3 ms·

>A top US Navy official said on Wednesday that a mainland Chinese invasion of Taiwan could take place as soon as this year, based partly on comments by Chinese

>A top US Navy official said on Wednesday that a mainland Chinese invasion of Taiwan could take place as soon as this year, based partly on comments by Chinese President Xi Jinping at a major political conference in Beijing this week. Such comment, even partly, does not exist. >“What we’ve seen over the past 20 years is that they have delivered on every promise they’ve made earlier than they said they were going to deliver on it,” he said in a discussion hosted by the Atlantic Council. True, but actual deadline is like 2049, modernization/reform is only half done, and if anything PRC still needs to wait 5 years to finish building 1000+ nukes for deterrance and for USN ships to decommission during decade of concern. Like there's no factors that presses for TW invasion THIS YEAR OR NEXT unless there's TW/US independance drama during 2023-24 election cycles. >“So when we talk about the 2027 window, in my mind, that has to be a 2022 window or potentially a 2023 window. I can’t rule it out.” Note the 2027 "window" is purely a fabrication of US blob, conveniently timed for another election cycle. Just in terms of pure incentives, it seems like US is the one itching for an early war since current analysis suggest they might have chance in near short term but medium/long term regional force balance will favour PRC. Hence the eroding of strategic ambiguity etc. That said 2022/2023 window, AGAIN THAT'S RIGHT NOW, there's essentially nothing US can do to bolster posture in that timeframe. I surmise this is hyperbole testimony to fish for the emergency procurement powers Pentagon wants to support UKR war... but really for TW since MIC is not producing enough for both.

Throwawayaerlei 4y ago
"That said 2022/2023 window, AGAIN THAT'S RIGHT NOW, there's essentially nothing US can do to bolster posture in that timeframe." Simply moving most of our attack subs into the theater after full weapons loadouts would massively if "silently" bolster our posture. We could also shift surface assets there. We're not going to be able to build many more Standard missiles in a 2.5 month timeframe, but we could move a lot of Arleigh Burke class destroyers into the theater and extending all the way to Guam. We might have some anti-missile equipment we could move to that island, don't know how much the war in the Ukraine has drained those. That's just off the top of my head before I go to sleep, I'm sure there's lots ore.
- dirtyid 4y ago
  Good points. By "posture" I meant more in terms of new capabilities in sufficient stocks or even current ordnances in sufficient stocks which by most reports I've read US is currently lacking for full spectrum PRC war (and vice versa). IMO PLA being ready for TW invasion = PLA ready for long and total confrontation with US, including an all the marbles forward deployment posture. Like if dear admiral thinks PLA delivers early & is ready, then that implies PLA is prepared for whatever US can pre-position forward. Including mature ASW capabilities + huge seabed sensor suits to deal with ~6-9 on duty+training SSGNs and all the antiship capabilites to deal with however many CSGs USN can surge. If he really thinks PLA is ready to fight near term, then the PLA is much further along than the typical bullish PLA watchers.

Throwawayaerlei 4y ago

"That said 2022/2023 window, AGAIN THAT'S RIGHT NOW, there's essentially nothing US can do to bolster posture in that timeframe." Simply moving most of our attack subs into the theater after full weapons loadouts would massively if "silently" bolster our posture. We could also shift surface assets there. We're not going to be able to build many more Standard missiles in a 2.5 month timeframe, but we could move a lot of Arleigh Burke class destroyers into the theater and extending all the way to Guam. We might have some anti-missile equipment we could move to that island, don't know how much the war in the Ukraine has drained those. That's just off the top of my head before I go to sleep, I'm sure there's lots ore.

dirtyid 4y ago
Good points. By "posture" I meant more in terms of new capabilities in sufficient stocks or even current ordnances in sufficient stocks which by most reports I've read US is currently lacking for full spectrum PRC war (and vice versa). IMO PLA being ready for TW invasion = PLA ready for long and total confrontation with US, including an all the marbles forward deployment posture. Like if dear admiral thinks PLA delivers early & is ready, then that implies PLA is prepared for whatever US can pre-position forward. Including mature ASW capabilities + huge seabed sensor suits to deal with ~6-9 on duty+training SSGNs and all the antiship capabilites to deal with however many CSGs USN can surge. If he really thinks PLA is ready to fight near term, then the PLA is much further along than the typical bullish PLA watchers.