6 ms·

One thing is sure: if China still wants to invade Taiwan, they certainly have postponed their plans by a few years, maybe a decade, maybe even more. The attemp

One thing is sure: if China still wants to invade Taiwan, they certainly have postponed their plans by a few years, maybe a decade, maybe even more. The attempted invasion of Ukraine by Russia just reminded people that the best war plans don't survive the first contact with the enemy (apparently stated by the Prussian general Moltke), or in the more folksy words of Mike Tyson, everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face. In 2014, Russia achieved a military miracle: they took over Crimea so quickly and without loss of blood, that they delivered a "fait accompli". Oh, how much would China like to replicate that in Taiwan. And that's what they were preparing for. But now, in 2022, the latest example of an attempted invasion shows that things can still go astray. Why? No doubt China will analyze everything and try to see if they are in danger of experiencing the same problems. But the overall learned lesson will still be that no matter how much you plan, you can still encounter huge obstacles when you start a war. And the world response in terms of economic sanctions was unbelievable. Definitely, not something China wants. If anything the prospect of WW3 because of a Chinese miscalculation vis-a-vis Taiwan went down considerably.

kerneloftruth 5y ago
One thing is sure: if China still wants to invade Taiwan, they certainly have postponed their plans by a few years, maybe a decade, maybe even more. How can you be so certain? This reminds me of people saying just 14 days ago "I don't think Putin is going to invade." Taiwan is not Ukraine, indeed -- Taiwan would be easier to capture because it is an island. There aren't land borders across which supplies and weapons can be brought. They would have to come by ship or plane, which are easier to defeat. It would be easier, militarily, to take Taiwan. China certainly has the will, and it has learned that the worst it would face would be some sanctions.
- kingcharles 5y ago
  > some sanctions Some sanctions? The entire Russian economy has disappeared overnight. The only reason it has not been felt yet is due to inertia. There are still just about enough goods in the pipes to support things for weeks or months. But once computers start breaking, planes start breaking, shelves start to empty, and nothing is arriving to replace them, shit is going to hit the fan.
  - somewhereoutth 5y ago
    Indeed. They're being unplugged from the 21st century.
    - kerneloftruth 5y ago
      Or have they been? "Unplugged" is a good metaphor, for they currently control the vast majority of energy to all of Europe[1]. We're turning Russia into a gigantic version of North Korea, and with the same major ally, China. What happens if Russia diverts its gas sales to China -- it's Europe that'll be unplugged. 1. https://www.loc.gov/resource/g5701h.ct003365/?r=0.025,0.336,0.692,0.396,0 https://www.loc.gov/resource/g5701h.ct003365/?r=0.025,0.336,...
      - somewhereoutth 5y ago
        Your reference is from 2008. Certainly recent events have concentrated minds regarding energy security in Europe, and likely self sufficiency (or at least better sources) will be achieved, much as food security was after ww2.
      - kingcharles 5y ago
        If China is the only available customer, how much do you think China will pay? They will have Russia by the balls. They will pay pennies on the Ruble. Europe will piss and moan for a while as prices go up, but Europe is rich enough to route around this problem. I agree though, we're turning Russia into a giant North Korea. What that means for the world, I don't know. In fact, I would say they're getting cut off worse than North Korea. Some of these companies canceling Russia probably operate (with permission) in North Korea.
- ipnon 5y ago
  To counter this claim, I'd ask you to consider which of two similarly sized invasions was easier to achieve: D-Day and the invasion of Western Europe, or Operation Barbarossa and the invasion of Eastern Europe. You may also consider why the Nazis never made it to Great Britain, and why Great Britain has been insulated from the Great Wars of Europe more often than it has taken part in the conflicts.
  - JadeNB 5y ago
    > To counter this claim, I'd ask you to consider which of two similarly sized invasions was easier to achieve: D-Day and the invasion of Western Europe, or Operation Barbarossa and the invasion of Eastern Europe. You may also consider why the Nazis never made it to Great Britain, and why Great Britain has been insulated from the Great Wars of Europe more often than it has taken part in the conflicts. It seems that this paragraph is meant to suggest that Barbarossa was easier than D-Day, but this might not be the best example, since Barbarossa failed and D-Day succeeded. (Of course, a lot of things could have gone differently that could have made the outcomes very different, but I still find this example a little unconvincing.)
    - ipnon 5y ago
      Perhaps it would have been simply best to note that island nations are generally insulated from invasion in ways that continental nations are not. Great Britain had the long term national security to forge an empire while the continental nations of Europe were engaged in endless back-and-forth wars (often at the instigation of Great Britain). Japan had centuries of peaceful self-imposed isolation while the continental nations of China and Indochina were engaged in endless wars, which was utilized to build up an empire while safely protected by the Sea of Japan. Being an island nation is an immense geostrategic advantage that is apparently not completely obvious to all observers of history.
      - dirtyid 5y ago
        UK could be resupplied across the Atlantic by world's preeminenant industrial producer while German power projection of era couldn't comprehensively cripple GBR. German Blitz+blockade didn't achieve strategic goals of destroying GBR industries while also being distracted by land war. TW has even less food/resource security and entirely within range of PRC weapon platforms, who has more industrial capacity than US during peak of WW2 production. Also consider UK managed to hold onto Falklands. It's really about industrial capacity to wage attritional war - TW has an initial defensive bonus but massive resupply penalty. If PRC gains air superiority and deter outside intervention, taking over island is only matter of time. Merchant fleet assets alone is enough to ferry 100,000s anywhere on TW if PRC wants to human wave / million man swim in days. Dunkirk moved 350k bodies on 800 ships in a week. PRC has 50-80k fishing boats that can make the journey. It's hard to overstate PRC industrial advantage relative to TW.
- Etherlord87 5y ago
  The worst thing, that you don't mention: China has a much stronger economy than Russia. Currently we're cutting Russia from almost everything, but still (as silently as we can) buy its gas - because it would be very hard for us to stop buying it. Cutting off China? That would hurt both sides to the point I doubt it's even possible... But then again I wouldn't expect cutting Russia the way we did was possible. Still, even individuals boycotting China would probably hurt more than Taiwan is worth?
  - sidibe 5y ago
    Chinese people are more likely to rage at the government if the economy goes bad. I don't know why that is considering the media is much more locked up than Russia's has been until now, but you can see local fury every once in a while where the government is forced to concede because of angry mobs
- yongjik 5y ago
  > Taiwan would be easier to capture because it is an island. That makes no sense. Being an island is good for you if you are the defender. For it to be a plus to China, China will first have to capture it.
  - smegger001 5y ago
    only if you are self sufficient and not facing a opponent that has more that enough fire power to carpet bomb the entire island from a distance or more soldiers than you have bullets.
- elihu 5y ago
  I don't think an island invasion would be easier than a land invasion, but I agree that "China definitely won't invade Taiwan right now" is overly optimistic. It's probably not in their best interests, but Russia invading Ukraine wasn't in Russia's best interests either and they did it anyways.
- davidjytang 5y ago
  Taiwan is more difficult to capture exactly because it is difficult to sustain a well supplied continuous attack on an island 250 miles away. > the worst it would face would be some sanctions CCP lends its legitimacy on economy. That is one thing most vulnerable.
ipnon 5y ago
MANPADS, ATGM, and drones like the Bayraktar have now been shown to be much more effective than the same cost investment into aircraft, tanks and artillery. In addition the united international condemnation and sanctions have been greater than I think everyone imagined. China may conclude that Russian strategic goals would have been better served by maintaining their credible threat of invasion rather than actually invading, and adjust their strategy accordingly. But Russia is not China ...
internet_user 5y ago
>In 2014, Russia achieved a military miracle: they took over Crimea so quickly and without loss of blood, that they delivered a "fait accompli". Oh, how much would China like to replicate that in Taiwan. And that's what they were preparing for. That only seems like a miracle because you need to do more research into what Crimea actually is. Crimea was never actually part of Ukraine, only a paper "gift" to Ukranian SSR way back when, negligible amounts of ethnic Ukrainians live there. Nearly the entire jurisdiction is employed supporting the mostly russian tourist industry, or actual russian military, their Black Sea fleet. There were simply no other outcomes possible. It was a defacto Russian territory, with a token Ukranian security force against an entire Russian Black Sea fleet, and tens of thousands sailors and marines. It seems that even Ukraine itself didn't wholeheartedly consider Crimea it's own territory, essentially no resistance whatsoever.
- Etherlord87 5y ago
  > Crimea was never actually part of Ukraine You mean never before 1954. After the collapse of USSR, in 1994 Russia agreed to respect Ukraine's independence with its current (back then) borders, signed in the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances.
- anothernewdude 5y ago
  > Crimea was never actually part of Ukraine Such utter nonsense. Who did Russia take it from?
  - unmole 5y ago
    Crimean Tartars?
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > > Crimea was never actually part of Ukraine > Such utter nonsense. Who did Russia take it from? The more full Russian nationalist argument is something like “Crimea was never part of Ukraine until Crimea was arbitrarily joined to the Ukraine SSR by the Soviet government, disregarding both the historical Russianness of Crimea and the historical invalidity of Ukraine as a nation.” No one actually denies that Ukraine controlled Crimea since Stalin gave it to them until 2014, they just deny the appropriateness of Stalin’s action and therefore all subsequent control of Crimes by Ukraine.
bingohbangoh 5y ago
I legitimately don't understand where all these "Ukraine is obviously winning" takes are coming from. If Ukraine was doing well, it wouldn't be giving out weapons to civilians [0], forming penal battalions [1], or lie about receiving NATO planes. [2] If Ukraine was doing well, it wouldn't be inflating death counts to be larger than the US involvement in Afghanistan, a 20 year period of time. [3,4] If Ukraine was doing well, they wouldn't need to make up a story about the Ghosts of Kyiv. [5,6] I am utterly utterly perplexed. Where is any semblance of proof that Russia is doing badly? They seem to be encircling the capital and winning city after city. It's only two weeks in. Did we expect better after the early adrenaline rush? Do they benefit from being told this? Are we just being setup to be told this is a Pyrrhic victory for the Russians? [0]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/26/ukraine-russia-militias/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/26/ukraine-russ... [1]: https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-releases-prisoners-combat-experience-war-russia-volodymyr-zelensky-1683175 https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-releases-prisoners-combat-e... [2]: https://www.newsweek.com/eu-ukraine-fighter-jet-promise-falling-apart-russia-advances-slovakia-poland-bulgaria-1683588 https://www.newsweek.com/eu-ukraine-fighter-jet-promise-fall... [3]: https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/news-oon-kst-gertv-boyovyh-donbas/31110937.html https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/news-oon-kst-gertv-boyovyh-do... [4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%932021) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80... [5]: https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-ukraines-ghost-of-kyiv-fighter-pilot/a-60951825 https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-ukraines-ghost-of-kyiv-figh... [6]: https://twitter.com/KFCBarstool/status/1497366093362520065?s=20&t=qurEK3YFjlm7dN114M5HOA https://twitter.com/KFCBarstool/status/1497366093362520065?s...
- plorkyeran 5y ago
  I legitimately don't understand how people keep interpreting "this doesn't seem to be going how Russia hoped it would" as "Ukraine is obviously winning". Those aren't the same thing at all.
  - bingohbangoh 5y ago
    Where is the proof or source that this isn’t going as Russia would hope?
SkyMarshal 5y ago
> One thing is sure: if China still wants to invade Taiwan, they certainly have postponed their plans by a few years, maybe a decade, maybe even more. Not necessarily. CPC is still waiting to see what the US and NATO do in response to the Russian invasion, and especially Putin's threats of nuclear escalation. If China perceives that all the West will do is sanctions on Russia, but no direct military intervention to prevent a democratic country from being taken over by force, then China will deduce that nuclear saber rattling is enough to ensure the US won't intervene in a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. That may lead them to accelerate their plans to do just that, to accomplish it during a time that 1) Western leadership is easily deterred by nuclear threats, 2) the Chinese Navy has more ships than the US Navy, and 3) US and NATO are divided into fighting a 2-front war. CPC is also waiting to see the full extent of sanctions on and potential decoupling with Russia, how far the West will go in that regard. If CPC believes they could survive the same, again they'll be encouraged to accelerate their Taiwain plans. The jury's still out, but it's not a given that events have already decelerated CPC's intent to invade Taiwan. That's still up in the air.
- zdragnar 5y ago
  We're still buying millions of dollars worth of oil from Russia daily because our government is afraid of blowback from further energy price inflation. Economic sanctions on China would absolutely cripple us. I don't doubt that, if they were committed to the idea, the CPC would likely be willing to ride out whatever we actually cobble together in response. They've been pushing heavily for self reliance in every industry for quite awhile now.
  - vandreas2 5y ago
    It would cripple them too. Being rich is only relative.
    - zdragnar 5y ago
      They haven't had too much of an issue with what Americans would consider insane lockdown measures during COVID. Given the trade surplus they have been running for years- well over $3 trillion worth total held in their foreign exchange reserves- I suspect they know (or believe) they would weather the sanctions better than we would. See: Disney, Apple, Nike and dozens of other large corporations all cut off Russia over Ukraine, yet maintain healthy relationships with China despite all of the horrors reportedly committed against the Uyghur Muslims.
dirtyid 5y ago
Not really. PRC war/political plans for TW has always assumed worst case scenario of US intervention. Any TW plan is a US deterrence plan foremost, which if successful opens up various options for TW from blockade to full out invasion. TW can be dismantled at leisure as long as PRC can deter US. The real question is whether PRC will take "half measure" options off the table and skip straight to leveling the island. UKR military improvements since 2014 thanks to western support is basically the porcupine model US has been pushing on TW. As was expanding US/NATO security architecture to trigger current "fighting to the last Ukrainian" strategy. Which has has pushed RU from "special operations" that would have spared most of the population to scorched earth. We'll have to see if UKR/TW thinks that's worth it once frank appraisal occurs when/if this war ends. This could very be a decade long war that turns most of Ukraine into Yemen. Except much harder for TW as an island not self sufficient in anything to support a prolonged insurgency. In the meantime, PRC has learned that US/NATO will not interdict directly when you have 6000 nukes instead of just 300. That most of major non-west resource exporters have remained neutral. There's also opportunity a prolonged war will divide US attention across Atlantic again. Better to push sooner when US military has not pivoted and TW is still at UKR 2014 levels of ill preparedness - many of potentially lessons and developments that could push TW scenario sooner instead of delay it.
2-718-281-828 5y ago
> The attempted invasion of Ukraine by Russia just reminded people that the best war plans don't survive the first contact with the enemy Or how Mike Tyson puts it: "Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth."
- gruez 5y ago
  That's very similar to what the parent poster already mentioned. >or in the more folksy words of Mike Tyson, everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.
audessuscest 5y ago
Right the other way. It would be the perfect timing for China. Do you think the west can afford sanctioning the shit out of China now? They can't even sanction Russia properly. Do you think China prefer to wait that the west figured their shit out to depend less on other countries? Plus now Russia, Belarus, depends so much from China... and I bet many other countries are thinking of getting the fuck away from the west financial system, considering how weak that make them, especially now that there's real alternative market / system emerging independently from the west. Most of all, Taiwan is a very strategic country, because of microchips production. Considering the sanctions (Apple, Intel, AMD, Samsung, Microsoft, Lenovo, Dell, probably more, are not selling in Russia anymore) Imagine the leverage that Taiwan would give to China, and the solution it would be for Russia. I would be very surprised that Taiwan is not next. Everything is pushing in that direction. Edit: As other mentioned, the outcome in Ukraine is certainly a big factor, but even if Russia fails somehow, I'm not sure that it wouldn't even make it more important for China to get Taiwan...
- davidjytang 5y ago
  > I would be very surprised that Taiwan is not next. Just wanna establish some clear understanding on what you mean by "next". Would you be very surprised if Taiwan is not invaded within 3 months? 6 months? or 12 months? Or what you mean is that you would be surprised that there can even be another invasion elsewhere after the invasion of Ukraine and before the invasion of Taiwan?
  - smegger001 5y ago
    depends on how this plays out. If the west gets it act together and helps Ukraine it may be postponed indefinitely. If they start making side deals with Russia and ignoring Ukraine while they start taking major losses 6 months to 2 years. If full scale war breaks out between Russia and NATO 3 months (we will be to busy to do anything about it or they will think that). If nuclear war starts it to chaotic to tell, but if say its a limited exchange and both make it out unbombed and they aren't all dying of radition poisoning from the fallout whenever they want.

kerneloftruth 5y ago

One thing is sure: if China still wants to invade Taiwan, they certainly have postponed their plans by a few years, maybe a decade, maybe even more. How can you be so certain? This reminds me of people saying just 14 days ago "I don't think Putin is going to invade." Taiwan is not Ukraine, indeed -- Taiwan would be easier to capture because it is an island. There aren't land borders across which supplies and weapons can be brought. They would have to come by ship or plane, which are easier to defeat. It would be easier, militarily, to take Taiwan. China certainly has the will, and it has learned that the worst it would face would be some sanctions.

kingcharles 5y ago
> some sanctions Some sanctions? The entire Russian economy has disappeared overnight. The only reason it has not been felt yet is due to inertia. There are still just about enough goods in the pipes to support things for weeks or months. But once computers start breaking, planes start breaking, shelves start to empty, and nothing is arriving to replace them, shit is going to hit the fan.
- somewhereoutth 5y ago
  Indeed. They're being unplugged from the 21st century.
  - kerneloftruth 5y ago
    Or have they been? "Unplugged" is a good metaphor, for they currently control the vast majority of energy to all of Europe[1]. We're turning Russia into a gigantic version of North Korea, and with the same major ally, China. What happens if Russia diverts its gas sales to China -- it's Europe that'll be unplugged. 1. https://www.loc.gov/resource/g5701h.ct003365/?r=0.025,0.336,0.692,0.396,0 https://www.loc.gov/resource/g5701h.ct003365/?r=0.025,0.336,...
    - somewhereoutth 5y ago
      Your reference is from 2008. Certainly recent events have concentrated minds regarding energy security in Europe, and likely self sufficiency (or at least better sources) will be achieved, much as food security was after ww2.
    - kingcharles 5y ago
      If China is the only available customer, how much do you think China will pay? They will have Russia by the balls. They will pay pennies on the Ruble. Europe will piss and moan for a while as prices go up, but Europe is rich enough to route around this problem. I agree though, we're turning Russia into a giant North Korea. What that means for the world, I don't know. In fact, I would say they're getting cut off worse than North Korea. Some of these companies canceling Russia probably operate (with permission) in North Korea.
ipnon 5y ago
To counter this claim, I'd ask you to consider which of two similarly sized invasions was easier to achieve: D-Day and the invasion of Western Europe, or Operation Barbarossa and the invasion of Eastern Europe. You may also consider why the Nazis never made it to Great Britain, and why Great Britain has been insulated from the Great Wars of Europe more often than it has taken part in the conflicts.
- JadeNB 5y ago
  > To counter this claim, I'd ask you to consider which of two similarly sized invasions was easier to achieve: D-Day and the invasion of Western Europe, or Operation Barbarossa and the invasion of Eastern Europe. You may also consider why the Nazis never made it to Great Britain, and why Great Britain has been insulated from the Great Wars of Europe more often than it has taken part in the conflicts. It seems that this paragraph is meant to suggest that Barbarossa was easier than D-Day, but this might not be the best example, since Barbarossa failed and D-Day succeeded. (Of course, a lot of things could have gone differently that could have made the outcomes very different, but I still find this example a little unconvincing.)
  - ipnon 5y ago
    Perhaps it would have been simply best to note that island nations are generally insulated from invasion in ways that continental nations are not. Great Britain had the long term national security to forge an empire while the continental nations of Europe were engaged in endless back-and-forth wars (often at the instigation of Great Britain). Japan had centuries of peaceful self-imposed isolation while the continental nations of China and Indochina were engaged in endless wars, which was utilized to build up an empire while safely protected by the Sea of Japan. Being an island nation is an immense geostrategic advantage that is apparently not completely obvious to all observers of history.
    - dirtyid 5y ago
      UK could be resupplied across the Atlantic by world's preeminenant industrial producer while German power projection of era couldn't comprehensively cripple GBR. German Blitz+blockade didn't achieve strategic goals of destroying GBR industries while also being distracted by land war. TW has even less food/resource security and entirely within range of PRC weapon platforms, who has more industrial capacity than US during peak of WW2 production. Also consider UK managed to hold onto Falklands. It's really about industrial capacity to wage attritional war - TW has an initial defensive bonus but massive resupply penalty. If PRC gains air superiority and deter outside intervention, taking over island is only matter of time. Merchant fleet assets alone is enough to ferry 100,000s anywhere on TW if PRC wants to human wave / million man swim in days. Dunkirk moved 350k bodies on 800 ships in a week. PRC has 50-80k fishing boats that can make the journey. It's hard to overstate PRC industrial advantage relative to TW.
Etherlord87 5y ago
The worst thing, that you don't mention: China has a much stronger economy than Russia. Currently we're cutting Russia from almost everything, but still (as silently as we can) buy its gas - because it would be very hard for us to stop buying it. Cutting off China? That would hurt both sides to the point I doubt it's even possible... But then again I wouldn't expect cutting Russia the way we did was possible. Still, even individuals boycotting China would probably hurt more than Taiwan is worth?
- sidibe 5y ago
  Chinese people are more likely to rage at the government if the economy goes bad. I don't know why that is considering the media is much more locked up than Russia's has been until now, but you can see local fury every once in a while where the government is forced to concede because of angry mobs
yongjik 5y ago
> Taiwan would be easier to capture because it is an island. That makes no sense. Being an island is good for you if you are the defender. For it to be a plus to China, China will first have to capture it.
- smegger001 5y ago
  only if you are self sufficient and not facing a opponent that has more that enough fire power to carpet bomb the entire island from a distance or more soldiers than you have bullets.
elihu 5y ago
I don't think an island invasion would be easier than a land invasion, but I agree that "China definitely won't invade Taiwan right now" is overly optimistic. It's probably not in their best interests, but Russia invading Ukraine wasn't in Russia's best interests either and they did it anyways.
davidjytang 5y ago
Taiwan is more difficult to capture exactly because it is difficult to sustain a well supplied continuous attack on an island 250 miles away. > the worst it would face would be some sanctions CCP lends its legitimacy on economy. That is one thing most vulnerable.

ipnon 5y ago

MANPADS, ATGM, and drones like the Bayraktar have now been shown to be much more effective than the same cost investment into aircraft, tanks and artillery. In addition the united international condemnation and sanctions have been greater than I think everyone imagined. China may conclude that Russian strategic goals would have been better served by maintaining their credible threat of invasion rather than actually invading, and adjust their strategy accordingly. But Russia is not China ...

internet_user 5y ago

>In 2014, Russia achieved a military miracle: they took over Crimea so quickly and without loss of blood, that they delivered a "fait accompli". Oh, how much would China like to replicate that in Taiwan. And that's what they were preparing for. That only seems like a miracle because you need to do more research into what Crimea actually is. Crimea was never actually part of Ukraine, only a paper "gift" to Ukranian SSR way back when, negligible amounts of ethnic Ukrainians live there. Nearly the entire jurisdiction is employed supporting the mostly russian tourist industry, or actual russian military, their Black Sea fleet. There were simply no other outcomes possible. It was a defacto Russian territory, with a token Ukranian security force against an entire Russian Black Sea fleet, and tens of thousands sailors and marines. It seems that even Ukraine itself didn't wholeheartedly consider Crimea it's own territory, essentially no resistance whatsoever.

Etherlord87 5y ago
> Crimea was never actually part of Ukraine You mean never before 1954. After the collapse of USSR, in 1994 Russia agreed to respect Ukraine's independence with its current (back then) borders, signed in the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances.
anothernewdude 5y ago
> Crimea was never actually part of Ukraine Such utter nonsense. Who did Russia take it from?
- unmole 5y ago
  Crimean Tartars?
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > > Crimea was never actually part of Ukraine > Such utter nonsense. Who did Russia take it from? The more full Russian nationalist argument is something like “Crimea was never part of Ukraine until Crimea was arbitrarily joined to the Ukraine SSR by the Soviet government, disregarding both the historical Russianness of Crimea and the historical invalidity of Ukraine as a nation.” No one actually denies that Ukraine controlled Crimea since Stalin gave it to them until 2014, they just deny the appropriateness of Stalin’s action and therefore all subsequent control of Crimes by Ukraine.

bingohbangoh 5y ago

I legitimately don't understand where all these "Ukraine is obviously winning" takes are coming from. If Ukraine was doing well, it wouldn't be giving out weapons to civilians [0], forming penal battalions [1], or lie about receiving NATO planes. [2] If Ukraine was doing well, it wouldn't be inflating death counts to be larger than the US involvement in Afghanistan, a 20 year period of time. [3,4] If Ukraine was doing well, they wouldn't need to make up a story about the Ghosts of Kyiv. [5,6] I am utterly utterly perplexed. Where is any semblance of proof that Russia is doing badly? They seem to be encircling the capital and winning city after city. It's only two weeks in. Did we expect better after the early adrenaline rush? Do they benefit from being told this? Are we just being setup to be told this is a Pyrrhic victory for the Russians? [0]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/26/ukraine-russia-militias/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/26/ukraine-russ... [1]: https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-releases-prisoners-combat-experience-war-russia-volodymyr-zelensky-1683175 https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-releases-prisoners-combat-e... [2]: https://www.newsweek.com/eu-ukraine-fighter-jet-promise-falling-apart-russia-advances-slovakia-poland-bulgaria-1683588 https://www.newsweek.com/eu-ukraine-fighter-jet-promise-fall... [3]: https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/news-oon-kst-gertv-boyovyh-donbas/31110937.html https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/news-oon-kst-gertv-boyovyh-do... [4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%932021) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80... [5]: https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-ukraines-ghost-of-kyiv-fighter-pilot/a-60951825 https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-ukraines-ghost-of-kyiv-figh... [6]: https://twitter.com/KFCBarstool/status/1497366093362520065?s=20&t=qurEK3YFjlm7dN114M5HOA https://twitter.com/KFCBarstool/status/1497366093362520065?s...

plorkyeran 5y ago
I legitimately don't understand how people keep interpreting "this doesn't seem to be going how Russia hoped it would" as "Ukraine is obviously winning". Those aren't the same thing at all.
- bingohbangoh 5y ago
  Where is the proof or source that this isn’t going as Russia would hope?

SkyMarshal 5y ago

> One thing is sure: if China still wants to invade Taiwan, they certainly have postponed their plans by a few years, maybe a decade, maybe even more. Not necessarily. CPC is still waiting to see what the US and NATO do in response to the Russian invasion, and especially Putin's threats of nuclear escalation. If China perceives that all the West will do is sanctions on Russia, but no direct military intervention to prevent a democratic country from being taken over by force, then China will deduce that nuclear saber rattling is enough to ensure the US won't intervene in a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. That may lead them to accelerate their plans to do just that, to accomplish it during a time that 1) Western leadership is easily deterred by nuclear threats, 2) the Chinese Navy has more ships than the US Navy, and 3) US and NATO are divided into fighting a 2-front war. CPC is also waiting to see the full extent of sanctions on and potential decoupling with Russia, how far the West will go in that regard. If CPC believes they could survive the same, again they'll be encouraged to accelerate their Taiwain plans. The jury's still out, but it's not a given that events have already decelerated CPC's intent to invade Taiwan. That's still up in the air.

zdragnar 5y ago
We're still buying millions of dollars worth of oil from Russia daily because our government is afraid of blowback from further energy price inflation. Economic sanctions on China would absolutely cripple us. I don't doubt that, if they were committed to the idea, the CPC would likely be willing to ride out whatever we actually cobble together in response. They've been pushing heavily for self reliance in every industry for quite awhile now.
- vandreas2 5y ago
  It would cripple them too. Being rich is only relative.
  - zdragnar 5y ago
    They haven't had too much of an issue with what Americans would consider insane lockdown measures during COVID. Given the trade surplus they have been running for years- well over $3 trillion worth total held in their foreign exchange reserves- I suspect they know (or believe) they would weather the sanctions better than we would. See: Disney, Apple, Nike and dozens of other large corporations all cut off Russia over Ukraine, yet maintain healthy relationships with China despite all of the horrors reportedly committed against the Uyghur Muslims.

dirtyid 5y ago

Not really. PRC war/political plans for TW has always assumed worst case scenario of US intervention. Any TW plan is a US deterrence plan foremost, which if successful opens up various options for TW from blockade to full out invasion. TW can be dismantled at leisure as long as PRC can deter US. The real question is whether PRC will take "half measure" options off the table and skip straight to leveling the island. UKR military improvements since 2014 thanks to western support is basically the porcupine model US has been pushing on TW. As was expanding US/NATO security architecture to trigger current "fighting to the last Ukrainian" strategy. Which has has pushed RU from "special operations" that would have spared most of the population to scorched earth. We'll have to see if UKR/TW thinks that's worth it once frank appraisal occurs when/if this war ends. This could very be a decade long war that turns most of Ukraine into Yemen. Except much harder for TW as an island not self sufficient in anything to support a prolonged insurgency. In the meantime, PRC has learned that US/NATO will not interdict directly when you have 6000 nukes instead of just 300. That most of major non-west resource exporters have remained neutral. There's also opportunity a prolonged war will divide US attention across Atlantic again. Better to push sooner when US military has not pivoted and TW is still at UKR 2014 levels of ill preparedness - many of potentially lessons and developments that could push TW scenario sooner instead of delay it.

2-718-281-828 5y ago

> The attempted invasion of Ukraine by Russia just reminded people that the best war plans don't survive the first contact with the enemy Or how Mike Tyson puts it: "Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth."

gruez 5y ago
That's very similar to what the parent poster already mentioned. >or in the more folksy words of Mike Tyson, everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.

audessuscest 5y ago

Right the other way. It would be the perfect timing for China. Do you think the west can afford sanctioning the shit out of China now? They can't even sanction Russia properly. Do you think China prefer to wait that the west figured their shit out to depend less on other countries? Plus now Russia, Belarus, depends so much from China... and I bet many other countries are thinking of getting the fuck away from the west financial system, considering how weak that make them, especially now that there's real alternative market / system emerging independently from the west. Most of all, Taiwan is a very strategic country, because of microchips production. Considering the sanctions (Apple, Intel, AMD, Samsung, Microsoft, Lenovo, Dell, probably more, are not selling in Russia anymore) Imagine the leverage that Taiwan would give to China, and the solution it would be for Russia. I would be very surprised that Taiwan is not next. Everything is pushing in that direction. Edit: As other mentioned, the outcome in Ukraine is certainly a big factor, but even if Russia fails somehow, I'm not sure that it wouldn't even make it more important for China to get Taiwan...

davidjytang 5y ago
> I would be very surprised that Taiwan is not next. Just wanna establish some clear understanding on what you mean by "next". Would you be very surprised if Taiwan is not invaded within 3 months? 6 months? or 12 months? Or what you mean is that you would be surprised that there can even be another invasion elsewhere after the invasion of Ukraine and before the invasion of Taiwan?
- smegger001 5y ago
  depends on how this plays out. If the west gets it act together and helps Ukraine it may be postponed indefinitely. If they start making side deals with Russia and ignoring Ukraine while they start taking major losses 6 months to 2 years. If full scale war breaks out between Russia and NATO 3 months (we will be to busy to do anything about it or they will think that). If nuclear war starts it to chaotic to tell, but if say its a limited exchange and both make it out unbombed and they aren't all dying of radition poisoning from the fallout whenever they want.