One of these days one of them is gonna break down in the strait and get tugged to a Chinese dock for repairs.
PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency
- Thread starter pugachev_diver
- Start date
One of these days one of them is gonna break down in the strait and get tugged to a Chinese dock for repairs.
Completely agree. Above all, the PLA needs to be either completely and absolutely and absurdly violent. This means 10,000 missile barrage, 10,000 armoured marines storming Taibei, complete energy and food collapse within a day, 5th column, mass ROCA defection, bombing Okinawa and sinking the 7th fleet, internal sabotage, flooding the island with propaganda questioning the Taiwanese will to fight, etc. all at the same time. The Taiwanese will to fight needs to be completely broken. Limited war will not be effective. Don't turn Taiwan into Gaza or Ukraine, turn it into Iraq in the Gulf War.
Taiwan isn't the only one that needs be frightened to submission, Korea, Japan, and American need to fear entering the war as well.
PLA has an air force you know....
What is the point of having PLA troops on the island? What can they accomplish that a blockade cannot? Any resistance from a single building will slow you down for hours. A city block can take days to clear.
You have to feed them, supply them (using ships) and provide air cover to protect them. That will tight up valuable ships (supply ships and combat ships that protect the sea lanes) and PLAAF assets. When the Americans and Japs intervene, those ships and PLAAF assets aren't available to counter them.
Can you post a summary?
I watched the whole thing, and it's a pretty bog-standard Congressional dog and pony show about how to address China's threat to Taiwan.
It starts with the Xi Jinping told the PLA to have the capability to take Taiwan by 2027, and then jumps right into the kind of basic strategies on how to deter China. Nobody actually went into any useful details like threat assessments or what anyone's capability is. It's very surface level stuff so I'd say that it's mostly a waste of time.
Highlights:
-Talk of how to defeat a blockade of Taiwan. Suggestions were to get Taiwan to stockpile more food and buy more Texas LNG. They were confident that submarines would break the blockade.
- Talk of a counter blockade of China with no details other than that the Europeans would help somehow.
- A lack of confidence that Australia, Philippines, and Japan would join in the conflict. I'm not sure why anyone ever thought that Australia would join in, but I guess looking at maps isn't popular for these folks.
- Talk about how Taiwan spending 10% of its GDP on American weapons isn't realistic because the US program for supplying Taiwan doesn't make that much!
Thanks.
What is the point of stockpiling food and LNG when you can’t transport food nor cook them after fuel depots (crude, gasoline, diesel and LNG) and transformer stations are blown-up?
So what if Aussies and others join?
ROC’s tax intake is only 14% of GDP, and the morons want the government spend most of it on weapons?
no need to attack US force first , it better to let them fire the first shot
and about taiwan ......it better if china have balls to conduct ...war of extermination toward any non-pro china/CPC living being on that island , after that build a five story tower of ..."footballs" in middile of taipei to remind any taiwanese still alive on that island don't be a traitor and the world about don't fked with china
It could days to clear a city block, or they could just surrender the island in a week. You certainly don't want to enter the war with that assumption, but you can attempt it while being prepared for a protracted conflict. What it can accomplish is then speed. As the Chinese saying goes, 夜长梦多, if you have a reasonable chance at finishing things quickly, you should try it. Going into a war half-heartedly is how the US and Russia/USSR have repeatedly ended up in quagmires, even if they're committed for many years.
Certainly that's not the only option. When Liu Bei took Shu he was given 3 options by his advisor Pang Kong, a fast, a slow, and a medium approach. Here, a fast, aggressive approach may be the best. If AR happens, China's commitment would certainly be no less than Russia's in Ukraine or America's in Vietnam, so why try the most passive route first? There'll be losses in a war, on both sides, don't get yourself into one if that's the concern. When you do you often end up with more losses anyway, again on both sides.