PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

[supersnoop]

Forgot to add:
That is just the native drone programs.

Also consider they have given hundreds of millions to the grifter Palmer Luckey (to have grifted hundreds of millions from you suckers) and AeroVironment for their "combat-proven" (proven to be bad) drones, then it tells you how the state of defense spending.

US State Media on Switchblade:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

But Tony Hu, a former U.S. Department of Defense official, believes that the situation in Taiwan and Ukraine is different, adding that the use of the Switchblade 300 is more suitable for Taiwan’s environment.

This is because the drones would first be deployed over water in the event of any invasion of Taiwan, said Hu.

Unlike in Ukraine, PLA troops would not have room to hide or buildings in which to take cover in such circumstances, Hu added.

This is the kind of justification they are using... "The PLA can't hide..."

The drones are being jammed to the point of uselessness by Russian "washing machines", so what would China's solution be? Apparently just "hide", despite having access to stronger EW assets and laser defense systems...

Anduril:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Anduril’s only real battlefield experience—in Ukraine—has been marred by problems as well, including vulnerability to enemy jamming, according to former employees and others familiar with the systems in Ukraine. Some front-line soldiers of Ukraine’s SBU security service, for instance, found that their Altius loitering drones crashed and failed to hit their targets. The drones were so problematic that they stopped using them in 2024 and haven’t fielded them since, according to people familiar with the matter.

This is without getting into the submarine program which recently was in the news for total loss of steering control which led to the sub being towed by tugs and also rumoured to be so poorly constructed that American contractors refused to take part in sea trials.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[bsdnf]

i don't see another free oppurtinity like this come into china's hand
the US are stuck in iran, china can take taiwan and japan tomorrow and there is nothing they can do about it

Well, no.

Time is still on China's side. Progress is good in everything from next-generation tanks, next-generation destroyers and frigates, to the Type 095 and Type 004 destroyers, and sixth-generation fighter jets. The stronger the PLA, the lower the price it will have to pay.

What we are seeing now is:
1. The rising power's power is approaching or reaching a balance with the hegemonic power.
2. The hegemonic power attempts "self-rescue" by choosing military adventures and falling into strategic errors.
But the "window of opportunity" created by 2 will not affect 1.

This is why those who advocate China's decline are actually warmongers. Only when 1 is lost will the rising power be forced to take a gamble.

 

[ForcedTrend]

this is a gift to china, they can now train ai with massive real life data on how they operate

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2030042916803203411

 

[supersnoop]

The current Iran war is showing the massive limitations of the US strategy of lobbing standoff munitions at a large country. So to the strategy of thousands of JASSM, LRASM, Tomahawks, PrSM aimed at China, it is simply unsustainable.

In addition, even without catastrophic losses, the US military is stretched thin, as is the industrial complex. It is leading to so-called “allies and partners” not called Israel to question the US’ commitment to them.

A common theme in this thread has been the US avoiding intervention over Taiwan because catastrophic losses in a war over Taiwan would destroy their regional presence in East Asia. It is probably a more realistic assumption today. Even if the US could be victorious over China in such an event, it would be pyrrhic for them at best.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

The current Iran war is showing the massive limitations of the US strategy of lobbing standoff munitions at a large country. So to the strategy of thousands of JASSM, LRASM, Tomahawks, PrSM aimed at China, it is simply unsustainable.

In addition, even without catastrophic losses, the US military is stretched thin, as is the industrial complex. It is leading to so-called “allies and partners” not called Israel to question the US’ commitment to them.

A common theme in this thread has been the US avoiding intervention over Taiwan because catastrophic losses in a war over Taiwan would destroy their regional presence in East Asia. It is probably a more realistic assumption today. Even if the US could be victorious over China in such an event, it would be pyrrhic for them at best.

Not just that, outright defeat is possible. Note how Iran took out multiple Patriot systems, 5/20 THAAD radars ever made and a PAVE-PAWS within 1 week, blinding the US to ballistic missile trajectories in the entire Middle East. China can do that on day 1, then keep them down with air and naval power. What stops Chinese air, naval or even amphibious activity at that point?

 

[vincent]

Like I have said before, China will not tolerate any hostile forces on the First Island Chain. The Epstein Class-Iranian War amply demonstrated PLA can eliminate majority of the eyes and ears of enemy forces on the First Island Chain in a week and then use its air forces to mop up the rest.

 

[plawolf]

Like I have said before, China will not tolerate any hostile forces on the First Island Chain. The Epstein Class-Iranian War amply demonstrated PLA can eliminate majority of the eyes and ears of enemy forces on the First Island Chain in a week and then use its air forces to mop up the rest.

China would be wasting an opportunity of historic proportions to only settle for the first island chain.

The scale and scope of China’s military modernisation only makes sense if they seek to push America back to Hawaii and seizing Japan as the first primary objective and off-ramp to cease active hostilities.

 

[vincent]

China would be wasting an opportunity of historic proportions to only settle for the first island chain.

The scale and scope of China’s military modernisation only makes sense if they seek to push America back to Hawaii and seizing Japan as the first primary objective and off-ramp to cease active hostilities.

What is the point of seizing the main Japanese Islands? There are no natural resources and have a hostile population. Taking them over means you are responsible for the welfare of the inhabitants. Just deindustrialize the place, smash all infrastructure and leave them be.

 

[FriedRiceNSpice]

What is the point of seizing the main Japanese Islands? There are no natural resources and have a hostile population. Taking them over means you are responsible for the welfare of the inhabitants. Just deindustrialize the place, smash all infrastructure and leave them be.

Just destroy the foreign military bases and impose peace conditions of 1) no foreign military bases or engagement with foreign militaries 2) no nukes 3) limited military capabilities.

 

[MMelon]

What is the point of seizing the main Japanese Islands? There are no natural resources and have a hostile population. Taking them over means you are responsible for the welfare of the inhabitants. Just deindustrialize the place, smash all infrastructure and leave them be.

Not to mention indefinite air and sea blockade until political surrender.