Moderated taiwan invasion war game

[Manfred]

Are we so far off topic that we can't ever see Taiwan anymore?

Tell you what, I'll find that TO&E, have the game, and be back later to let you know what happend.

Cheers!

 

[tphuang]

I'm thinking it would take at least a week before the PRC would have worn down the ROCAF air defences enough to begin to work on the invasion defences. PRC simply doesn't have that firepower. It could be done over 2-3 weeks plus minimum.

And that assumes no US intervention and that the ROC Navy is not being used for what it is supposed to be used for...

But stating how I see it. Haven't got the time to participate in the discussion, so I am looking forward to see what surprises the "couple of days" scenarios will reveal.

Btw, read a rumour that when an earthquake recently hit Taiwan, the internet in mainland China lost connection to the outside world - is that true?

As I said before, ROCN surface fleet doesn't have close to enough assets to be able to defend against a mass strike by say a regiment of JH-7As. All of the current Chinese fighters can detect and fire their missiles outside the range of the naval SAMs and land based SAMs. And one thing I did not even bring into picture last time was the amount of anti-radiation drones (Harpies and domestic ones) + EW planes they have at disposal. Chinese believe they can keep the Taiwanese ground based radar + SAM completely offline for the first few hours of the war.

 

[ever4244]

Are we so far off topic that we can't ever see Taiwan anymore?

Tell you what, I'll find that TO&E, have the game, and be back later to let you know what happend.

Cheers!

I m sorry about it, but my suggestion is that Taiwan war might not be a traditional kind of well-contained high-tech intensive regional war, it maybe new-concept conflicts including economy , diplomatism and even some "ultra-regular strike" simultaneity burst out over the world and last a rather long period of time. and the battle nearby Taiwan will just be a sinfonia.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Completely self sustainment will be an illusion, but even under UN cooperated restriction, Iraq was still enabled to access to Russian or even EU weaponry ------and now this weapon is in the hands of Iraq rebellions. but how many country will follow US to give China a completely embargo without UN commision. Russia himselve would delight to see China give US a bloody nose.

Your kind of missing the point. The intent would not be stop the trasition of weapons technology between russia and PROC, or a few clandiestine shipments of this or that, but to cripple China's economy, which would be achieved verry easily without UN co operation. The loss of US demand alone would achieve this in a number of weaks.

How can you destroy a nation( who has nearly 1/10 of world s production power) s industry capability with out landing on it, many crucial factory and research center is in underground bunker, and maybe China s submarine is not sufficient enough to sink US carrier, but they are advanced enough to hide from US navy and launch attack on any US cargos which try to accross the embargo zone (noted that recently a Chinese old type submarine successfully steal into a carrier-group) . Of course that wont strangle US, but more than enough to make US economy a mass----which would likely to last for decades.

You wouldn't need to destroy China's industrial capacity unless your talking about a WW2 style conflict. We are talking about a regional conflict and the defence/invasion of Taiwan. How long do you think it would take to change that massive amount of production from consumer goods to complex war material? You would need to produce the capital equipment first. It took the US at least 18 months in WW2 and the transition was not as complex. Is that timeframe going to be decicive in a conflict over Taiwan? And how is all that production going to function without the resources to feed it? If we are talking about a world war type scenario, which is what you seem to be advocating, what do you think the largest economy on the planet would be doing? If you think the US has a powefull military now, just imagine what it would look like if 10 or 20% of GDP was sent on the military in stead of 4? And a chinese Sub did not "break into" a US CBG, it was waiting there and the CBG sailed over it, and they weren't on a combat footing. Why is it that as soon as US involvement is mentioned it becomes a fight to the death and its allways china who will continue the fight forever? This isn't reasonable. Why is it that PROC is the only nation on earth who will not act in their own interest just in order to spite someone? I keep hearing this from chinese posters but i'm yet to understand it. And to answer a question, a strategic nucular strike would destroy that industrial capacity prety quickley, since were talking about a fight to the death that is.

but if China wanted , any country with a modest research ability can acquire Nuclear weapon without directly evidence to prove our interfere

.

This is silly. The US could ensure that the seperatist movement in Xinjian had nuclear weapons too and the US couldn't be blamed for that either. But i forgot the PROC will do ANYTHING and endure ANYTHING just in order spite someone for their envolvement in a regional conflict.

Dont get the "west" as a whole into the scenery, and the irrational behaviours will not be the sameway like cold war. The doomsday will not happen , but be ready for a more chao s world than ever, the order US tries to established among the regions will be collapse if China choose "not to cooperate" ( there is always enough people hate US---amusingly most chinese quite fond of American on the contra, and what they lack is a decent shoulder-missile or a YJ cruise missile on the truck ,of course some -intellectualized-mine will be more convenient than those rough roadside-bomb they are using now)
Plus:I know you will think spread Nuclear-tech and all kinds of missle is unmoral, and I agree with you, but in the matter of life and death, the instinct commands.

Again the US could make china's life dificult too. This really doesent have all that much to do with the defence/invasion of taiwan.

Aye, it s quite joyful to have a common view with you.I think mainland can reunite taiwan peacefully given enough time . If comes to war, and if US just give Taiwan logistical and technical support , one or two week is more than enough. ------consider taiwan has many advanced weapon, but suffer a greatly geographic weakness---------for example, mainland long range rocket launcher can cover many taiwan s airport,and patriot3 will let taiwan bankrupt if she tries to intercept mainland ballistic missile. The island is long and parallel to mainland. the aircraft wont have time to take off before the first wave of rocket and ballistic missile attack .So even though taiwan s air force looks prowess in quality and quantity ,they are likely to die on the ground or sit in the bunker all day long. needless to say s-300pmu can reach taiwan, so taiwan s pilot will enter hostile zoon as soon as they take off.

I absoloutly dissagree with this statement. It seems to be a forgone conclusion in China that PLA and PLAN can walk into Taiwan whenever they want and the only thing standing in the way is the US, yet i'm yet to hear an rational and achievable plan to sucsessfully invade that adresses the massive problems involved. The only thing that has any promise is a sustained air campaign and balistic and cruse misslie bombardment. But even if it was sucsessfull, that doesnt replace boots on the ground, and it does rely on political submission by ROC.

And in the news,i heard a lot of digital special-forces who was suppose to steal into taiwan and locate target of importance for air-force and snipe enemy leaders destroy information center-------Taiwan s highly developed system is also very frangible
``````` Too much to say
All in all taiwan himself is no match with mainland , the key is US

I heard a rumor about orbital weapons, hypersonic strike aircraft and a secret Australian nuclear arsenall too. Sounds cool but not really that relevant. And this isnt a strugle between PROC & ROC, there is not going to be an invasion of the mainland by ROC forces, and on even terms ROC is no match for PROC. However, even though i keep hearing that from chinese posters, i still havent heard how they really plan to invade taiwan with the assets they have, or should i say a plan that sounds reasonable.

If US decided to interfere, that will depends on how soon he will gather enough strenghth of aid taiwan. if more than 2 week, taiwan will be already gone. I tought US prepared 3 month for first Iraq war, for how long he would take to prepare a war with China I cant estimate.

The USAF and USN could have enough assets in the south china sea to have a decicive effect in hours. Thats the cold, hard truth. And i still dont belive that US involvement would mean a global war with china, in the WW2 style that others seem to think is a forgone conclusion.

As to the so called "conquer" you mentioned ,Taiwan s official shall be and only be taiwanness,However people in Taiwan can be elected as official in mainland. Taiwan will be free of tax for 50 years and keep his agency in foreign country .Taiwan shall keep his own political structure and forcible force as long as it does not contravente with the recognization of one-China
and If peacefully reunion, taiwan shall have it s own defence force .
------that the term mainland give taiwan 20 year ago.

Like tibet or Xinjian huh? Allthough i suppose Taiwan at least has ethnic and cultural links with the mainland, so maybe they'll be treated a bit better.

 

[ever4244]

Your kind of missing the point. The intent would not be stop the trasition of weapons technology between russia and PROC, or a few clandiestine shipments of this or that, but to cripple China's economy, which would be achieved verry easily without UN co operation. The loss of US demand alone would achieve this in a number of weaks.

does economy a problem to China in Korea war?
or does it a problem in Vietnam war?

You wouldn't need to destroy China's industrial capacity unless your talking about a WW2 style conflict. We are talking about a regional conflict and the defence/invasion of Taiwan. How long do you think it would take to change that massive amount of production from consumer goods to complex war material? You would need to produce the capital equipment first. It took the US at least 18 months in WW2 and the transition was not as complex. Is that timeframe going to be decicive in a conflict over Taiwan? And how is all that production going to function without the resources to feed it?

The traditional rigional war is what US s favour. but why must chinese want to favour america in war. If in Vietnam war VC launghed a formal decisive campaign towards US, there would not be VC anymore.What US fear most is that kind of "ultra-limit fight" If we determined to fight US 10 years in that way ,our prodution power can easly arm any US-hater in the world a advanced should-missle , any anti-US country a nuke.(just an idea.does nt mean I approve it), enough cruise missile to sink US cargo.enough ballistic missile to ruin US base, In a word , using China s production power to bring down US economy--------seting fire everywhere is much more easier than fighting against fire everywhere.

If we are talking about a world war type scenario, which is what you seem to be advocating, what do you think the largest economy on the planet would be doing? If you think the US has a powefull military now, just imagine what it would look like if 10 or 20% of GDP was sent on the military in stead of 4?

that s exactly what I suggested , say US put 20%GDP to war in 10 years, and always under the threat of all kinds of attack. what will become of his economy ? Of course neither China nor US would be blunt enough to come to this . Both country understand that they cant slap each other too hard. so I doult dare US win a victory in the channel?

And a chinese Sub did not "break into" a US CBG, it was waiting there and the CBG sailed over it, and they weren't on a combat footing. Why is it that as soon as US involvement is mentioned it becomes a fight to the death and its allways china who will continue the fight forever? This isn't reasonable. Why is it that PROC is the only nation on earth who will not act in their own interest just in order to spite someone?

Accord to your logic, if russia fire a single ICMB to US, BUSH should not push the button because what s done is done, a counter attack will only summon more retaliation.In a war , nation seldom consider short term interest.

I pardon you because you don t know chinese way of logic .fighting to death itself is as stupid as suicide and is not accord to the interest of both US and China. but a reputation of determination will gain you a lot. For example, the fight in korea which show the determination of PRC prevent many possible conflict between china and soviet.

also, demonstrate that China can bring down US in such kind of fighting will reduce or provent US s effort to interfere the war.

I keep hearing this from chinese posters but i'm yet to understand it. And to answer a question, a strategic nucular strike would destroy that industrial capacity prety quickley, since were talking about a fight to the death that is.

You mean a nuclear strike?Even myself haven t been nasty enough to bring direct nuclear strike on the table. and aid Iran in nuclear programme is vast different with giving al-qaida a nuke.

This is silly. The US could ensure that the seperatist movement in Xinjian had nuclear weapons too and the US couldn't be blamed for that either. But i forgot the PROC will do ANYTHING and endure ANYTHING just in order spite someone for their envolvement in a regional conflict.

Aye silly ,nevertheless US was afraid of it, but could it be sillier when China give "Ben laden" a nuke as birth day present for revenge? come on, US s social structure is much more vulnerable than china in the condition of terrorist attack.

Again the US could make china's life dificult too. This really doesent have all that much to do with the defence/invasion of taiwan.

Exactly, So tell me,when they both know they will make each other very difficult, why they still fight? So will US attack mainland troop in taiwan war is still very doubtful. and if he do,China ll make sure she can drag US down to the water and leave russia and EU at ease. So when US see his crown no longer settled , the only way to get rid of China is to meet her term

I absoloutly dissagree with this statement. It seems to be a forgone conclusion in China that PLA and PLAN can walk into Taiwan whenever they want and the only thing standing in the way is the US, yet i'm yet to hear an rational and achievable plan to sucsessfully invade that adresses the massive problems involved. The only thing that has any promise is a sustained air campaign and balistic and cruse misslie bombardment. But even if it was sucsessfull, that doesnt replace boots on the ground, and it does rely on political submission by ROC.

Taiwan s military leader has comfessed during Han Guang exercise that once mainland major assault force land on taiwan ,the war will be over. Even Taiwan s newspaper don t believe the ROC army will fight to death in this kind of brother-war--------you just can t comprehand how many ROC troops surrendered in the civil war and turn red.

I heard a rumor about orbital weapons, hypersonic strike aircraft and a secret Australian nuclear arsenall too. Sounds cool but not really that relevant. And this isnt a strugle between PROC & ROC, there is not going to be an invasion of the mainland by ROC forces, and on even terms ROC is no match for PROC. However, even though i keep hearing that from chinese posters, i still havent heard how they really plan to invade taiwan with the assets they have, or should i say a plan that sounds reasonable.

That is relevant , if you know mainland is building up a digital army corps. that s one of most important issue in recent years, even more important than j-10.

It will be a whole book if you want to that kind of plan. but I think you can refer to Taiwan s "Han Guang" computer virtual exercise . the rough report is always on the newspaper in Taiwan or mainland, and you can also try to geogle on net.

The USAF and USN could have enough assets in the south china sea to have a decicive effect in hours. Thats the cold, hard truth. And i still dont belive that US involvement would mean a global war with china, in the WW2 style that others seem to think is a forgone conclusion.

Oh, do they? but I recall they claim to have enough asset nearby Iraq as well? then why wait for so long before the war? is that a kind of ritual?

Like tibet or Xinjian huh? Allthough i suppose Taiwan at least has ethnic and cultural links with the mainland, so maybe they'll be treated a bit better.

You are as ignorant as those chinese-hater who accuse us blindly without a modest knowledge of what s going on in china.
Tibet and Xinjian is municipal-region which can have its own ethical way if not contra to the constitution. Its official mostly are local people and Can also be people from other region. Its religion and culture custom will be protect and support by central goverment .

However, in the special administration region like hongkong or macao. they shall keep their own constitution political structure, police force and law, not to mention the independent right of management on all the issue within the region except for diplomatism and defence. Their high official must be local people.Central goverment has no authority to name the official of that region.

To taiwan , the difference will be a independent right of defence and agency to foreign state.

--------sorry to off topic, but i m compelled to argue

 

[Rich]

does economy a problem to China in Korea war?
or does it a problem in Vietnam war?

At the time of these conflicts China was mostly a agrarian/peasant society. Now that they are a modern Industrialized society "economy a problem" and the economic penalty of war would indeed be heavy.

The traditional rigional war is what US s favour. but why must chinese want to favour america in war. If in Vietnam war VC launghed a formal decisive campaign towards US, there would not be VC anymore.What US fear most is that kind of "ultra-limit fight" If we determined to fight US 10 years in that way ,our prodution power can easly arm any US-hater in the world a advanced should-missle , any anti-US country a nuke.(just an idea.does nt mean I approve it), enough cruise missile to sink US cargo.enough ballistic missile to ruin US base, In a word , using China s production power to bring down US economy--------seting fire everywhere is much more easier than fighting against fire everywhere.

Can someone translate this for me". "Hey G.I. you got girfriend Vietnam"?

Both country understand that they cant slap each other too hard. so I doult dare US win a victory in the channel?

Still waiting for translator. "Me love you long time".

You mean a nuclear strike?Even myself haven t been nasty enough to bring direct nuclear strike on the table. and aid Iran in nuclear programme is vast different with giving al-qaida a nuke.

Youve already aided Iran's nuclear program. And if I translate this right your saying, instead of threatening to nukes us your threatening to give nukes to Al Qaeda to nuke us? Right? So what do you think would happen when the radiation analysis , after such an attack, matches the footprint of a Chinese weapon?

Aye silly ,nevertheless US was afraid of it, but could it be sillier when China give "Ben laden" a nuke as birth day present for revenge? come on, US s social structure is much more vulnerable than china in the condition of terrorist attack.

Oh we wouldn't bother sneaking a nuke into your cities. We'd simply empty a few of these into them. http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/ssbn-726.htm

As to the rest, and this is no insult, you simply have to learn better English before you can expect any of us to understand you. These silly threats to give nukes to terrorist groups makes you look even sillier because if its one thing we know about Chinese communists is that they aren't about to let anyone else influence their foreign policy, or, put them at risk. Theres a reason why they abhor alliances in the first place.

They are about as likely to give Al Qaeda a nuke as we are. Such threats, coupled with your lousy english and spelling, makes you look quite silly.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

They are about as likely to give Al Qaeda a nuke as we are. Such threats, coupled with your lousy english and spelling, makes you look quite silly.

I agree. It's a bottom-of-the-barrel argument by a desperate man.

 

[ever4244]

As to the rest, and this is no insult, you simply have to learn better English before you can expect any of us to understand you. These silly threats to give nukes to terrorist groups makes you look even sillier because if its one thing we know about Chinese communists is that they aren't about to let anyone else influence their foreign policy, or, put them at risk. Theres a reason why they abhor alliances in the first place.

They are about as likely to give Al Qaeda a nuke as we are. Such threats, coupled with your lousy english and spelling, makes you look quite silly.

It suddenly occur to me that you know nothing other than "silly"------Oh, that s not an insult
I threat no one because personally I have no hard feeling towards any country and even like US a little bit ,as I has explained many times that I just pointed out a different way of war. No one thought culture can be a motivation of modern war until 911, so don t ever think every war will goes the same track.

whether this idea of ultra-limit war practical or not , time will tell.
And whether my goverment with accept my little invention, I don t care, because I only responsible for my fun.

As to my english, which is not my mother tongue ,is nature to have flaw
and I would be very glad to see you use chinese debate with me if you would be so kind.and I will be honored to hear the flawless chinese you speaking.

another time, I am sorry for off the topic

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

I would be very glad to see you use chinese debate with me if you would be so kind.and I will be honored to hear the flawless chinese you speaking.

Except that this is an English-language forum. Although everyone is welcome to comment, it doesn't help if you can't get your point across easily.

Maybe it would help if you consider your posts more carefully before you hit "submit reply" in the future.

 

[ever4244]

Except that this is an English-language forum. Although everyone is welcome to comment, it doesn't help if you can't get your point across easily.

Maybe it would help if you consider your posts more carefully before you hit "submit reply" in the future.

Does that mean I have to past some GRE or TOEFL before I hit the button?

You talk about some sense.but you fail to understand that as a none english speaker I have made great effort and sacrifice to try to communicate with you as I giving up my advantage-language and picking up another language in the favour of your interest.

So, am I to be blamed for not mastering english well ?
at least I make effort to try to communicate? but forgive me, where is your effort in this?

I m not a arrogant one and I ll try to mend my post in the future according to your suggestion . but It s neither proper nor just to laugh at my english as long as this is a military forum other than a literature one!

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

does economy a problem to China in Korea war?
or does it a problem in Vietnam war?

Thats about as relevant as me sighting the use of steam power during the crimean war. Economics is a fundimental strength or weaknes for a market economy in a time of war, and in case the commies have decided to actually adhere to the philosophy that justifies their hold on power, or their existance for that matter, thats what china is. So yes, the massive economic cost that china would suffer in a war with the US, and its the economic growth that has come from US demand that has paid for all those shiny new goodies for PLA, PLAN & PLAF, and the effect on production would be devistating.

The traditional rigional war is what US s favour. but why must chinese want to favour america in war. If in Vietnam war VC launghed a formal decisive campaign towards US, there would not be VC anymore.What US fear most is that kind of "ultra-limit fight" If we determined to fight US 10 years in that way ,our prodution power can easly arm any US-hater in the world a advanced should-missle , any anti-US country a nuke.(just an idea.does nt mean I approve it), enough cruise missile to sink US cargo.enough ballistic missile to ruin US base, In a word , using China s production power to bring down US economy--------seting fire everywhere is much more easier than fighting against fire everywhere.

Are you advocating a kind of large scale gurrilla war? You realise if you want a long term war with the US, and you dont intend to actually meet them in battle, china wil suffer much much more than the US. What would be the goal? Get the US to give Taiwan over to PROC or at least stop defending it? In this sort of a situation it would be china's infistructure that would be attrited by US air power, that PLAF could nothing about. If you want to wear the US out over time, china will be back in the bronze age by the time the US looses its will, and all the gains PROC has made in the last 60 yrs will be for nothing. Some plan.

that s exactly what I suggested , say US put 20%GDP to war in 10 years, and always under the threat of all kinds of attack. what will become of his economy ? Of course neither China nor US would be blunt enough to come to this . Both country understand that they cant slap each other too hard. so I doult dare US win a victory in the channel?

What do you mean by "all kinds of attack"? Attacks on some shipping in the pacific or some terrorist attacks? pretty minor compared to what the PROC would be facing. I doubt PROC would use BM's unless they had a death wish.

Why would a large amount of military spending destroy the US economy when all the money spent on their platforms, munitions and R&D is spent localy? It would be a massive stimulous. look what happened to the US economy after WW2, (i know the economic conditions were different, but its just an example).

The cost to china would be a hundred fold what it would be to the US, and her alies, so why wouldnt china come to terms after the conflict in the streight was over???

Accord to your logic, if russia fire a single ICMB to US, BUSH should not push the button because what s done is done, a counter attack will only summon more retaliation.In a war , nation seldom consider short term interest.

No. Thats a bad enterperitation of what i was trying to say. Strategic nuclear exchange is a totaly different matter. If there is a local conflict, why would one nation want to escelate it to a full scale war when in has no need to be, and the cost would be so high for said nation? There would be no threat to the mainland, no attacks on chinese C4I, no acts outside the theater apart from ISR, so why would PROC escelate the conflict beyond the local theater? the US wouldn't. You know why. Because Taiwan's not worth fighting a world war over for both sides, but especially china. And just atempting to blackmail the US because you think you are more commited than them will not fly. They know you have the most to loose, so do you.

I pardon you because you don t know chinese way of logic .fighting to death itself is as stupid as suicide and is not accord to the interest of both US and China. but a reputation of determination will gain you a lot. For example, the fight in korea which show the determination of PRC prevent many possible conflict between china and soviet.

Thank you for your pardon my lord....

So the appearance of determination is important enough to destroy all the progress your nation hass made in the last 60 years?

What about the US's determination in Vietnam, they fought for 10 years in defence of an ally there and lost over 50 000 dead, but they'll just give up on Taiwan right?

also, demonstrate that China can bring down US in such kind of fighting will reduce or provent US s effort to interfere the war.

And the wholesale destruction of china is not a detterent on the other side?

You mean a nuclear strike?Even myself haven t been nasty enough to bring direct nuclear strike on the table. and aid Iran in nuclear programme is vast different with giving al-qaida a nuke.

You asked a question and i gave you an answer. The scenario you were outlineing was one of total war, the use of all china's production capacity to defeat the US, and a large scale strategic nuclear strike would not be out of the question.

Aye silly ,nevertheless US was afraid of it, but could it be sillier when China give "Ben laden" a nuke as birth day present for revenge? come on, US s social structure is much more vulnerable than china in the condition of terrorist attack.

Again you only take into account the effects this would have in the US and not those faced by PROC. It would be discovered which reactor the fule was bread in, and china would be held respoinsable. The retaliation would be swift, devistating and unstopable. If it was in retalianion for a nuclear strike, well there wouldn't be any nukes to give anyone, or anything to give anyone for that matter. But ofcorce PROC will do endure anything to prove that its commited, even provoke the wholesale destruction of every living thing on the chinese mainland. That makes heaps of sence.

Exactly, So tell me,when they both know they will make each other very difficult, why they still fight? So will US attack mainland troop in taiwan war is still very doubtful. and if he do,China ll make sure she can drag US down to the water and leave russia and EU at ease. So when US see his crown no longer settled , the only way to get rid of China is to meet her term

You seem to be confirming my argument. Neither side would want to escelate the conflict beyond the theater. But you keep saying if the US gets involved china will fight for 10yrs no matter the cost.

Taiwan s military leader has comfessed during Han Guang exercise that once mainland major assault force land on taiwan ,the war will be over. Even Taiwan s newspaper don t believe the ROC army will fight to death in this kind of brother-war--------you just can t comprehand how many ROC troops surrendered in the civil war and turn red

.

Again you used an irrelevant referance to the WW2 era that has no parralells to the situation.

I think he meant if the PROC forces sucsessfully broke out of their beachead, and personally, if they even establish a beahead, i dont give them a hope in hell of achieving that, given the defences involved and the logistical porblems that are inherrant to an amphibious operation, let alone one as precarious as this.

Oh, do they? but I recall they claim to have enough asset nearby Iraq as well? then why wait for so long before the war? is that a kind of ritual?

You are completly missunderstanding the nature of the conflict if you think that the US would need to invade in the fation that they did in OIF. During an aphibious assault on taiwan, Intervention by a few squadrons of F22's baced in Japan, and some long range strategic strike asstets like B2's, B52's or B1B's would decemate any PLAN hulls in the streights with stand off weapons such as JASSM. That could all be in the theater in hours. And thast only if they had no time to prepare, which is unlikely considering the ISR capability thats pointing at PROC as we type. So the addition of a couple of LA class SSN's would be the final nail in the coffin. The US could stop the invasion without a sinlge rifleman or tank ever setting foot (or track) on taiwan.

You are as ignorant as those chinese-hater who accuse us blindly without a modest knowledge of what s going on in china.
Tibet and Xinjian is municipal-region which can have its own ethical way if not contra to the constitution. Its official mostly are local people and Can also be people from other region. Its religion and culture custom will be protect and support by central goverment .

However, in the special administration region like hongkong or macao. they shall keep their own constitution political structure, police force and law, not to mention the independent right of management on all the issue within the region except for diplomatism and defence. Their high official must be local people.Central goverment has no authority to name the official of that region.

To taiwan , the difference will be a independent right of defence and agency to foreign state.

--------sorry to off topic, but i m compelled to argue

I'm not going to start arguing about the invasion, annexation, religious oppression and ethnic dillution of the most non threatening, pacifist nation possible, allthough i'd love to, but i wont here. Let me just say i'd take that offer with a truck load of salt.

If all they want is controll over foregin policy, why would they be willing to go to war over it??? And how long do you think the communist party is going to allow some parts of china to allect their leaders, or have a free press, or give their citizens any of the liberalistic freedoms western society is baced on, when the rest of the country has one none of the above (ok maybe economic freedom, and the rule of law, but that is not political freedom). It seems to me that the Chinese communist party is pretty darn scared of political decent, just look at the drastic action taken at Tiana min aquare (i appolagise for my spelling of that). You dont think the political freedoms enjoyed in Taiwan wont be a bit contagous on the mainland? Somehow i really dont buy it.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Does that mean I have to past some GRE or TOEFL before I hit the button?

You talk about some sense.but you fail to understand that as a none english speaker I have made great effort and sacrifice to try to communicate with you as I giving up my advantage-language and picking up another language in the favour of your interest.

So, am I to be blamed for not mastering english well ?
at least I make effort to try to communicate? but forgive me, where is your effort in this?

I m not a arrogant one and I ll try to mend my post in the future according to your suggestion . but It s neither proper nor just to laugh at my english as long as this is a military forum other than a literature one!

I dont mind at all about your english. Its a bit hard to read sometimes is all, which is understandable. I can only say 3 things in french.

 

[Schumacher]

Except that this is an English-language forum. Although everyone is welcome to comment, it doesn't help if you can't get your point across easily.

Maybe it would help if you consider your posts more carefully before you hit "submit reply" in the future.

Judging from the responses to ever4244 posts, it seems the respondents do get the points he's trying to make, whether they agree is another matter. So I do suspect the motivation of some for bringing up the language issue.
But hey, that's just me.

 

[Rich]

Ever the real problem here is we are having a tough time figuring out what your talking about. What I can understand doesn't make a whole lot of sense, or, they are childish threats.

I think everyone here is open to an argument that spells out a logical offensive Chinese action, using available resources, that could have a reasonable chance to take Taiwan. Were open to military logic here.

Threats wont get you anywhere because, A, We Yanks aint afraid. B, No Aussie is afraid. C, I doubt any other Pacific rim Democracy treatied with America is afraid. And we dont expect you to be afraid either. Neither Australia or America would launch any looney offensive operation against China except in self defense. Yaknow we would go positively ape if we, or one of our allies, were nuked by the PROC.

Concentrate on hardware, resources, and strategy. Then pose your argument.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

Judging from the responses to ever4244 posts, it seems the respondents do get the points he's trying to make, whether they agree is another matter. So I do suspect the motivation of some for bringing up the language issue.

Some of what he says is honestly confusing.

 

[Manfred]

i am only trying to deal with the military side also, and for the sake of a hypothetical war game... why all the angst?

I really wish I had more time for this, but I am also trying to sell a book I just wrote, hold down a job and maintain a minimal social life. Going to Yahoo to put a real war game together will have to wait till next week, if then, but i am more determined than before to make this work.

I will go with a Guadalcanal, or Crete-style approach. Minimal preperation time, minimal warning and a diplomatic black-out.

My first dirty trick involves tanks in the interior. Since an obvious Taiwanese strategy would be to fall back into the interior where the mountains and forrests seem to provide good defensive ground.
Have you heard about the Chinese T-62? This is NOT the Soviet T-62, but a 21-ton light tank that looks exactly like a T-55. It has a 85mm gun and is very handy in rough terrain. This tank is light enough to be air transported, even by the old AN-12.

Imagine the surprise when a few dozen of these tanks turn up with the paratroops, blocking critical passes and forcing the Taiwanese to worry about a threat within thier Island while the main PLA force in landing on thier shores.

Things getting interesting yet?

 

[gf0012-aust]

My first dirty trick involves tanks in the interior. Since an obvious Taiwanese strategy would be to fall back into the interior where the mountains and forrests seem to provide good defensive ground.

Have you heard about the Chinese T-62? This is NOT the Soviet T-62, but a 21-ton light tank that looks exactly like a T-55. It has a 85mm gun and is very handy in rough terrain. This tank is light enough to be air transported, even by the old AN-12.

Imagine the surprise when a few dozen of these tanks turn up with the paratroops, blocking critical passes and forcing the Taiwanese to worry about a threat within thier Island while the main PLA force in landing on thier shores.

Things getting interesting yet?

I'm wondering what your background is?

One significant but singularly important issue is the sea air gap - and the fact that its not a trivial exercise getting transports (air and sea) across that gap unmolested. That means sensor systems across the depth and breadth of the theatre (and in the entire battlespace) being neutralised. China does not have the remotest capability to locate and then deploy those assets without triggering multiple sensor systems.

You can't deploy anything effectively unless you have effectively deceived, dislocated or decapitated the critical battlespace sensor system structure. That means also neutralising US systems. That means it then becomes an act of war against the owners of those sensor systems.

If you don't even get the fundamentals right, then the whole exercise is totally unrealistic. Airlifting in 21 ton tanks is not going to happen unless you have already killed the defence system - and its also not how airlifts work.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Agree compleatly with GF. An airbourne operation is only possible if you've got complete air supremacy and you have destroyed or sufficiantly supressed all air defences in the area, or those big slow transports wont last 10 minets. By the way unless you intend to parashute them in then you have to capture an airfield. Then you are going to have to make sure that no one can take a shot at your transports or those tanks arn't going to be able to shoot or drive because they won't be supplied. So you would have limited forces in a pocket around an airfield, if the inital airborne assault sucseeded in the first place, and an air corridor that has to fly over enemy held teritory. That little pocket would be dreadfully vulnerable to an armoured counterattack or artillary bombardment. And i dont really see the point. Airborne forces could be held in check by minimal ROC units, so it wouldn't divert large forces from the battle at the beachead. And if you intend to send out platoon, company or battalion sized units to go out and cause trouble, supported by light armour, unless you have echieved complete suprise, they will be cut off from supply and reinforcement and destroyed.

If your not going to be realistic then there is no point war gaming it. Why would you assume that the Taiwanese would fall back? What they would just let PROC forces establish a beachead without a strong counterattack? And then let them build up supplies and move out at thier lessure? How stupid do you think they are? They might aswell not fight at all.

As I have pointed out about 10 times before, the notion that the PROC could achieve anything close to suprise is unrealistic. The amount of ISR assets looking streight at China, AS WE TYPE, reders this pretty mutch impossible. Apart from maybe some small special forces opperations, but that is a long way from catching the whole ROC army sleeping.

Again, no one has outlined how PLAN intends to supply the forces in theater, with lines of communication that are far from sucure and very vulnerable to interdiction. Any beachead is likely to be under heavy, sustained MLRS bombardment. How do you think Omaha or Utah beach would have looked if it was raining MLRS there huh? Overlord was a logistical nighmare, and the allies enjoyed complete air and sea supremacy in the theater, secure lines of communication, secure beacheads after the first few days and months to soften up defences and isolate the battlefield by sustained air bombardment. PROC has NONE of these advantages, with no where near the sealift capacity of the allies, and a simmilar strength of defencding forces to overcome. This is the fundimental problem with any of these senario's and i'm yet to hear anyone adress them.

 

[Rich]

Judging from the responses to ever4244 posts, it seems the respondents do get the points he's trying to make, whether they agree is another matter. So I do suspect the motivation of some for bringing up the language issue.
But hey, that's just me.

My motivation is simple. I cant understand 1/2 of what hes saying.

Manfred that's an interesting scenario with the tanks. But first the mainland Chinese, in the future I'll call MCs, have to get the tank there. They would have to seize and airfield with enough troops to defend it and expand the perimeter. Of course they would have to take out the Taiwanese air force first to even have a chance of that.

If there is a historical equivalent to this attack the only one I can think of would be Normandy. Both scenarios involve crossing a small stretch of water, of course the straights of Taiwan are wider then the English channel.

The Allies had a terrible time trying to gain a foothold in Europe despite complete air and sea dominance, a situation the Chinese would most certainly not have in their favor. The Yank led Allied navies in June '44 were absolutely monstrous, with an incredible capacity to move men and supplies. Not just that, but we Yanks created the art of amphibious assault. The Chinese have never attempted such an op, indeed they have never even fought a modern war, "no Korea doesn't count".

And still, with a incredible advantage in firepower, both on sea and in the air, we had to fight for every inch on several invasion beaches. Overlord came fairly close to failing despite all out advantages. Think about that when you consider the chances of the Chinese in such an assault. Also in Normandy we had the advantage of relative surprise, another "something" the Chinese wouldn't have. Not with so many Yank Intel assets pointed at them.

They would also have to first neutralize the Makung Islands offshore in the straight, so chalk up another landing there. Taiwan is crisscrossed by rivers, which certainly would be blow, so they would need to bridge an awful lot. And like the Allies in '44 the Chinese would have to attack from the sea on 3 separate beaches to increase their chances for success. All would have to be on the heavily defended western shore of Taiwan. I would guess one beach would be near the southern city of Tainan, due to the cities importance as a communications/transportation hub. And because of the airbase near the city. Feng-Shan is another southern city of importance that might be attacked instead. It has a terrific port.

The 2nd front would be in the center of the Island near Ching-shui. Again it has a great port and is a major rail and road network. There is another air base near it also. The 3rd beach would be near Tan-shui due to its location near the capitol of Taipei. A diversionary air drop, with the added benefit of tying up forces in the east, and, grabbing two airbases, would be a drop near Hualien. An airborne drop there could also be supported by the sea, provided any Chinese ships are still floating by then.

Man when you look at Taiwan in Google Earth you get a sense of the magnitude and difficulty the Chinese would have with this OP. It would be far more difficult then Overlord was for the Allies.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Man when you look at Taiwan in Google Earth you get a sense of the magnitude and difficulty the Chinese would have with this OP. It would be far more difficult then Overlord was for the Allies.

It seems that alot of people just look at how big and bad the chinese military is and just assumes that taiwan is just there for the taking, as long as the US does not dircely intervene. I dont think many of them actually objectively anylise the massive problems envolved. I know the Chinese millitary has come in leaps and bounds, and sometimes i think thats all some people see, and not the cold hard realities of the situation.