I never supported the violent protesters in HK. I was trying to digest what was in their minds. How about you stick to the topic of Taiwan. There is another thread for HK. Also, if you label everyone who you disagree with as terrorists, if just make sound extremely narrow-minded and unwilling to analyze your opponents' intentions. That's called hubris. I hope decision makers in Beijing do not share your hubris.
china/taiwan news
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
- Status
Taiwan has been "de facto" independent, but keep in mind that Taiwan NOT recognized by most members of the UN because the One China Principle pushed by Beijing is accepted by most countries. Even the U.S. and most EU countries still pay lip service to the One China Principle, since this principle is what countries need to accept in order to establish diplomatic ties and trade with the PRC. However, the trick is that the U.S. also has something called the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which allows Washington to maintain unofficial diplomatic and military ties with Taipei despite official switch diplomatic recognition to the PRC in 1979. Thanks to Taiwan's decades of successfully lobbying, the TRA also requires Washington to sell weapons to Taiwan.
Just so there's no misunderstanding about Taiwan being a country.
Tsai taking her oath of office in front of the founding father of modern China!
People like our friend with the same name as that traitor joshua in Hong Kong just, either don't get it or refuses to get it and buried their heads in the sand.
As for Beijing pushing the "one China policy". This show how ignorant they are. Who was pushing the one China policy for over twenty years? Give you one guess.
When the west only recognise one China, and that China wasn't the big old landmass in east Asia said it all. I hope this is not too hard for you.
Who's pushing their agenda then?
And as for the Taiwan relations act (TRA). How dare he even mention this as if the US is doing this with honour. The US, as native American would have said, is talking with fork tongue. After agreeing not to supply Taiwan in order to get China onside. They then come up with the TRA.
We all know what the geopolitical picture is apart from them, the traitors. people really ought to brush up with their history before coming out here to make a fool of themselves.
Tsai taking her oath of office in front of the founding father of modern China!
People like our friend with the same name as that traitor joshua in Hong Kong just, either don't get it or refuses to get it and buried their heads in the sand.
As for Beijing pushing the "one China policy". This show how ignorant they are. Who was pushing the one China policy for over twenty years? Give you one guess.
When the west only recognise one China, and that China wasn't the big old landmass in east Asia said it all. I hope this is not too hard for you.
Who's pushing their agenda then?
And as for the Taiwan relations act (TRA). How dare he even mention this as if the US is doing this with honour. The US, as native American would have said, is talking with fork tongue. After agreeing not to supply Taiwan in order to get China onside. They then come up with the TRA.
We all know what the geopolitical picture is apart from them, the traitors. people really ought to brush up with their history before coming out here to make a fool of themselves.
Last edited:
Nuclear attack submarines are ill suited for combat in the shallow waters close to the Chinese coastline and in the Taiwan straits. They would be easily hunted down. The Virginias would only be an issue if China pushed past the first island chain into deeper seas. But to conquer Taiwan that is not necessary. If the US retaliated by using fighter aircraft from either Guam or Okinawa, both those places could simply be obliterated with Chinese nuclear weapons like the DF-26. Then any airborne F-22 or F-35s would be like fish out of the water. If the US then insisted and attacked the Chinese mainland, the continental US itself would be obliterated in return with strategic nuclear weapons like the DF-41. I doubt the US would risk that for Taiwan or even Guam or Okinawa. For much the same reason they stayed put after stirring up the hornets nest in Georgia and Ukraine. It is one thing to make a cheap psyops campaign and prop up color revolution to make others fight for you, but quite another to mess with one of the major UN Security Council members directly.
For some reason people think we are back in fantasy WW2 or whatever. What a lot of people forget is the vast majority of Japanese soldiers died fighting in China. Just the Soviet invasion of Manchuria alone caused more Japanese soldier losses than the entire US Pacific campaign. Yes the US Pacific campaign was impressive from a logistics standpoint and in terms of naval warfare but in terms of really winning the war? Overrated IMHO.
Last edited:
Thanks for your reply. However, doesn't China have no first use policy with regards to nukes?
That's the thing with policy. It can change. The Soviets also had no first use policy but Putin's Russia reserves itself the right to use nuclear weapons in case of even conventional or terror attacks in Russian territory. The recently passed Russian Constitution makes it unlawful to cede one inch of Russia territory. I doubt the Chinese government would simply fight a conventional war if either the US or worse a coalition came against them. For the Chinese, Taiwan is also Chinese territory. All it takes is a Taiwanese proclamation of independence, which in Chinese terms, would be secession and I suspect the same would happen to Taiwan. If you think the US will go into a full WW3 because of Taiwan, I doubt it. But the Chinese would.
Last edited:
Skywatcher
Captain
While, if he is Dutch, then he's not a very good Dutchman (protip, the Spanish bestowed the sobriquet "Formosa")
plawolf
Lieutenant General
I see you have completely disregard my warning about taking Hollywood war porn seriously.
SK would not allow the US to use their bases to attack mainland China directly as doing so has a huge risk of re-starting the Korean War. Their bases are poorly positioned in any case.
That just leaves Okinawa and Guam. Guam is 4,750km from China, its 2,750km from Taiwan, but that’s still comfortably outside the combat radius of F22s and F35s. That means tankers and tired pilots, which naturally limits sortie rates.
Okinawa is a lot closer, but that also makes it a lot more dangerous as they will be in range of a hell of a lot of Chinese weapons. Stealth fighters still need to land, and on the ground they blow up just like anything else.
The US is massively constrained by the number of available bases in terms of how many land based fighters it could deploy. With Chinese missile technology, it also faces the dilemma that anything it forward deploys will be at massive risk of being annihilated in the opening stages of war, and America does not have Raptors to waste like that.
The only way it can cause even a fair amount of damage to Chinese invasion forces is if it waited for the invasion to begin before launching a Pearl Harbour like surprise attack. If it made its hostile intentions clear before then, its forward deployed forces would be long destroyed before Chinese invasion forces were on their way to Taiwan. But even then it will have to fight through the bulk of the PLAAF and PLAN to get to the invasion forces, and even if it does manage that, the few survivors would have no bases to return to by the time the got back, so the more the US forward deploys, the more forces it will loose.
Same deal with Virginias and Seawolfs.
Hunting for them in the open waters of the Pacific is one thing, but if they enter the natural choke point of the Taiwan straits to try to get to the invasion fleet, they will box themselves into a narrow stretch of water, with all new PLAN warships having very comprehensive ASW capabilities as well as large numbers of new Chinese MPA aircraft available, not to mention China’s own massive fleet of SSKs waiting at choke points, that’s as much a suicide mission as one can have in modern warfare. At best they get a few torpedoes off before they are destroyed, but more likely they get ambushed by lurking Yuans and Songs before they can even get within firing range.
The US military machine, like all militaries, work well as a whole. There are no magical sliver bullets, not even stealth figures or SSNs. If the US is foolish enough to throw their prized spear tip assets like those at China piecemeal and without the necessary support, they will at best achieve limited results before being obliterated. But most likely they will be totally ineffective and lost for little effect. Either way, to throw US forward deployed, defensive oriented forces and assets against the entirety of the Chinese military machine is just throwing them away. Just like covid19, there is no magical protection from real world realities just because of the colour of your skin or passport.
It's complicated since China considers Taiwan Chinese territory. If foreign troops occupy Chinese territory China can use nukes, technically speaking. Whether they do so is up for debate.
Firstly, I agree with Josh Luo's point that US is willing to take heavy casualty interfering Taiwan militarily. since it is never about Taiwan, it is about the best position US has in order to contain China. If Taiwan is taken by China, west pacific become indefensible, Japan's throat is at China's hand, ASEAN country will also tremble. US will have to setup a secondary line of defense in India Ocean and Hawaii.
Secondly, no, there will be most likely no nuclear weapon involved, China will stick to its NFU in the foreseeable future, most important reason being the nuclear balance is so unfavourable to China.
Unless US first use their tactical nuclear weapon, then China may retaliate with similar measure, but i highly doubt anyone will escalate to strategic level.
Thirdly, Okinawa will be obliterated very soon once hostility started, since it is within the range of PLARF SRBMs and China has plenty of them. Guam is another matter, since the number of weapon (that can reach Guam and penetrate air defense) are still limited, DF26, according to recent DoD report, is about 200, i think it is far from enough.
Guam for the US on the other hand, will not be where they operate their main offensive tactical aircraft force, but rather than strategic bombers.
Fourthly, the real question is the airbases in southern Japan, whether PLA has the capability to suppress those will to a large extent decide the outcome of the war. That is obviously up for debate.
Secondly, no, there will be most likely no nuclear weapon involved, China will stick to its NFU in the foreseeable future, most important reason being the nuclear balance is so unfavourable to China.
Unless US first use their tactical nuclear weapon, then China may retaliate with similar measure, but i highly doubt anyone will escalate to strategic level.
Thirdly, Okinawa will be obliterated very soon once hostility started, since it is within the range of PLARF SRBMs and China has plenty of them. Guam is another matter, since the number of weapon (that can reach Guam and penetrate air defense) are still limited, DF26, according to recent DoD report, is about 200, i think it is far from enough.
Guam for the US on the other hand, will not be where they operate their main offensive tactical aircraft force, but rather than strategic bombers.
Fourthly, the real question is the airbases in southern Japan, whether PLA has the capability to suppress those will to a large extent decide the outcome of the war. That is obviously up for debate.
- Status