PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

GZDRefugee

Senior Member
Registered Member
Funnily enough in today's Guancha stream Ayi and Yankee talked about this very topic too. They said indeed even internally within PLA Trump's actions in the last few weeks have changed people's thinking. Yankee said he sat in a meeting where this topic came up and some people were still holding the opinion that US bases along the 1st Island Chain should not be attacked unless they attack first because of international law. Yankee said someone then stood up at the meeting and said:

"International Law? Go ask Trump how to write the word 'international law', see if he knows if it starts with a vertical or horizontal stroke!"

Yankee said previously when this topic came up with Japanese or Korean people on exchange they would immediately blurt out "of course you won't attack us, because we know you follow international law." But the events of last few weeks have made them realize that assumption is not safe and being host to US bases on the front line is a dangerous properstiton.
I wonder what Patch thinks about his scenario planning now. Especially with how the GCC countries are not retaliating.
 

supersnoop

Colonel
Registered Member
Excuse my language but god damn. This is terribly enlightening, thank you.
I always thought this was common knowledge, but maybe only of people of a certain age.
In the late 90's/early 00's, it was quite common to post this pic to call for AR and call for the head of "Lee Dog Hui"
As an aside, Jai China's of then were certain People's War of J-7 and J-6 would overwhelm the USA and ROCAF

I think if ROC government sent such a message that they were willing to submit to the central government under that term like tomorrow (or some other short period of time max 6 months under supervision), it would be accepted.

You can make the argument that "Oh, look at HK 2019 riots, they won't let that happen again"
2 key differences
- Central government was more hands off with HK back in 97 because HK was in a position of strength. It continued to be fairly hands off because things were working fairly well until 2019. Taiwan would certainly not be in any position of strength.
- Central government is ready to deal with the headaches after HK and certainly would have more safeguards in place (like Macau). Certainly these kinds of issues would be less destructive than military action. If you could keep all the infrastructure like military bases intact, it would be worth a few hundred cans of tear gas and liters used for water guns.
 

ZeEa5KPul

Brigadier
Registered Member
Funnily enough in today's Guancha stream Ayi and Yankee talked about this very topic too. They said indeed even internally within PLA Trump's actions in the last few weeks have changed people's thinking. Yankee said he sat in a meeting where this topic came up and some people were still holding the opinion that US bases along the 1st Island Chain should not be attacked unless they attack first because of international law. Yankee said someone then stood up at the meeting and said:

"International Law? Go ask Trump how to write the word 'international law', see if he knows if it starts with a vertical or horizontal stroke!"

Yankee said previously when this topic came up with Japanese or Korean people on exchange they would immediately blurt out "of course you won't attack us, because we know you follow international law." But the events of last few weeks have made them realize that assumption is not safe and being host to US bases on the front line is a dangerous properstiton.
Man, I could not be happier that Xi cleaned out the CMC. These boomers are unbelievable - it doesn't matter how advanced the PLA's gear is, you could hand them God's Own Thunderbolts and they'd still lose the war because of crap like this. "International law"? Are these people serious? The Japanese and Koreans are calling them sacless right to their faces.

Remove boomer.
 

PandaAI

Junior Member
Registered Member
International law is just a sham. UNSC is a sham. International law couldn’t protect Iran getting attacked twice. Why should Iran follow international law after that.
CPC and CMC would be incredibly naive to think about international law or UNSC votes once war starts. Main aim is to decisively win the war. That means destroying all US bases and removing US military presence in Asia.
 
International law is just a sham. UNSC is a sham. International law couldn’t protect Iran getting attacked twice. Why should Iran follow international law after that.
CPC and CMC would be incredibly naive to think about international law or UNSC votes once war starts. Main aim is to decisively win the war. That means destroying all US bases and removing US military presence in Asia.
The instant US enters the conflict, US bases in Japan should be obliterated. South Koreans should receive a 48hr ultimatum to expel US forces and join the right side of history.
 

Temstar

Brigadier
Registered Member
Funnily enough in today's Guancha stream Ayi and Yankee talked about this very topic too. They said indeed even internally within PLA Trump's actions in the last few weeks have changed people's thinking. Yankee said he sat in a meeting where this topic came up and some people were still holding the opinion that US bases along the 1st Island Chain should not be attacked unless they attack first because of international law. Yankee said someone then stood up at the meeting and said:

"International Law? Go ask Trump how to write the word 'international law', see if he knows if it starts with a vertical or horizontal stroke!"

Yankee said previously when this topic came up with Japanese or Korean people on exchange they would immediately blurt out "of course you won't attack us, because we know you follow international law." But the events of last few weeks have made them realize that assumption is not safe and being host to US bases on the front line is a dangerous properstiton.
The segment in question:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Temstar

Brigadier
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
1773827756113.png
Don't get too excited just yet, it's just an one off statement from TAO spokesperson:
Chen Binhua, a spokesperson for China's Taiwan Affairs Office, told reporters in Beijing that "peaceful reunification" would bring better protection of Taiwan's energy and resource security with a "strong motherland" as its backing.
"We are willing to provide Taiwan compatriots with stable and reliable energy and resource security, so that they may live better lives," he said, responding to a question about Taiwan's energy supplies during the war in the Middle East.
But still, that's something new.
 
Top