PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

PLAwatcher12 said:

What makes you say there is absolutely zero chance the US can win in a war over Taiwan? What makes you so confident in that and you are aware the US has hundreds of bases near China with 120 in Japan and 9 in the Philippines, those are imporant bases,

Click to expand...

The fact that Taiwan is 100 miles off the coast of China and the existence of the PLAAF and PLAN as well as myriad of hypersonic and ballistic anti-ship missile systems. Is the chance of victory 100%? No of course not, but it's probably somewhere between 95%-99%.

Also, I am very aware of what major U.S. positions are around China. It's not hundreds of bases, because for the purpose of this conflict, only airbases and naval bases are important. Nobody cares about the small FOBs and various other facilities that count as "bases".

PLAwatcher12 said:

and yes I would say it would be possible for China to beat the US and keep influence in Cuba if China had hundreds of bases near the US.

This is exactly why I say people here seem to be underestimating the US by saying there is zero possibility the US could win in a war over Taiwan

Click to expand...

Even IF China had an airbase in Cuba and naval port, it wouldn't matter. STOP LOOKING AT NUMBERS and start looking at logistics. HOW will those bases be resupplied and reinforced? How vulnerable are they to attack? Are they able to provide enough protection to the assets they contain to allow them to sortie and participate in meaningful offensive actions?

Heresy said:

The fact that Taiwan is 100 miles off the coast of China and the existence of the PLAAF and PLAN as well as myriad of hypersonic and ballistic anti-ship missile systems. Is the chance of victory 100%? No of course not, but it's probably somewhere between 95%-99%.

Also, I am very aware of what major U.S. positions are around China. It's not hundreds of bases, because for the purpose of this conflict, only airbases and naval bases are important. Nobody cares about the small FOBs and various other facilities that count as "bases".



Even IF China had an airbase in Cuba and naval port, it wouldn't matter. STOP LOOKING AT NUMBERS and start looking at logistics. HOW will those bases be resupplied and reinforced? How vulnerable are they to attack? Are they able to provide enough protection to the assets they contain to allow them to sortie and participate in meaningful offensive actions?

Click to expand...

You are aware the US has a navy and airforce too and missiles don’t win wars also the US has a great logistics network that’s how they are able to have bases all across the world if they didn’t they wouldn’t have bases all across the world and sure Taiwan is a 100 miles from Taiwan but US bases aren’t super far way ether also you are aware US bases are well defended they don’t have zero defense around it. And they are reinforced. Saying Chinas chance of winning is 95-99% is massively underestimating the US ability

PLAwatcher12 said:

You are aware the US has a navy and airforce too and missiles don’t win wars

Click to expand...

Yes the U.S. has a navy and an air force. How much are they able to deploy to support Taiwan? For the assets deployed, what is their time on station? Do you know? And if you don't how can you say with confidence that the U.S. is able to deploy enough force quickly enough to meaningfully affect the Taiwan outcome?

And while missiles by themselves don't win wars, in this case, they can absolutely keep the U.S. from meaningfully intervening. Not to mention, it wouldn't be "missiles" vs the 7th Fleet and elements of the US Airforce. It would be the PLAN, the PLAAF, plus a crap ton of missiles against the 7th Fleet and elements of the U.S. Airforce.

PLAwatcher12 said:

also the US has a great logistics network that’s how they are able to have bases all across the world if they didn’t they wouldn’t have bases all across the world

Click to expand...

Logistics capable of supplying bases in peacetime is not the same thing as logistics capable of supplying those same base when they are under fire form a peer military less than 1000km away from you.

PLAwatcher12 said:

and sure Taiwan is a 100 miles from Taiwan but US bases aren’t super far way ether

Click to expand...

...and do you know how far U.S. bases are away from it? I'm not doing your research for you. You need to figure this out. The closest base is Okinawa. Everything else is much farther.

PLAwatcher12 said:

also you are aware US bases are well defended they don’t have zero defense around it. And they are reinforced.

Click to expand...

Do you seriously believe that any American base in the Pacific within missile range of China has the magazine depth to defend against a concentrated Chinese missile strike?

PLAwatcher12 said:

Saying Chinas chance of winning is 95-99% is massively underestimating the US ability

Click to expand...

It really isn't. I think it's been demonstrated thus far that you have no conception of logistics, combat readiness of platforms, magazine depths of offensive and defensive missiles, or any of the hundreds of other details that basically make it extremely difficult to almost impossible for the U.S. military to win against China in a pure Taiwan scenario. And it's not just me making things up out of my ass. The DoD basically agrees that it can not really defend Taiwan meaningfully from a concentrated attack from the Mainland.

I think it's pretty obvious at this point that you don't have the intellectual capacity to successfully think the question through of how a Sino-American conflict over Taiwan will play out. All you have are vibes and vague feelings based on information that is probably a decade or more old at this point. You have demonstrated that are completely unserious and basically not credible when it comes to your opinions on this matter. Your username of PLAwatcher...is aspirational at best, and insulting to the actual PLA-Watchers on this forum.

Instead of leveraging the fact that you are on a forum full of PLA watchers and using the knowledge on this forum to bolster your own, you choose to sprout garbage opinions with zero resemblance to the situation on the ground (or rather, on the sea and in the air) today. That tells me a lot about your personality. And so long as you demonstrate an inability to seriously and critically reflect on the views that you hold and to modify them in the presence of new information, you are not going to have a good time in life. You will certainly not have a good time in college. My unsolicited advice to you? Listen and read more. Post less.

PLAwatcher12 said:

You are aware the US has a navy and airforce too and missiles don’t win wars also the US has a great logistics network that’s how they are able to have bases all across the world if they didn’t they wouldn’t have bases all across the world and sure Taiwan is a 100 miles from Taiwan but US bases aren’t super far way ether also you are aware US bases are well defended they don’t have zero defense around it. And they are reinforced. Saying Chinas chance of winning is 95-99% is massively underestimating the US ability

Click to expand...

Counting weapons systems is how amatures analyze military affairs. By your logic, Japan absolutely had a chance to defeat the US in WW2 (at least 30-40% chance). In reality, the outcome was decided the instant Yamamoto set sail from Tokyo Bay en route to Pearl Harbor.

The US is a maritime empire. How does a maritime empire overcome the tyranny of distance to defeat the dominant continental power when it has only 0.4% the shipbuilding and 1/4th-1/3rd the industrial capacity of said dominant continental power? Especially when the dominant continental power has the benefit of interior lines and strategic depth.

Counting ships and planes is for amature armchair generals. Learn some real history and military strategy. That said, if war broke out today, there is a small yet considerable chance that the US could prevent the PLA from successfully invading Taiwan for some period of time (up to 1-2 years maximum). There are too many unknowns to predict the outcome of the initial stages of conflict with a high degree of confidence. That said, do you think the PLA will just give up if its initially unable to land troops on Taiwan? No, the PLA will either continue fighting until it has built up to a critical mass to just steamroll over any opposition: and thats assuming Taiwan continues to fight on after 6-24 months of naval blockade.

IJN initially did great during the first year of the Pacific War and the Wehrmact did as well during the first 2 years in Russia. But ultimately, both were streamrolled and crushed to atoms.

PLAwatcher12 said:

You are aware the US has a navy and airforce too and missiles don’t win wars also the US has a great logistics network that’s how they are able to have bases all across the world if they didn’t they wouldn’t have bases all across the world and sure Taiwan is a 100 miles from Taiwan but US bases aren’t super far way ether also you are aware US bases are well defended they don’t have zero defense around it. And they are reinforced. Saying Chinas chance of winning is 95-99% is massively underestimating the US ability

Click to expand...

Do an analysis on Okinawa.

I reckon there are at least 20 Chinese Air Force bases with aircraft within range.
Plus the initial and ongoing missile strikes. Okinawa's air defences would highly likely be overwhelmed.
US bases aren't well defended or reinforced. There's no hardened aircraft shelters or mountain airbases like we see in mainland China.

So how long will Okinawa last?

Analysis of the U.S. military's equipment procurement in 2025, especially in terms of air defense and ammunition. Despite rising military spending, the number of purchases of critical ammunition is declining. For example, the number of Patriot missile purchases has been decreasing year by year, and development funding is expected to continue to support the Pacific deterrence program in 2025. In addition, the number of purchases of guided bombs such as Jetdam has also dropped significantly. Although the US military plans to produce a certain amount of ammunition, most of it has been consumed by Ukraine and Israel. The production of long-range standoff strike weapons such as solutions is also much lower than that of China and Russia, which means that the U.S. military may be insufficient in long-range strike capabilities. At the same time, the video also details the purchase quantity and cost of a variety of missiles, including the Sidewinder 9X, AM120, Javelin, Rasmus, Trident, Standard Six, A116 and New Tomahawk. Among them, the purchase price of the new Tomahawk has soared from 68 and 34 in 2023 to 22 in 2025, and the unit price has soared to a shocking $35 million.

The purchase price of the M1A2 bicycle was $9 million 10 years ago, and it quadrupled eight years later
The purchase volume of M10 Booker tanks is 33 units, the unit price is 500 million, and the production cost is high, and the specific reason is unknown
Patriot ammunition purchases for the entire 2023-2024 period are zero
Of the U.S. military's equipment procurement expenses in 2025, $167.5 billion will be used for procurement, accounting for about 20% of the total military spending, far lower than that of China and Russia

Analysis extracted from the connection above
In fact, I do not see any preparation or intention of the United States to launch a war in the Taiwan Strait at all

2027 is just a delusion of Americans, who think that China's rise is short-lived and the decline in the United States is temporary, so China can't wait to attack when Americans think the United States is weakest.
In fact, China's development has been on the rise for the foreseeable future, while the rate of industrial loss in the United States is accelerating. When the United States began spending tens of billions of dollars to build submarines instead of aircraft carriers, his end in the Western Pacific was already doomed.

wangcard said:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Analysis extracted from the connection above
In fact, I do not see any preparation or intention of the United States to launch a war in the Taiwan Strait at all

Click to expand...

Agreed. Alternatively, if the US is gearing up for war, they're doing it the dumbest way possible. To fight a modern war, one must have a vast stockpile of advanced munitions. Without one, entering into war against a modern opponent is suicide. The US doesn't have such a stockpile, and has no way of ramping up production in the short term to create one, and it's the main reason why I'd say that the US has no chance in a war in the Western Pacific.