And to Vlad... (thougth who is really begun to loose his credipility by hiding behind typing remarks to avoid answering...)
Actually, I responded to all your legitimate concerns, however, if you keep insulting my intelligence I'm gonna have to keep pointing out your poor typing:
thougth who is (has) really begun to loose his credipility
Quit insulting my intelligence and maybe I'll stop insulting your typing, though honestly, sometimes it really is so bad I can't tell what you're writing.
No. I said that its even hard to US to defeat them. Its difference. US can crush Taiwan, but not with parade manners....and PRC cannot
You said it's impossible. I quoted you just a while back.
By what? Again you just repeat that cheast-beating mantra without proving how PLAFs limited capacity can manage to achieve it
How about anti-ship missiles? China has more than enough to overwhelm the ROCN. Hell, just a few hundred should be enough, maybe even 100 if they're the more advanced missiles.
Yeas? Ever heard of irony....
That's not irony, what you did is called strawman. I never said anything even resembling what you said.
It speaks only for the fact that I've skipped some of the english classes
No, it proves you can't type.
Ballistic missiles ring any bells remember how you humiliated yourself by claiming over and over again how they are tactical weapon to be used in similar cases as air launched percission munitions or cruise missiles???
Apparently someone hasn't been paying attention to what China's been doing to their ballistic missiles as of late. They're making their BMs more accurate some are within 100 CEP and they're looking to make them even more accurate. 2010 should be enough time for them to get some of those more accurate ones out.
However, in enough numbers they're still more than enough to keep the ROCAF out of the air in the first hours.
And again you just repeat that they can do this and they can do that....
Without even bothering to base this to anything.....
So again I ask...with what forces?
I've told you time and time again what they'd use, but you're just ignoring that part.
what munitions? Are you now moving towards traditional artillery strikes or what? ballistic missiles where old news, so you decided to pick other equipment out of its operational contest and throw it into game....
...or what? Im getting bit confusing with your logic....(expecially when we get into this
More like you're forgetting they have these things called bombs, ARMs, and cruise missiles.
Ahem! Thats what I have ranted over and over again myself. So you honestly claim that human errors are out of question when it comes to PLA operations?
If so, I guess there is little point of continue any depate with you
There's not much room for human error is the thing. They'd be told exactly what to hit and they'd hit. Could there be error? Yes, but not nearly enough to warrant your criticism.
I said it quite clear: PLAN cannot conduct joint operations between surface ships and nuclear subs in sea with its current organisation as it would mean that SSNs would have to lead that task force as their commander and ship-rank system would make them senior compared to the surface units....
If you you understand naval warfare, you can figure out the result of such composition by yourself....
...but Somehow I begun to loose my hope that you understand....
I haven't even mentioned nuclear subs, I was always referring to conventional subs. I mentioned nuclear subs for a little, but they weren't part of the main naval strike.
Vietnam '79 Well China really hasent gone trough military campaing that would equal the scale of annexation of Taiwan. perhaps thats the main reason why those horrible command structures and doctrines still remain in PLA service....All soviet military failures have not come from the weapons or thecnologies, but out of simple inflexibility in their chain of command, from the dual-leader BS that still exist in PLA
That sounds like opinion you're trying to peddle as fact. Ever thought maybe their military failures came from just simply being a poorly-trained and poorly-disciplined force? How about poor strategy?
Vietnam wasn't a failure. I wouldn't call it a resounding success, but it was hardly a failure.
No you werent, becouse you werent refering to anything. Thats the proplem. You just say and say how PLAAF would smahs the taiwanese positions, and how its limited ground attack capacity can master something that even NATO couldnt master in 1999. What you say is principle what PLA should do, but unlike all others, you also assume that its exactly what is going to happen without even stopping to think that can PLA even manage to do that, not to mention how would ROCAs defences effect on these attempts.
Again you make poor comparisons and ignore my previous statements.
For one, I told you that command and control facilities, radar stations, air defense batteries, and airfields would be targeted by multiple weapons systems, not just ballistic missiles, the ballistic missiles would be to soften up, harass, and keep as much of the air force grounded as possible, the ARMs would take out air defense radars and long-range radars, with glide bombs coming in to take out those and other facilities, cruise missiles would also be used and, by then they should be softened up enough for less-advanced fighters to fly over and start using LGBs over Taiwan.
For another Serbia is larger than Taiwan and had far more air defense systems.
Agains Taiwanese air elements that can spread havoc to unprotected PLAN ships. Have you even slightest clue of the state of PLAN air defences?
And why would they need all their modern fighters to protect it? becouse there is so few them. And becouse PLAN ship borne air defences cannot at the same time protetc the landing ships and the operational units operating against Taiwanese fleet, as well as its own supply lines.... PLAN itself needs a fighter umbrella upon it to even try to achieve the goals your scennario imposes to them. All those planes are out of other usage...
If it is that hard to understand, why you even bother to post in military forums?
What air elements though? You say it, but don't give any specifics. Are you talking about land-based anti-ship missiles?
No. Chinese will suffer simply becouse they are humans. All armies aknowlidges this (and I hope PLA does it too, thougth I cannot be sure under ligth of some evindence...) and thats why the basic military leadershiptraining should always emphase innovativeness and spontanius so that military units can keep its fighting potential in ever changing and unpredictable operations. Chinese system and its inflexibility works counter-wise and really adds a multipler to disasters in conflict like Taiwan annexation that really isent winnable by simple quantative power, that has been key to all previous PLA triumphs.
As I recall the PLA has traditionally been outnumbered in all of its conflicts. They would win by being innovative and flexible. That's what they did in the Korean War. They would use numbers, but in a different way. You're going to have to provide a specific example.
No. It means that it can add the element of suprise and unpredictability to your scennarios. It means that you cannot ignore it.
Where, though? There's nothing the ROC could do to stop this kind of attack, they could only hope the PLAAF and PLAN screw up. It's unlikely they would either, not on the scale need to give the ROC a good chance at least.
Im not saying that China would fail in its annexation of Taiwan becouse ROCA can rebel it, claiming that would be as silly as your claim of PLA as superarmy without room for human errors.
I never claimed they were a superarmy. I've only said that Taiwan is a pissy little force that China can easily steamroll over. I'm not saying they could do that to any force, just Taiwan. I don't think they could do that to South Korea, Russia, India, or Vietnam. They could probably do a number on North Korea, though.
However, Taiwan is nothing compared to any of them. Taiwan has all kinds of shortages and suffers from a very limited strategic focus that largely requires them to wait to be hit. Hitting them hard enough right at the start would make their plans useless.
How can the under-brigade size unit without no fire support nor supplylines advange deep in to the Taiwans territory without being encircled and keep the beach head so that the main bulk of PLA troops can land when they are facing at least 1 army corps (thats three western division to those who don't know) size opponent force with the all the benefits of local area and existing supplylines?
Air and naval support is one part of it. Having a few H-6s carpet bomb an oncoming enemy division would certainly help. Having special ops taking out command facilities and senior officers as well as messing with supply lines would help more. Attacks on road ways and major storage facilities would further increase the strain on them.
yeas you are. You cannot claim that they have no change to use it effectively without spesifically explain why, and what PLA "super weapons" can bring such miracle upon them that they cannot.
I already explained to you how this would work. It's taken from Operation Opera. Massive overwhelming air power destroying large swaths of enemy infrastructure. I explained this to you and pointed out how the changes in technology meant the tactical reworking of it would not be prepared for. Under the circumstances Taiwan does not have enough firepower to deflect such an onslaught.
