Lessons for China to learn from Ukraine conflict for Taiwan scenario

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lime

Junior Member
Registered Member
I never think the US will involve in the unifying war. Taiwan is China‘s core interest but not the US's.
It is very ridiculous for the US to lose its hegemony due to an island which is thousand miles away from its homeland.
 

vincent

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
I never think the US will involve in the unifying war. Taiwan is China‘s core interest but not the US's.
It is very ridiculous for the US to lose its hegemony due to an island which is thousand miles away from its homeland.
US has sticked its reputation on defending Taiwan. Not doing it means it will lose its credibility as a Hegemon.
 

Biscuits

Major
Registered Member
why is the US so scared not to even touch an inch of Russian soil despite Russia's performance in this current war but will go apeshit on China when AR happens? What is the difference between the two conflicts that can warrant such drastically different responses?
It just seems strange that US won't even ramp up production to hand Russia a decisive defeat but will go total-war over a country that has a much larger economy and production potential compared to Russia.

One explanation i can think of is US internal politics. Namely, a strong contingent of Republicans are still somewhat warm to Russia and would prefer not escalating the war. Recent Republican pollings showed that nearly 50% of Republicans oppose the current Ukrainian intervention, as mild as it is, and want to end aid to Ukraine. As long as this faction is embedded into US politics, there will be an opposition voice over further escalation.

However, there is no such lobby for China. As a result, unchecked escalation leading to WW3 is a very likely possibility and should be kept in mind at all times. Even Chinese Americans are very divided and are unlikely to convince the USG of any position.

Therefore, if China attempts AR, it should prepare for the worst.
The stakes are different, US could afford to lose Ukraine, but if they start an invasion of China, they need to get some result or they will immediately have their back broken.

Imagine if Putin started the SMO but Ukraine immediately destroyed every major Russian base within air range of Ukraine, destroyed the logistics depots required to send out the Russian army, and then wiped out the rebels in the Donbass. That would more likely than not be the end of Russia, perhaps not as a polity but as a relevant polity.

However US only really has the capacity to hit Taiwan and islands in the SCS. Every other Chinese area has too high strategic depth and is too well defended.

Even true coastal cities like Liaoning have comparable distance to them from US bases as Lvov has compared to Russian bases. USAF has less bombers than RuAF, although some are of higher quality. But China has overwhelmingly better air defense and air force compared to Ukraine.

Russians can also choose many different bases to hit Ukraine from, but US faces a signficant bottleneck because China will bomb their bases and after awhile may start strategic bombing of the countries hosting the bases. While countries like Japan may have an air defense on a similar level to Ukraine (meaning China would need to be more cautious and use cruise/ballistic missiles + drones rather than glide bombs), countries like Philippines have no major AD to speak of.

Besides attacking Taiwan which isn't covered by any tight AD at the start of conflict, any US bomber force is liable to lose more US pilots than whatever facilities they could hit in return.
 
Last edited:

fatzergling

New Member
Registered Member
US has sticked its reputation on defending Taiwan. Not doing it means it will lose its credibility as a Hegemon.
There are no domestic voices opposing a US intervention. Once it begins, everyone will clamor for blood.

TBH, it's not in US's best interests to go all in. The risk of losing, and the humiliations that will accompany it, would collapse US's superpower status. Instead the US could use a Taiwan AR as an excuse to bind SK and Japan to US interests for the next 100 years, similar to how US used Ukraine as an excuse to chain the EU. SK and Japan combined make up ~6T GDP, a non-insignificant number.

But due to various reasons, US will go all in. The question is how China should be prepared, both for a win and a loss.
 

Serb

Junior Member
Registered Member
It just seems strange that US won't even ramp up production to hand Russia a decisive defeat


The US can't ramp up their production overnight, because nowadays they are industrially weak, service and consumption based country and economy. The 80% of their GDP is consumption. Their industry is 20% of their GDP, but for example, China's is 40%. They are not manufacturing and export oriented nation. They don't have nearly enough millitary capacity as in the Cold War.

That is showing their whole economic model, of recent decades, for "growth", which is printing money out of thin air, debt creation, importing, and then reselling mostly Chinese goods to their citizens im Walmarts, Home Depots, etc. That's what "services" are to them.

Other than that, they have the most bullshit positions on the planet, the most lawyers per capita, bankers per capita, hedge fund managers, instagram influencers, youtubers, etc... Nothing of real value that can actually produce you something once a war-time economy starts. Even those 20% that is counted as industry is mostly general assembly relying on mostly Chinese imported parts. Meaning, they are industrial weakling.

It is nothing strange that the Russia, which has the nominal GDP size of Italy, 30 times smaller GDP than NATO, is out producing and embarrassing them so easily. Russia already entered full wartime production mode, now producing 7 times more millitary equipment, than before, where is the West?

They already did practically empty all of their and their vassals' millitary stockpiles of some specific types of weapons to give to Ukraine. First they stole Soviet origin millitary equipment from their Eastern European vassals to give to Ukraine, then they emptied Western European vassal stockpiles, but nothing seems to work. Because Russia is simply producing more.

They basically DO already keep Ukrainians afloat. The original Ukrainian millitary was already destroyed by Russia in those first few months of war. They are now fighitng against Western equipment's, instructors, ISR capabilities, and in many cases directly Western soldiers, especially the Poles.

Ukrainian economy is already destroyed, the US is giving billions of dollars each week if we divided the total amount given recently and the number of weeks. Ukraine would have folded 10 times until now if not the West. Ukrainian original economy and millitary are already destroyed, this is now Western stuff.

So, what I'm trying to say, it's not like the US did pull any punches against Russia, not even close. For example stealing Russian foreign reserves was such a crazy and self-destructive move that didn't even happen during Cold War.

It is just that you think that the US could provide them more weapons, when I say that they can't. The only thing the US could do is to provide more dangerous types of weapon systems, like fighter jets and longer range precise missiles, but guess what, they are already doing it!

As to why the US doesn't send it's own forces directly against Russian forces in Ukraine, like they prepare to send against Chinese for Taiwan, it's because Ukraine is objectively strategically irrelevant shithole which was the poorest country in Europe per capita even before the war, while Taiwan is global overlord of high end chips, the most advanced and precious technology that currently exists.

Why should they send their forces for Ukraine then? Also, even if Russia gets Ukraine, they are still stuck encompassed by NATO everywhere they turn, meanwhile if China gets Taiwan, it is free to roam Pacific. Not to mention China is a real superpower peer rival, meanwhile Russia is nowhere near that status as a peer existential threat like that. That's why they will go directly after China and not directly after Russia. Because Ukrainians are irrelevant fascist pawns while Taiwan is the real deal and the most significant territory in the world for this century.
 
Last edited:

FriedButter

Major
Registered Member
Perhaps you're right, but aren't theshipyards in China vulnerable? Take them and related industries out and they won't be able to fix or replace damaged and sunk naval units let alone cargo ships.

Just my IMO but I don’t think the shipyards itself (not the ships) will be in a priority target for the West. Like the other guy mentioned that China has a strong air defence network which leads back to the risk to reward calculation. Is it worth lobbing a finite quantity of missiles against a strong air defence network to blow up some shipyard cranes and buildings. It’s more likely they will try hitting the ships instead due to military industrial limitations.
 

B.I.B.

Captain
This isn't a matter of them being constrained, but whether they have the ability to even do it, because the air defense network of PLA is far greater and stronger than that of Ukraine and the ability to hitback at US bases and platforms is also many, many times greater.
Hmmm, why are we comparing China's air defense capability with that of Ukraine and not Russia
That’s too extreme. There is no need to risk MAD.
China can build enough cheap but effective munitions (i.e. hundreds of thousands of piston-based cruise missiles) to wipe out all American bases and Japanese/Korean airports on the First Island Chain, maybe bomb Hawaii and Guam as well.

Without refueling aircrafts from airfields located on the First Island Chain, American strategic bombers will struggle to get in range of China to fire off cruise missiles.

I'm with Manqiangrexue on this. China could communicate through back door channels that she is prepared to fire on the US mainland with Hypersonic weapons if the U.S. fires on the Chinese mainland.
Of more immediate concern, what are the chances of the US trying something if they think the KMT are going to win next years elections?
 
Last edited:

Michaelsinodef

Senior Member
Registered Member
Hmmm, why are we comparing China's air defense capability with that of Ukraine and not Russia

I'm comparing to Ukraine because Russia has had a very hard time to penetrate and attack the Ukrainian air and missile defenses.

And I'm saying that the US would end up having a far harder time attacking China With missiles and bombs, compared to what Russia experienced in like the first yearish.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top