List of results from China-Taiwan computer war simulations.

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Patnaik wasn't the only person to present this alternate view on the missing millions and one which Im inclined to agree with.

He is not the only one that question the figure of 30 million. George ball did essay in this subject as well

Did Mao Really Kill Millions in the Great Leap Forward?
Joseph Ball (September 21, 2006)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Roderick MacFarquhar from Asian quarterly used this number based on population statistical inference by Judith Banister. Basically it is number pulled from the air based on misunderstood an poorly executed Chinese statistic

Chinese data on famine deaths was used by a group of U.S. demographers in their own work on the subject. These demographers were Ansley Coale, John Aird and Judith Banister. They can be said to be the three people that first popularized the “massive death toll” hypothesis in the West. Ansley Coale was a very influential figure in American demography. He was employed by the Office of Population Research which was funded by the Rockefeller Foundation in the 1980s when he was publishing his work on China. John Aird was a research specialist on China at the U.S. Bureau Of The Census. In 1990, he wrote a book published by the American Enterprise Institute, which is a body that promotes neo-liberal policies. This book was called Slaughter of the Innocents and was a critique of China’s one-child birth control policy. Judith Banister was another worker at the U.S. Bureau of the Census. She was given time off from her employment there to write a book that included a discussion of the Great Leap Forward deaths.35 John Aird read her book pre-publication and gave her advice.

Banister calculates the total number of under-reported deaths in this period by first calculating the total number of births between the two censuses of 1953 and 1964. She does this using data derived from the census and data from a retrospective fertility survey carried out in 1982. (Participants in the survey were asked to describe the number of babies they had given birth to between 1940 and 1981). Once the population of 1953 and 1964 is known, and the total number of births between these two years is known, it is possible to calculate the number of deaths that would have occurred during this period. She uses this information to calculate a total number of deaths for the eleven year period that is much higher than official death rates show.
 
Last edited:

Kurt

Junior Member
Let's cut the politics. I learn other languages (including Chinese), study other cultures' developments and travel to countries abroad as well as stay in contact with people in and from many countries.
The relationship of uninterrupted boom and bust is due to my own observations of economic development, but widely accepted, although the 1-child policy (in theory) creates a heritage effect that could help to create a long continuing boom (similar to the European age of wealth at the beginning of the Little Ice Age
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
after the mass death waves). I say in theory, because in practice there are a number of people exempting themselves from the policy one way or another.
Long booms lead to inefficient economic structures based on overshooting ambitions. The longer someone feels stable in an environment that rewards risk taking adventures, the greater the ambitions until a different analyses of information triggers a break of convidence. I don't consider China or any other nation or group of human beings immune to that. The longer the boom, the more bust, because of sudden behaviorial changes of the environment (that is mostly outside the sphere of influence of the affected).

Considering Taiwanese political factions, it's the best shot independce advocats have to use a period of lowest capability (including their own economy) to dare the most risky act. Any hostile Chinese reply has the capability of triggering China into a worsening economic situation because enemy SLoC control can bring their capabilities to a standstill and destroy their wealth (paying usury prices), while China during this specific time is at its lowest financial ability to muster power projection as "money is the sinews of war" (English proverb). Naturally, such a Taiwan project will be intertwined with the ambitions of other players.
I specifically used the best shot scenario because I consider it the best possibility to push any aganda directed against the mainland. Simply because the economic ties are severed (not cut) in such a situation and it would be rather unthinkable with the growing economic ties between these two states intact and rapidly expanding as of now. Because of lack of data and transparence, I can't make an exact date of bust for the PRC, but I consider it unavoidable.

Because anticipating such a situation is part of any serious military planning and wargaming, let's take a look at it. A responsible military has even continguency plans if their most trustworthy ally switches sides.

So going back to war simulations. In a simulation Taiwan or PRC can win such a conflict, but very likely both would lose a lot because both have the ability to create great damage to each other with little expenditure in naval mines, unlike the enormous money involved in fighter aircrafts.
Taiwan has an advantage in equipment, including aircrafts, they need a defense to win, PRC would need a much more costly offense. Light and less complex aircrafts with one engine and fitted mostly for the fighter role can have a higher readiness rate than large complex multipurpose machines.
Taiwan has a total troop concentration, PRC only a partial concentration, depending on the acts and stances of further actors and possible actors.
So in essence, even with a much smaller military budget and fewer troops, Taiwan could be equal in critical theatre capabilities and possibly stand their ground.

So for China to win such a conflict, longterm build-up of blue water naval (carrier centered surface groups) and other forces to secure their South Asian harbours outside Taiwan interference is paramount. So in any war game involving Taiwan and PRC you have to ask about US and Indian involvement as well as what supplies will and can the Russians provide China.

A wargame between PRC and Taiwan is in my opinion not so much about the Taiwan Strait, but the PRC strategic position. The geographic PRC position is very bad from the prespective of defending their commercial naval access. Taiwan's is slightly better, but not in comparison to their enemies capabilities at creating denial. I pointed out, it's quite meaningless how many marines there are on the Chinese shore, because it will be very hard to cross the Strait in a conflict for a time long enough for a defensive build-up. The capabilities of aerial warfare have been proven as overstated in Serbia vs. NATO. Taiwan will likely be capable of keeping her fighters, but not forever, and the question about air force rather involves using the fighters in successful sorties on tracked enemy targets.
It boils down to Chinese capability to keep the string of pearls in the Indian Ocean secured and open and that begs the stance of the Indian navy as regional player and the US Navy as global player.
There's quite a lot of discussion in US military publications about a possible great war with China. Look at the Iraq War and you'll see how an agenda can be pushed beyond all facts. So I'm not sure what the future brings and I think it's a good idea to conduct wargames as an endeaver for more thorough understanding of possibilities.
One such possibility is a declaration of independance by a Taiwan group. It's not necessary that this group has been elected for that purpose, but rather to solve domestic troubles of a different kind. The current US stance againts supporting such an act is a great contribution to peace, but how long will it last?
 

Kurt

Junior Member
He is not the only one that question the figure of 30 million. George ball did essay in this subject as well

Did Mao Really Kill Millions in the Great Leap Forward?
Joseph Ball (September 21, 2006)
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


_ZIP_

Roderick MacFarquhar from Asian quarterly used this number based on population statistical inference by Judith Banister. Basically it is number pulled from the air based on misunderstood an poorly executed Chinese statistic


Banister calculates the total number of under-reported deaths in this period by first calculating the total number of births between the two censuses of 1953 and 1964. She does this using data derived from the census and data from a retrospective fertility survey carried out in 1982. (Participants in the survey were asked to describe the number of babies they had given birth to between 1940 and 1981). Once the population of 1953 and 1964 is known, and the total number of births between these two years is known, it is possible to calculate the number of deaths that would have occurred during this period. She uses this information to calculate a total number of deaths for the eleven year period that is much higher than official death rates show.

Great link that someone takes a look at Cold War possible propaganda fallout, but what has this to do with the wargame?
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
Great link that someone takes a look at Cold War possible propaganda fallout, but what has this to do with the wargame?

Well isn't it Goebbels who once said that lie repeated thousand time will become truth.
Kurt cut off on the nonsense of China is vulnerable to embargo or quarantine.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China is not vulnerable contrary to what western analyst opinion. To begin with the single largest source of energy in China is coal 90% of generating station in China is coal power. China has a lot of coal mine in inner Mongolia. The reason why China import coal mainly from Indonesia is because it is cheaper to load coal using ship to coastal cities than transporting coal form inner province.

China is essentially self sufficient in Food most grain and other staples food. The soybean import is mostly used for animals feed. Ok China will have to ration meat in the event of war But that is hardly a hardship actually even better and healthier food
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Most oil are used only for Transportation. China supplied roughly 50% of oil from domestic sources. But now that the Russian - China, China- Turkmenistan. China -Kazakhstan pipe in operation They can quadruple their oil delivery in a emergency.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Again there will be ration for gasoline and private car , But they can still used public transit and China has been building subway like gangbusters There are now 50 cities that has built subway or plane to built subway.

China is endowed with mineral wealth. There are plenty of Iron ore, copper and aluminum. In in hinterland provinces that has yet to develop due to lack of transportation. But in emergency those rail line will be built. In fact there are talk of dedicated coal line.

Feverish as they look, in fact China rail line is only 150,000 mile vs 300,000 mile in US

If you want this is excellent link why embargo will be futile check this one out
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Taiwan issue has been postponed not because China is afraid of US But it is more advantageous for China to have Taiwan on its own.
Think of all the technologies and capitals that China is getting from Taiwan.

Taiwan alone invest roughly 150 billion dollars in China . Right now there are more than 1 million Taiwanese living and working in China
In effect Taiwan is the conduit of high tech to China and therefore circumvent the embargo.

China can wait for reunification.What they did not want is official Taiwan separation and that is why they draw the red line in the sand and dare anybody to cross it
 
Last edited:
None of the simulations means anything because as I suspected, most young Taiwanese do not want to fight.

From the Wires
Wednesday, Nov 30, 2011 10:20 PM Eastern Standard Time
Taiwanese Youth Losing Taste For China Fight
By Peter Enav, Associated Press

Topics:From the Wires

TAIPEI, Taiwan (AP) — Signs that Taiwan was preparing for possible war with China were once everywhere: huge posters calling for liberating the Chinese mainland and lengthy school yard drills training students to fight the communist enemy. That culture has changed so much since a detente process began in the 1990s that many young Taiwanese are now unwilling to take up arms to protect the island’s self-rule.

A magazine survey published this week appears to confirm that Taiwan’s process of demilitarization is rapidly gaining steam. Based on a sample of students aged 12 to 17, it found only 38.7 percent would be ready to see either themselves or a family member fight if a new war broke out, while 44.3 percent would not. The remainder had no opinion.

“It goes without saying that the number of Taiwanese willing to fight has come down significantly in recent years,” said former Deputy Defense Minister Lin Chong-pin. “I’m even surprised that the number of pro-defense people cited by the magazine is so high.”

The Defense Ministry declined to comment on the survey, saying it had no information on the way it was conducted. Commonwealth said it was carried out by mail between Oct. 17 and Nov. 4 and that the 3,715 responses represented a 74 percent return on the 5,054 questionnaires it sent.

Aside from shining a light on the huge changes now taking place in Taiwanese society, the Commonwealth findings offer a big challenge for Taiwan’s military, which is already struggling with a constricted defense budget and the reluctance of the United States to supply it with the weapons it says it needs to cope with China’s ambitious military modernization.

While Taiwan plans to end its current system of 11-month mandatory male conscription in favor of an all-volunteer force by 2014, a lack of funds and difficulty in attracting recruits are almost certain to push that date back by several years. That will leave the military dependent on large numbers of apparently unmotivated draftees.

Tamkang University military specialist Alexander Huang says the negative trends in volunteer force recruiting are especially worrying.

“I have been asking university students for several years now whether they would be willing to join an all-volunteer military,” he said. “I get positive responses from no more than 2 or 3 percent.”

Taiwan, which split from China amid civil war in 1949, has been engaged in a gradual program of detente with the mainland over the past two decades, culminating in Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou’s efforts to bring the sides ever closer together, mostly through a series of ambitious commercial initiatives.

But China has never renounced its long-standing threat to take over the island by force should it move to make its de facto independence permanent, or delay unification indefinitely. It currently aims an estimated 1,500 missiles at Taiwanese targets, and conducts frequent drills simulating an invasion across the 100-mile- (160-kilometer-) wide Taiwan Strait.

Despite the threats and the missiles, present day Taiwan is a remarkably un-militarized society, with few signs of a military presence outside of Defense Ministry facilities. Uniformed military personnel are rarely seen in major cities, and while highlights of annual war games are shown on television to boost morale, few people outside of the armed forces take them very seriously.

Both Huang and Lin ascribe the lack of military consciousness to the rapid improvement in relations with China, which they said made it difficult for Taiwanese young people to conceive of the possibility of a return to the tension of the past.

“The atmosphere in cross-strait relations is so relaxed now,” Huang said. “It’s difficult to envision a war.”

Additional factors Huang cited for low military consciousness include the aversion of Taiwanese young people to military-style discipline and their belief that a military framework is incompatible with the “cyber lifestyle” many of them covet.

Fifteen-year-old Taipei high school student Gao Yu-kai explained his own lack of willingness to fight an invading Chinese force by saying it made no sense to participate in a losing effort.

“We could never beat China,” he said. “They are just too strong.”

The pessimism of Taipei students comes against the background of the continuing drop in defense expenditures as a proportion of GDP, and Taiwan’s recent failure to convince the United States — its most important strategic partner — to sell it new F-16 jet fighters, for years the leading item on Taiwan’s military wish list.

Those developments — and Ma’s 2009 announcement that Taiwan’s military should henceforth see disaster relief as its main priority — appear to have done much to deflate whatever military consciousness survived the beginning of detente with the mainland in the early 1990s and the development of a relationship that now includes the arrival of thousands of Chinese tourists in Taiwan everyday and the maintenance of hundreds of weekly flights across the Taiwan Strait.
Close

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

If all bids well, eventually the reunification process involves one that's similar to HK. No shots fired, not much changes(social), democracy stays, and ROC military assimilated into PLA and PLA offering protection to Taiwan
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
Because anticipating such a situation is part of any serious military planning and wargaming, let's take a look at it. A responsible military has even continguency plans if their most trustworthy ally switches sides.

So going back to war simulations. In a simulation Taiwan or PRC can win such a conflict, but very likely both would lose a lot because both have the ability to create great damage to each other with little expenditure in naval mines, unlike the enormous money involved in fighter aircrafts.
Taiwan has an advantage in equipment, including aircrafts, they need a defense to win, PRC would need a much more costly offense. Light and less complex aircrafts with one engine and fitted mostly for the fighter role can have a higher readiness rate than large complex multipurpose machines.
Taiwan has a total troop concentration, PRC only a partial concentration, depending on the acts and stances of further actors and possible actors.
So in essence, even with a much smaller military budget and fewer troops, Taiwan could be equal in critical theatre capabilities and possibly stand their ground.


Sorry, but your "simulations" is flawed. What time frame are you looking at 1949? Do you know Taiwan needs China more for business and survival than any other trade partners? Taiwan defense systems is way behind compare to the PLA more advanced and getting more self-sufficient.
 

Kurt

Junior Member
Considering Chinese resources, I just want tp lay my finger on for example titanium
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Bluntly said, who has open SLOC to most of the world has the best access to resources and capabilities and who hasn't is in a worse position.
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
China could send and retrieve resources by trains, planes, and trucks. Those who couldn't afford to keep those fancy ships patrolling along the coasts for 24/7 with limited resources such as fuel costs will eventually bites back on them (think rising prices of fuel cost in the US results in rising prices of everything).
 

Kurt

Junior Member
It's an old truth that ships are the cheapest way to move objects around (that's why we still have so many ships today). Whoever doesn't have harbours for ships to do the job must pay about 20-25 times more per transport mileage. It isn't impossible to get one or another kind of resource into China, but without SLoC access China, like every other nation on earth, would be have to pay much more for a rather limited quantity.
 

delft

Brigadier
So who is going to attack China? And why? And how secure will other countries feel, if they were to allow the aggressor to win?
 
Top