PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

solarz

Brigadier
That's assuming that 300 nukes (or whatever China has, which on the most generous estimates is a small fraction of what America has) survive the first strike, have zero malfunctions, and all get through the America missile defenses. I'm not familiar with how damaging the radiation from nuclear weapons is, but I'm not comfortable assuming a few tons of fission products dispersed over a continent is enough to make it a "living hell." If you have a reliable study about that, I'd like to read it.

The fallacy here is that you think you need US/Russia amounts of nukes to ensure MAD. That is simply not true. US and Russia have more than enough nuclear weapons to destroy the whole planet. Their stockpile is an expensive legacy of the Cold War arms race, and it's not a mistake China need or should repeat.
 

ZeEa5KPul

Colonel
Registered Member
The fallacy here is that you think you need US/Russia amounts of nukes to ensure MAD.
Does China have sufficient nuclear weapons to reliably kill every single American in every scenario where it would need to? That's the only pertinent question here.
Their stockpile is an expensive legacy of the Cold War arms race, and it's not a mistake China need or should repeat.
This poverty mentality is by far the greatest threat China faces. No need to raise defense spending, remember the USSR. No need to expand the nuclear arsenal, remember the USSR. No, forget the USSR.

It doesn't matter whether America has thousands of nuclear warheads because it was the greatest idea ever or a horrendous Cold War blunder, the point is they have them. China must also have them or it will remain in an inferior position.
 

zhangjim

Junior Member
Registered Member
In every country, the politicians/ruling class are a separate caste of some sorts that are not completely in touch with the people. It's all relative; American politicians don't know how much it takes to ride the subway and the president thinks you need ID to buy food at the supermarket.
It may be reasonable in other countries, but it is definitely a bad thing for a "people's regime".There are too many guys floating in the sky trying to teach us how to do things.
In 2016,files measured in TB were compromised.It involves the tax evasion secrets of officials and celebrities in various countries, as well as their complex relations.
If you use Baidu search“巴拿马档案”, you will find that this is a severely restricted vocabulary.
If this document is true, then our chairman is not exempt from nepotistic corruption.
Well, this is a structure that results from rewarding exceptional talent/ability and contribution. It is inevitable that we move in this direction in order to cultivate innovation and growth. No country in the world can be cutting edge while favoring mediocrity, inflating the blue collar share of the pie at the expense of those who innovate and create. These are force multipliers while workers are linear contributors. Force multipliers must be favored in order to cultivate and attract them because a society that is too heavy on linear workers moves too slowly to be competitive. That is why it's more noble to be an entepreneur/innovator than it is to be a worker; it is the same all over the world.

Your view needs to evolve to fit the new times. They are old-school, the attitude that you have is what prevailed in China when China was just a large North Korea. To open a business was evil greed and that caused China to stagnate for decades. Now, to be a modern competitor, China has evolved how it thinks and how its society is structured and rewarded.
The standard of living for everyone in China, most notably the poor (via the poverty eradication drive) has improved substantially and continues to do so. Having more people get rich is only a problem if they are getting rich by making others poor; China's rich are not strengthening due to wealth redistribution favoring them and robbing the working class but because everyone is getting richer, just that the rich are doing it faster. They are doing it in due to incredibily fast wealth generation instead that has no negative effect on the blue collar class.
You mean a decline in traditional old school communism? That had to happen because that system didn't work; China had to evolve it into China's modern system and that's not a decline. China's progress in economics, technology and military are all undeniably the fastest in the world and growth of hard power is what matters. As long as that is being delivered, my support of the CCP will be unwavering.
I don't want to comment too much on these parts.But I definitely don't expect the capitalists' conscience.This year's fertility rate is very bad. You can't really burn "labor resources" as fuel.
Maybe they can choose to move their factories abroad or introduce a group of cheaper immigrants.
 

escobar

Brigadier
All this useless turmol here and in CN is the result of PLA not having the massive conv military backed by a massive strategic nuke capability that will scared the shit out of pentagon General & Admirals. The kind of military capability that makes them shit in their pants just at the mention of fighting PLA. If this were the case, no one will care about Pelosi visit or if Biden himself want to go there with all his administration and the whole congress. But since it's not the case we have all these emotions level posts about what PLA should do or not.
 

manqiangrexue

Brigadier
It may be reasonable in other countries, but it is definitely a bad thing for a "people's regime".There are too many guys floating in the sky trying to teach us how to do things.
It's bad everywhere but it's comparative. As a politician, you live a lifestyle that separates you from what ordinary people do and the most pronounced effect is on mundane things that are typically taken care of for you so you can tend to other duties. That's natural. It's the degree that matters and like I said over and over again, it is comparative to other countries. You need to compare China's issues to those of other nations, not an imaginary perfect situation.
In 2016,files measured in TB were compromised.It involves the tax evasion secrets of officials and celebrities in various countries, as well as their complex relations.
If you use Baidu search“巴拿马档案”, you will find that this is a severely restricted vocabulary.
If this document is true, then our chairman is not exempt from nepotistic corruption.
Don't know what you are talking about. Either you have evidence or you don't; we don't imagine evidence and their consequences from some non-Chinese files.
I don't want to comment too much on these parts.But I definitely don't expect the capitalists' conscience.This year's fertility rate is very bad.
What the hell does the fertility rate have to do with the rest of the conversation? What does it have to do with your unfounded complaints?
You can't really burn "labor resources" as fuel.
Maybe they can choose to move their factories abroad or introduce a group of cheaper immigrants.
Machines replace people in the need for general and basic labor. The educated and innovative few can create machines that vastly reduce the need for cheap blue collar labor. That's why force multipliers are rewarded heavily over linear contributors.
 
Last edited:

mossen

Junior Member
Registered Member
At this point, it's probably smartest to let the Pelosi visit go through. China isn't yet strong enough to win against the US on parity. It's not about China taking Taiwan - that could have been achieved a decade ago already. It's about outlasting the US in a total war. The US has 20X the amount of nuclear weapons and it is almost entirely self-sufficient in energy and food. China is very vulnerable to energy imports and it will be years before the big Power of Siberia pipeline (the 2nd one) comes online from Russia.

Why is the US escalating now? Because they still have the upper hand against China even if that advantage is shrinking by the day. If they wait 10 years, they will either be at parity or even behind China. This is the last moment that they can escalate and still have decent chances of inflicting more damage on China than vice versa.

That's why it makes more sense for China to simply let the provocation happen and build strength in the meantime. Time is on its side. China needs to first be completely secure in both energy and chips supply. In 3-4 years, it should have its own DUV machines from SMEE and by then the big pipeline from Russia will be complete. Important to have a cool head.
 

9dashline

Senior Member
Registered Member
After reading all that has been discussed, the few things we could agree on is:

1) The longer China can defer any military conflict with the US, the better it is for China.

2) The earlier the US can force a military conflict with China, the better it is for the US.

What we do not agree on is whether China should respond with military force to the US provocation this time.

But if going by our concensus, why in the world would the US give China the luxury of preparing itself "for just a few more years"? Why not forcing a military confrontation now? Why would the US, knowing that its window of opportunity to put China down for good is closing down by the months, would just let it pass?

Not saying that China should absolutely react militarily now, but I don't think there is anything anyone can do if America decides that, that's it, let's do it now.
My point exactly, its not up to China how long it can drag out war.... US has decided August is it, it shall be now... and they have gone "ALL IN"
At this point, it's probably smartest to let the Pelosi visit go through. China isn't yet strong enough to win against the US on parity. It's not about China taking Taiwan - that could have been achieved a decade ago already. It's about outlasting the US in a total war. The US has 20X the amount of nuclear weapons and it is almost entirely self-sufficient in energy and food. China is very vulnerable to energy imports and it will be years before the big Power of Siberia pipeline (the 2nd one) comes online from Russia.

Why is the US escalating now? Because they still have the upper hand against China even if that advantage is shrinking by the day. If they wait 10 years, they will either be at parity or even behind China. This is the last moment that they can escalate and still have decent chances of inflicting more damage on China than vice versa.

That's why it makes more sense for China to simply let the provocation happen and build strength in the meantime. Time is on its side. China needs to first be completely secure in both energy and chips supply. In 3-4 years, it should have its own DUV machines from SMEE and by then the big pipeline from Russia will be complete. Important to have a cool head.
Right about first part wrong about second....

US escalating while it still retains military advantage is sound analysis but the mistake I see folks are making is assuming if only China merely turn the other cheek and eat humble pie again etc that it would not go to full scale war....

America is out of time, this is its one and last final chance, so in August its going ALL IN. Decision already made. Course locked in. Doesnt actually matter what China does or doesnt do
 

solarz

Brigadier
Does China have sufficient nuclear weapons to reliably kill every single American in every scenario where it would need to? That's the only pertinent question here.

This poverty mentality is by far the greatest threat China faces. No need to raise defense spending, remember the USSR. No need to expand the nuclear arsenal, remember the USSR. No, forget the USSR.

It doesn't matter whether America has thousands of nuclear warheads because it was the greatest idea ever or a horrendous Cold War blunder, the point is they have them. China must also have them or it will remain in an inferior position.

You contradict yourself.

If the goal is for China to have enough nuclear weapons to ensure the "Assured Destruction" part of MAD, then the number of nukes the US has is irrelevant. The only question we need to ask is whether China has enough nuclear deterrence to ensure MAD against the US.

To bring the conversation back to the point I was making, the US is not going to start a direct conflict with China because China has a sufficiently credible nuclear deterrence. China's nuclear deterrence, whatever you think the stockpile numbers are, has been strong enough to deter the Soviet Union during the height of Soviet-China hostilities, and it has only improved over the decades. Through out multiple Taiwan strait crises and SCS disputes, the US has demonstrated its reluctance to engage China in hostilities in no small part due to that nuclear deterrence.

Therefore, what you are trying to argue goes against proven history, and you need to provide the data and analysis to support your point. You cannot just claim that China's nuclear weapons can only destroy 3 or 4 American cities, that's an extraordinary claim and requires extraordinary evidence.
 

bobsagget

New Member
Registered Member
Public stereotypes can also exacerbate the crisis.
I went to quora and saw some topics about the 5th generation fighter,the content made me very disappointed. Most people still stubbornly believe that China's technology cannot be better than that of the United States,some people don't even admit that the j-20 is a qualified 5th generation fighter,it's just a replica of MiG 1.44.

In view of this prejudice, it is inevitable to underestimate China's military strength.Ordinary people may think that letting the aircraft carrier go there will scare us.The worst thing is that these people who lack professional knowledge have the right to vote,even if the U.S. military is aware of this danger, they are afraid that they will have to carry out this highly dangerous mission under the pressure of the public and politicians.

This bold behavior is based on the self-confidence that "China dare not".After all, after years of propaganda, the public will only think that they are dealing with a large North Korea.They will only think that once China dares to attack the US Army, the US Army can destroy the enemy like killing ants.

okay i can comment here . I went to a fairly high end university for political science and let me say americans even intellectuals are highly racist here. It is nearly impossible to have any discussion that does not devolve into cringy fu manchu type stereotypes. I have heard folks with phds reiterate that the chinese cannot be a creative people nor can they do what we do because insert x. I feel a lot like a certain Japanese admiral warning that attacking the sleeping giant is a bad idea that will seal our doom.
Does China have sufficient nuclear weapons to reliably kill every single American in every scenario where it would need to? That's the only pertinent question here.

This poverty mentality is by far the greatest threat China faces. No need to raise defense spending, remember the USSR. No need to expand the nuclear arsenal, remember the USSR. No, forget the USSR.

It doesn't matter whether America has thousands of nuclear warheads because it was the greatest idea ever or a horrendous Cold War blunder, the point is they have them. China must also have them or it will remain in an inferior position.
china will likely never have enough nukes to kill every american for the same reason america will never have rnough ready to launch to board wipe china . Population distribution . During the height of the cold war population loss from a complete exchange was only estimated to be 40-60 percent of participating countries populations. Most nuclear weapons are aimed at logistics centers military assets and other nuclear weapons. Scrubbing cities serves only a minimal value .
 

9dashline

Senior Member
Registered Member
okay i can comment here . I went to a fairly high end university for political science and let me say americans even intellectuals are highly racist here. It is nearly impossible to have any discussion that does not devolve into cringy fu manchu type stereotypes. I have heard folks with phds reiterate that the chinese cannot be a creative people nor can they do what we do because insert x. I feel a lot like a certain Japanese admiral warning that attacking the sleeping giant is a bad idea that will seal our doom.

china will likely never have enough nukes to kill every american for the same reason america will never have rnough ready to launch to board wipe china . Population distribution . During the height of the cold war population loss from a complete exchange was only estimated to be 40-60 percent of participating countries populations. Most nuclear weapons are aimed at logistics centers military assets and other nuclear weapons. Scrubbing cities serves only a minimal value .
Yup just check out the nukemap online and you will see the nuke power of destruction doesnt scale with increase in kiloton/megaton yield.... past a point it hits diminishing returns... and nuclear winter is more or less a myth... volcanos spew much more and life hasnt gone extinct yet
 
Top