’t discuss this anymore to avoid getting banned. We can agree to disagree
So the plan is to put the best assets at range of medium-short range cruise, drones, hypersonic and ballistic missiles. That is not counting at the range of land based stealth radars and AWACs
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
I said agree to disagree not because I can’t defend because I don’t want to get banned again
You can't defend because you can't defend. You don't get banned for defending; you get banned for saying things that are too stupid.
To answer everyone’s questions the US can bring an good amount of F-35/F-22 to the pacific they don’t need to use Guam to launch, they can use Japan
Both Guam and Japan are in Chinese missile range. Neither will be operable.
, yes China has carrier killer missiles but that doesn’t mean the US carriers are useless.
That's exactly what it means. Bring them into range and they become radioactive reefs.
My overall point is it’s possible that if war started today the US could win
That's not what you said before. You said America's chances are much higher than China's. If you just said "possible," I don't have anything to say to that. It's possible a chicken can kill its butcher so whatever.
and it would be more likely it would than if war started in 2027.
That just means that the US is waning in comparison to China and that's true.
But I won’t discuss this anymore to avoid getting banned. We can agree to disagree
This is the correct place to discuss this.
 
Top