PLA Strategy in a Taiwan Contingency

Heresy said:

Do you deny that there is a non-zero percentage probability that the Americans would decide to throw the dice with nuclear, biological and chemical weapons if they sense they are in a potential lose-it or use-it scenario? Do you not think that the Chinese should be prepared for this?

It's not the Chinese that are interested in wiping out the Anglos; rather it's quite clear that the Anglos are saying that they can not co-exist peacefully with an ascendant, or even dominant China. To that I (and I hope Zhongnanhai) says, "Very well. So be it."

Click to expand...

CSIS has repeatedly used tactical nuclear weapons in war games. Whether they are advertising for ammunition suppliers or really feel the need, it will lay the psychological foundation for real-life behavior.

Puss in Boots said:

A nuclear arsenal that ensures mutual destruction is sufficient; having more is meaningless and would waste excessive resources on nuclear weapon maintenance. Russia currently spends over half of its military budget on nuclear weapon maintenance, contributing to its slow military development.
Thus, after ensuring the ability to achieve mutual destruction, the focus should be on building a comprehensive ballistic missile defense system. This will ensure your invincibility.

Click to expand...

Complete Destruction of US and all its allies will likely require 5k plus warheads. So, China has long way to go before achieving that. Destroying one full city the size of new york will require atleast ten 500KT warheads. US has 346 cities with 100k population and most of these cities are much more spread out than other countries. It will take alot of warheads.

Even if most cities are destroyed, you still need devote warheads on military bases, missile silos, factories and so on. So, overall count of warheads needed to achieve full destruction is many thousands.

So, no, China with its current warhead and launch vehicle numbers, does not have the ability to ensure "Mutual Destruction". What they have is the ability to inflict severe/"unacceptable" damage on US.

Its because of this reason China is expanding its arsenal. I don't think China will stop until they get atleast 2-3 thousand warheads and even get to 5000 just to ensure parity with US and Russia.

tamsen_ikard said:

US has 346 cities with 100k population and most of these cities are much more spread out than other countries. It will take alot of warheads.

Click to expand...

Make sure the destruction is not the carpet bombing you imagine. China is not a demon that wants to kill everyone!

FairAndUnbiased said:

If everyone will be nuked back to the middle ages, just remember what China looked like in 600-1400 vs North America or Northern Europe.

North America is quite resource poor for things that can be extracted without industrial technology. Great Plains aquifers require motorized pumps. Most of their minerals require deep mining. Cold winters constrict the growing season and require huge effort in keeping warm. Much of the US has a climate like Mongolia.

China in contrast was always one of the richest countries in the world pre-industry. The soil and the weather naturally grows vast forests and fields and people only need light clothing. In the bronze age, there were even elephants in China up to the Yellow River, that's how rich it was.

Click to expand...

If that happens the new Zheng He and his superior better do it right this time.

Google translated

The Ministry of National Security released the identity information of three "Taiwanese soldiers" who spread the separatist fallacy of "Taiwan independence"

Click to expand...

remember how during China EU trade talks, the Europeans demanded rare earths and arrogantly sanctioned China? Doubtless they were doing it on behalf of the pentagon to shunt rare earths to America.

Puss in Boots said:

Do you know under what circumstances a nuclear war would break out?
The answer is that a nuclear war would only break out if one is assured of protection from a nuclear attack. Therefore, the "Golden Dome Project" was created for this very reason.
Trump is trying to convey to Americans the idea that they are immune to the threat of nuclear war, a belief that will lead some warmongers to take risky actions, using this radical approach to pressure China. China simply displayed a large number of hypersonic missiles and ballistic missiles with global reach to easily shatter Trump's illusions.
When facing death, many things can be given up. Power, status, money, and wealth are fleeting. Living a decent life is what most people choose.

Click to expand...

In virtually every major conflict North America was never touched and its civilian population especially its rich/powerful elites ,but the now real possibility of losing everything and actually suffering boggles their minds(even during the USA/SU cold war didn't have this aspect of evident economic/social decline as now) and this stark reality may just induce some common sense into the westoids not to accept defeat but to a accept a fairer ,multipolar world with peaceable,acceptable,mutually beneficial coexistence for all.Can it be that hard?

Puss in Boots said:

A nuclear arsenal that ensures mutual destruction is sufficient; having more is meaningless and would waste excessive resources on nuclear weapon maintenance. Russia currently spends over half of its military budget on nuclear weapon maintenance, contributing to its slow military development.
Thus, after ensuring the ability to achieve mutual destruction, the focus should be on building a comprehensive ballistic missile defense system. This will ensure your invincibility.

Click to expand...

I believe this topic should consider what mutual assured destruction tactics truly entail. Because the actual number of nuclear warheads required to literally annihilate a nation far exceeds most people's imagination. If we're merely discussing how to win a nuclear war, it becomes extremely difficult to determine precisely how many warheads would guarantee victory. We'd likely have to factor in the enemy's nuclear arsenal and delivery systems. At least for now, the number of warheads is woefully inadequate, especially considering China's significant geostrategic disadvantages. U.S. SSBNs can approach launch positions and carry a full complement of 14 Trident D5 warheads. In contrast, China's JL-3 missile, while potentially comparable in performance, can only deliver a single warhead against U.S. silo targets tens of thousands of kilometers away. This disparity compels China to maintain a larger nuclear arsenal.

I doubt the JL-3 is still single warhead.

tamsen_ikard said:

Complete Destruction of US and all its allies will likely require 5k plus warheads. So, China has long way to go before achieving that. Destroying one full city the size of new york will require atleast ten 500KT warheads. US has 346 cities with 100k population and most of these cities are much more spread out than other countries. It will take alot of warheads.

Click to expand...

China probably only needs enough for the US and their non-European allies. Once the threshold is reached, the US will most likely launch against Russia. The Americans are not going to entertain the idea of Russia emerging out of a post nuclear war as a potential great power. Triggering the Russians to retaliate on NATO.