4 ms·

>The fact that wargamed invasions of Taiwan are so costly for PRC I don't know what wargames you've been reading but recent western ones finally comport with a

>The fact that wargamed invasions of Taiwan are so costly for PRC I don't know what wargames you've been reading but recent western ones finally comport with analysis out of PRC from last few years that a PRC-TW confrontation would be relatively expedient and low cost for PRC, militarily. Current assumption is PRC will secure air dominance within days and enable a lot of relatively uncontested actions in absence of US intervention. TW barely has enough ordinants to arm their prestige military aquisitions. They certainly don't have enough missiles to damage PRC coastal cities without venturing into warcrime scenarios. It's why currently US is desperately trying to pressure the island into adopting porcupine strategies to bleed PRC in case of invasion. But island isn't biting, the establishment is actively stalling reforms because reinstating civil service and telling population their only hope is to fight like insurgents is politically unworkable. >invasions of Taiwan are so costly for PRC The invasion itself isn't and hasn't been for a while. The concern has been dealing with US intervention, i.e. SLOC blockades and potential trade sanctions. Taking TW with relatively little cost is almost forgone at this point. Not to mention PRC has host of other strategies without formal invasion like blockade/quarantine they can do right now without single boot on the ground. There is almost no one except the most deluded actual shills that gets paid by TW (i.e. Ian Easton) who thinks TW can put up much of a fight against PRC anymore.

pydry 5y ago
I read a few that indicated that the US wouldnt do really badly in an "all out" scenario. The US is geared towards fighting colonial wars rather than facing off against equiv-tech adversaries. They can help a lot (and with relative safety) by firing MCBMs from far away, downing Chinese satellites, supplying arms and materiel beforehand and sending subs to sink chinese invading ships but aircraft carriers, fighter jets and long range bombers would all be useless. Most wargame scenarios indicate a heavy loss of life on all sides (partly coz the US does insist on using easily sinkable aircraft carriers). China might be able to win if it threw everything it had at the invasion but realistically the government would topple if it deliberately tolerated extreme loss of life (60%+ attrition rate for invading soldiers, perhaps?) - especially if it was doing it invading their Chinese "brothers". If it were as easy as you said it would already have happened.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  If the US is involved that is something else. The issue is that Taiwan might already fall before the US gets seriously in there. Submarines are complicated. The Taiwan strait is not very deep and any US subs would have to deal with UUVs in large numbers and sonarphones. It would be a difficult target. Shooting down satellites is a very risky proposition. If the US attempts that, the Chinese will retaliate. The US has a lot more to gain from satellites than the Chinese do. Once those satellites are shot down though the US has no accurate ballistic missiles. The ATACMS relies on GPS for good accuracy. There is no GPS-independent seeker for ballistic missiles in US service. It's also a slow and easy to intercept missile. It's not happening because, as a Chinese General put it, why today and not tomorrow? The more time goes on the cheaper and easier and quicker it will be, so there is no reason to rush it.

pydry 5y ago

I read a few that indicated that the US wouldnt do really badly in an "all out" scenario. The US is geared towards fighting colonial wars rather than facing off against equiv-tech adversaries. They can help a lot (and with relative safety) by firing MCBMs from far away, downing Chinese satellites, supplying arms and materiel beforehand and sending subs to sink chinese invading ships but aircraft carriers, fighter jets and long range bombers would all be useless. Most wargame scenarios indicate a heavy loss of life on all sides (partly coz the US does insist on using easily sinkable aircraft carriers). China might be able to win if it threw everything it had at the invasion but realistically the government would topple if it deliberately tolerated extreme loss of life (60%+ attrition rate for invading soldiers, perhaps?) - especially if it was doing it invading their Chinese "brothers". If it were as easy as you said it would already have happened.

sudosysgen 5y ago
If the US is involved that is something else. The issue is that Taiwan might already fall before the US gets seriously in there. Submarines are complicated. The Taiwan strait is not very deep and any US subs would have to deal with UUVs in large numbers and sonarphones. It would be a difficult target. Shooting down satellites is a very risky proposition. If the US attempts that, the Chinese will retaliate. The US has a lot more to gain from satellites than the Chinese do. Once those satellites are shot down though the US has no accurate ballistic missiles. The ATACMS relies on GPS for good accuracy. There is no GPS-independent seeker for ballistic missiles in US service. It's also a slow and easy to intercept missile. It's not happening because, as a Chinese General put it, why today and not tomorrow? The more time goes on the cheaper and easier and quicker it will be, so there is no reason to rush it.