What's new

Ukraine war will make China more cautious on Taiwan, advisers say

Exercises by the US military have shown that the PLA wins in 9 out of ten scenarios, and the PLAN and PLAAF and also SRF and the GF are only getting stronger year after year.

In the late 20's and early 30's when China will make it's move, the US will not be able to do anything to stop China, and Taiwan will have to bend the knee or be utterly destroyed.

Chinese military advances are obvious given a handsome defense budget, exposure to GLOBAL technologies*, and extensive domestic R&D programs. Fair observation and point to make.

But American military advances ARE ALSO considerable (and continuous) given a handsome defense budget, valuable insight received from GLOBAL security commitments, and extensive domestic R&D programs. Americans neglected hypersonic munitions development - a miscalculation that allowed Russia and China to leave them behind in this particular domain but Americans are much ahead of the entire world in developing some key technologies including stealthy applications and the gap is nowhere close to being bridged by another country in similar pursuits. Americans have also started to develop hypersonic munitions and the scope of this initiative is much broader than Russian and Chinese applications.

About American military exercises:

American military exercises are typically informed by ASSUMPTIONS about what can happen in a war that might be fought with a particular opponent in a particular region at a particular point in time (Worst-Case Scenario). I will share two examples below.

Example # 1: An American military simulation that was conducted for war in Iraq before 1991 suggested that they will be able to shoot down F-117 aircraft and American military KIA will be around 30,000.

"Shortly before the allied offensive in the Persian Gulf war, the United States command anticipated that coalition casualties might run into tens of thousands killed and wounded, according to a report on the war issued by the Pentagon today.

Although the eventual toll never remotely approached that magnitude, a previously undisclosed order approved by President Bush, revealed in the report, suggested that casualties could run as high as 10 percent of ground combat troops. The order shows how seriously the Pentagon viewed the possibility that a bloody campaign might be required to oust nearly half a million Iraqi troops from Kuwait, even if a steady air campaign cut Iraq's strength in half before ground troops moved in."



- - - -

US-led forces defeated Iraqi armed forces and liberated Kuwait in 1991 with much lower losses than projections in reality.


Then COAS Mirza Aslam Baig predicted disaster for US-led forces in Iraq in 1991 but he was proven wrong as well.

- - - -

Example # 2: RAND assessment of Russian military capability in 2016 suggested that Russian armed forces will be able to overrun much of the Baltics in a war.

As Presently Postured, NATO Cannot Successfully Defend the Territory of its Most Exposed Members

  • Across multiple games using a wide range of expert participants in and out of uniform playing both sides, the longest it has taken Russian forces to reach the outskirts of the Estonian and/or Latvian capitals of Tallinn and Riga, respectively, is 60 hours.
  • Such a rapid defeat would leave NATO with a limited number of options, all bad.



- - - -

Russia is finding it very difficult to handle Ukraine let alone much of the Baltics in reality.


- - - -

Emphasis mine. American military exercises are INTENTIONALLY RIGGED to SIMULATE Worst-Case Scenario of (any) war but FINDINGS do NOT suggest GAME OVER - FINDINGS are aimed to provide DIRECTIONS for war-planners about how to improve American armed forces and avoid a bad outcome in a hypothetical war of choice.

How the reports of American military exercises are received in PRESS is another matter. For example: Iranians love to tout about the outcome of American Millennium Falcon (Scenario A) exercise in their PRESS for domestic consumption but their take is SKEWED and LIMITED in reality.

What will be the situation in the late 20's and early 30's remains to be seen, therefore.

- -

*Chinese can buy Russian arms, study them up close, and come up with something better. Americans and Europeans also felt comfortable in terms of sharing their technologies and expertise with the Chinese on many counts for a long time. For perspective, Chinese have taken over 117 British companies by now let alone companies of value of other countries from around the world. But times are changing and Americans are now attempting to curtail technology transfers from the WEST to China. Chinese have acquired numerous technologies and created considerable knowledge base to move things forward on their own by now but they will have to shift to much higher count of homegrown solutions to meet their various needs in the future. It remains to be seen how the emerging dynamic will affect Chinese progress.

Taiwan will face cyber attacks that will cripple all civil and military systems, you will have thousands of cruise and ballistic missiles flying in, and with a blockade (Taiwan imports most of its food and raw materials) their economy will collapse within months.

Russians have done much the same to Ukraine short of achieving complete blockade of the country due to Russian forces facing heavy resistance on the ground and unable to block Ukraine-Poland border. The results are less than convincing.


US/NATO made it possible for Ukrainian forces to offset the impact of Russian Cyberwarfare and EW assets.


Taiwan is already capable of engaging PLAN around its terrain with combination of its warships, jet fighters, and different types of cruise missiles (LACM variety). Taiwan is also developing a long-range LACM which it will use to strike at Chinese military positions in the mainland in case of war.

Chinese armed forces can take losses and degrade Taiwanese defenses out in the open but Taiwanese military infrastructure built inside the mountains will present significant challenge. IF PLAN suffers heavy losses in the exchange then China cannot achieve its fundamental objective of annexing Taiwan.

No country have fielded thousands of launchers for ballistic missiles (and cruise missiles) by the way - this is too expensive. For perspective:

Chinese IRBM launchers = 200 (count to be achieved)
Chinese MRBM launchers = 150 (count achieved)

PLAN have multiple warships but each is equipped with different types of munitions due to obvious reasons (multi-role).

PLAAF and boots on the ground will have to do the hard work in my view.

War is no longer easy to fight in some countries.
 
.
Chinese military advances are obvious given a handsome defense budget, exposure to GLOBAL technologies*, and extensive domestic R&D programs. Fair observation and point to make.

But American military advances ARE ALSO considerable (and continuous) given a handsome defense budget, valuable insight received from GLOBAL security commitments, and extensive domestic R&D programs. Americans neglected hypersonic munitions development - a miscalculation that allowed Russia and China to leave them behind in this particular domain but Americans are much ahead of the entire world in developing some key technologies including stealthy applications and the gap is nowhere close to being bridged by another country in similar pursuits. Americans have also started to develop hypersonic munitions and the scope of this initiative is much broader than Russian and Chinese applications.

About American military exercises:

American military exercises are typically informed by ASSUMPTIONS about what can happen in a war that might be fought with a particular opponent in a particular region at a particular point in time (Worst-Case Scenario). I will share two examples below.

Example # 1: An American military simulation that was conducted for war in Iraq before 1991 suggested that they will be able to shoot down F-117 aircraft and American military KIA will be around 30,000.

"Shortly before the allied offensive in the Persian Gulf war, the United States command anticipated that coalition casualties might run into tens of thousands killed and wounded, according to a report on the war issued by the Pentagon today.

Although the eventual toll never remotely approached that magnitude, a previously undisclosed order approved by President Bush, revealed in the report, suggested that casualties could run as high as 10 percent of ground combat troops. The order shows how seriously the Pentagon viewed the possibility that a bloody campaign might be required to oust nearly half a million Iraqi troops from Kuwait, even if a steady air campaign cut Iraq's strength in half before ground troops moved in."



- - - -

US-led forces defeated Iraqi armed forces and liberated Kuwait in 1991 with much lower losses than projections in reality.


Then COAS Mirza Aslam Baig predicted disaster for US-led forces in Iraq in 1991 but he was proven wrong as well.

- - - -

Example # 2: RAND assessment of Russian military capability in 2016 suggested that Russian armed forces will be able to overrun much of the Baltics in a war.

As Presently Postured, NATO Cannot Successfully Defend the Territory of its Most Exposed Members

  • Across multiple games using a wide range of expert participants in and out of uniform playing both sides, the longest it has taken Russian forces to reach the outskirts of the Estonian and/or Latvian capitals of Tallinn and Riga, respectively, is 60 hours.
  • Such a rapid defeat would leave NATO with a limited number of options, all bad.



- - - -

Russia is finding it very difficult to handle Ukraine let alone much of the Baltics in reality.


- - - -

Emphasis mine. American military exercises are INTENTIONALLY RIGGED to SIMULATE Worst-Case Scenario of (any) war but FINDINGS do NOT suggest GAME OVER - FINDINGS are aimed to provide DIRECTIONS for war-planners about how to improve American armed forces and avoid a bad outcome in a hypothetical war of choice.

How the reports of American military exercises are received in PRESS is another matter. For example: Iranians love to tout about the outcome of American Millennium Falcon (Scenario A) exercise in their PRESS for domestic consumption but their take is SKEWED and LIMITED in reality.

What will be the situation in the late 20's and early 30's remains to be seen, therefore.

- -

*Chinese can buy Russian arms, study them up close, and come up with something better. Americans and Europeans also felt comfortable in terms of sharing their technologies and expertise with the Chinese on many counts for a long time. For perspective, Chinese have taken over 117 British companies by now let alone companies of value of other countries from around the world. But times are changing and Americans are now attempting to curtail technology transfers from the WEST to China. Chinese have acquired numerous technologies and created considerable knowledge base to move things forward on their own by now but they will have to shift to much higher count of homegrown solutions to meet their various needs in the future. It remains to be seen how the emerging dynamic will affect Chinese progress.



Russians have done much the same to Ukraine short of achieving complete blockade there due to Russian forces facing heavy resistance and unable to secure Ukraine-Poland border in the course. The results are less than convincing.

Taiwan is already capable of engaging PLAN around its terrain with its warships, jet fighters, and different types of cruise missiles. Taiwan is also developing a long-range LACM which it will use to strike at Chinese military positions in the mainland.

Chinese military forces can take losses and degrade Taiwanese defenses but the contention is about defeating Taiwanese military infrastructure inside the mountains which will be much more difficult to achieve.

No country have fielded thousands of launchers for ballistic missiles (and cruise missiles) by the way - this is too expensive. For perspective:

Chinese IRBM launchers = 200 (count to be achieved)
Chinese MRBM launchers = 150 (count achieved)

PLAN have multiple warships but each is equipped with different types of munitions due to obvious reasons.

PLAAF and boots on the ground will do the hard work in my view.


Protecting Guam: The biggest slice of the request is $42.4 billion aimed at building a new air and missile defense system for Guam, along with new “electronic warfare, space, cyber, and over-the-horizon radar” systems spread throughout the region.

Those systems would form the backbone of an integrated sensing and tracking infrastructure across the Pacific that would feed into a network of precision long-range weapons launched from land, sea and air, allowing commanders near-real-time targeting information.



LeGen, PDF members still have a poor understanding of US posture and plans in the Indo-Pacific.

Just like how their shocked at the Russian debacle in Ukraine, they’ll be shocked by China in Taiwan.
 
. .
Chinese military advances are obvious given a handsome defense budget, exposure to GLOBAL technologies*, and extensive domestic R&D programs. Fair observation and point to make.

But American military advances ARE ALSO considerable (and continuous) given a handsome defense budget, valuable insight received from GLOBAL security commitments, and extensive domestic R&D programs. Americans neglected hypersonic munitions development - a miscalculation that allowed Russia and China to leave them behind in this particular domain but Americans are much ahead of the entire world in developing some key technologies including stealthy applications and the gap is nowhere close to being bridged by another country in similar pursuits. Americans have also started to develop hypersonic munitions and the scope of this initiative is much broader than Russian and Chinese applications.

About American military exercises:

American military exercises are typically informed by ASSUMPTIONS about what can happen in a war that might be fought with a particular opponent in a particular region at a particular point in time (Worst-Case Scenario). I will share two examples below.

Example # 1: An American military simulation that was conducted for war in Iraq before 1991 suggested that they will be able to shoot down F-117 aircraft and American military KIA will be around 30,000.

"Shortly before the allied offensive in the Persian Gulf war, the United States command anticipated that coalition casualties might run into tens of thousands killed and wounded, according to a report on the war issued by the Pentagon today.

Although the eventual toll never remotely approached that magnitude, a previously undisclosed order approved by President Bush, revealed in the report, suggested that casualties could run as high as 10 percent of ground combat troops. The order shows how seriously the Pentagon viewed the possibility that a bloody campaign might be required to oust nearly half a million Iraqi troops from Kuwait, even if a steady air campaign cut Iraq's strength in half before ground troops moved in."



- - - -

US-led forces defeated Iraqi armed forces and liberated Kuwait in 1991 with much lower losses than projections in reality.


Then COAS Mirza Aslam Baig predicted disaster for US-led forces in Iraq in 1991 but he was proven wrong as well.

- - - -

Example # 2: RAND assessment of Russian military capability in 2016 suggested that Russian armed forces will be able to overrun much of the Baltics in a war.

As Presently Postured, NATO Cannot Successfully Defend the Territory of its Most Exposed Members

  • Across multiple games using a wide range of expert participants in and out of uniform playing both sides, the longest it has taken Russian forces to reach the outskirts of the Estonian and/or Latvian capitals of Tallinn and Riga, respectively, is 60 hours.
  • Such a rapid defeat would leave NATO with a limited number of options, all bad.



- - - -

Russia is finding it very difficult to handle Ukraine let alone much of the Baltics in reality.


- - - -

Emphasis mine. American military exercises are INTENTIONALLY RIGGED to SIMULATE Worst-Case Scenario of (any) war but FINDINGS do NOT suggest GAME OVER - FINDINGS are aimed to provide DIRECTIONS for war-planners about how to improve American armed forces and avoid a bad outcome in a hypothetical war of choice.

How the reports of American military exercises are received in PRESS is another matter. For example: Iranians love to tout about the outcome of American Millennium Falcon (Scenario A) exercise in their PRESS for domestic consumption but their take is SKEWED and LIMITED in reality.

What will be the situation in the late 20's and early 30's remains to be seen, therefore.

- -

*Chinese can buy Russian arms, study them up close, and come up with something better. Americans and Europeans also felt comfortable in terms of sharing their technologies and expertise with the Chinese on many counts for a long time. For perspective, Chinese have taken over 117 British companies by now let alone companies of value of other countries from around the world. But times are changing and Americans are now attempting to curtail technology transfers from the WEST to China. Chinese have acquired numerous technologies and created considerable knowledge base to move things forward on their own by now but they will have to shift to much higher count of homegrown solutions to meet their various needs in the future. It remains to be seen how the emerging dynamic will affect Chinese progress.



Russians have done much the same to Ukraine short of achieving complete blockade of the country due to Russian forces facing heavy resistance on the ground and unable to block Ukraine-Poland border. The results are less than convincing.


US/NATO made it possible for Ukrainian forces to offset the impact of Russian Cyberwarfare and EW assets.


Taiwan is already capable of engaging PLAN around its terrain with combination of its warships, jet fighters, and different types of cruise missiles (LACM variety). Taiwan is also developing a long-range LACM which it will use to strike at Chinese military positions in the mainland in case of war.

Chinese armed forces can take losses and degrade Taiwanese defenses out in the open but Taiwanese military infrastructure built inside the mountains will present significant challenge. IF PLAN suffers heavy losses in the exchange then China cannot achieve its fundamental objective of annexing Taiwan.

No country have fielded thousands of launchers for ballistic missiles (and cruise missiles) by the way - this is too expensive. For perspective:

Chinese IRBM launchers = 200 (count to be achieved)
Chinese MRBM launchers = 150 (count achieved)

PLAN have multiple warships but each is equipped with different types of munitions due to obvious reasons (multi-role).

PLAAF and boots on the ground will do the hard work in my view.

War is no longer easy to fight in some countries.

Yeah but the US is thousands of miles away and Taiwan is just a hundred miles off the coast, the US will not risk tens of thousands of casualties and the potential destruction of its major cities for Taiwan, it just won't.

Taiwan will not be able to resist a blockade, most of its food and raw supplies come from abroad. And frankly key US allies like Japan, SK or the Philippines will never allow attacks against China from thier soil, so the US would have to bring everything in from the sea.

By the late 20's the PLAN and the PLAAF would be far too powerful for the US navy and the USAF especially in the south Pacific
 
.
Taiwanese defense spending is not as high as it should be, considering the security threat that they face. It is a high income country and therefore can afford to spend more by sacrificing some of it's luxuries.

This makes me think that the people of the island may not be as willing to fight as the Ukranians have. 🤔
 
. .
Yeah but the US is thousands of miles away and Taiwan is just a hundred miles off the coast, the US will not risk tens of thousands of casualties and the potential destruction of its major cities for Taiwan, it just won't.

Taiwan will not be able to resist a blockade, most of its food and raw supplies come from abroad. And frankly key US allies like Japan, SK or the Philippines will never allow attacks against China from thier soil, so the US would have to bring everything in from the sea.

By the late 20's the PLAN and the PLAAF would be far too powerful for the US navy and the USAF especially in the south Pacific

Russians feel strongly about Ukraine but do you see Russians bombing American cities even though they can clearly see US/NATO providing support to Ukraine and creating much difficulty for them? In spite of the fact that Russian forces have suffered heavy losses in Ukraine by now? In spite of the fact that Russian economy is being subjected to economy-crippling sanctions from OECD? I am pretty sure that Vladimir Putin is pissed but he understands his limitations.

I completely understand how the Chinese feel about Taiwan given its history and geographical proximity. Chinese feel strongly about Taiwan much like Russians feel strongly about Ukraine.

But it is important to understand how others feel about Taiwan:




I am not sure how you determined that the PLAN and the PLAAF would be far too powerful for the USN and the USAF in the South Pacific by the late 20s? Any independent data to support this perspective?

There is fairly large amount of data to suggest otherwise.

PLAN is impressive in its current form and will be more so by the late 20s but others are not sitting idle, my friend.

Conventional wisdom.

- - - -

SpaceX Starlink makes geography redundant and is one of the most secure and robust networks in existence.


Taiwan can also be granted access to this network if its own cyber network fails when subjected to cyberwarfare.

Ukrainians shifted to SpaceX Starlink to offset impact of Russian cyberwarfare efforts in the region; more than Russian cyberwarfare efforts in fact. Google is your friend.
 
.
Everyday we keep improving ourselves and everyday america declines is a victory for us. We will bleed america dry through a thousand cuts from North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, Russia etc while America demographically and politically implode in the coming years. Chinese are smart to not force anything especially when they are winning every single day.
 
. .
Exercises by the US military have shown that the PLA wins in 9 out of ten scenarios, and the PLAN and PLAAF and also SRF and the GF are only getting stronger year after year.

In the late 20's and early 30's when China will make it's move, the US will not be able to do anything to stop China, and Taiwan will have to bend the knee or be utterly destroyed.



Taiwan will face cyber attacks that will cripple all civil and military systems, you will have thousands of cruise and ballistic missiles flying in, and with a blockade (Taiwan imports most of its food and raw materials) their economy will collapse within months.
That's because we dont do exercise when you have all the advantage, everyone know how to fight when you are winning, what you really need to learn is how to turn the table.

US military exercise is heavily in favor of the OPFOR, that's because most exercise we conduct is aiming to learn something with the experience, and that experience is not riding on victory to Glory.

For example, I was in a FTX (Field Training Exercise) once when the Red Force (OPFOR) have 5 to 1 advantage and Blue Force (US Force) have to defend a town where you cannot use MSR and ASR for support nor airdrop. You have to defend the town for 5 days and you are giving 12 hours head start, and by day 3, we (I was in Blue Force) were overrun with 80% casualty and inflicting 40% or so on the enemy. That is expected but it also test how you adapt to the situation.

No exercise is designed for your own force to win, because that would have been too easy.....
 
. .
That's because we dont do exercise when you have all the advantage, everyone know how to fight when you are winning, what you really need to learn is how to turn the table.

US military exercise is heavily in favor of the OPFOR, that's because most exercise we conduct is aiming to learn something with the experience, and that experience is not riding on victory to Glory.

For example, I was in a FTX (Field Training Exercise) once when the Red Force (OPFOR) have 5 to 1 advantage and Blue Force (US Force) have to defend a town where you cannot use MSR and ASR for support nor airdrop. You have to defend the town for 5 days and you are giving 12 hours head start, and by day 3, we (I was in Blue Force) were overrun with 80% casualty and inflicting 40% or so on the enemy. That is expected but it also test how you adapt to the situation.

No exercise is designed for your own force to win, because that would have been too easy.....
Back in 1985 when I was still on the F-111, we had an exercise where we were 'attacked' by the Luftwaffe's F-104s. Now, those F-104 guys were borderline crazies. The exercise inspectors were hitting us with red cards everywhere. If a truck was carded, everyone inside the truck 'died' and the truck had to stay where it was 'killed', even if the truck was blocking taxiway traffic and jets had to be rerouted for takeoff. Similar when were exercised with the Italians at Aviano where the Blue Force were consistently at a disadvantage.

These guys here have no idea what goes on yet they talk as if they know everything.
 
. .
My lack of military knowledge? What do YOU have other than knowing how to post reams after reams of pictures? More likely what is staggering is that you think that those pictures make your argument credible.
" So Taiwan inflict serious losses on the PLAN making the blockade weaker, then we resupply Taiwan defenses."
LOL What I have? I just educated you the military knowldege on Coastal Anti-Ship Missile and 800+ 3.5gen planes that can easily blockade Taiwan. Which part you still don‘t understand? I'm still waiting for your brilliant military tactics that can magically resupply 20 million people or your magic ships that power boost by modern resupply doctrine to do resupply after Taiwan weaker PLAN.:omghaha:
 
Last edited:
.
Without a modern airpower doctrine, the J-20 is worthless.
1648881623133.jpeg

WOW!!! Our brilliant "professional" once again offered a mind blowing military strategy for Taiwan!! His brilliant military strategy for TAIWAN to counter PLAAF 700+ 3.5 gen and 100+ J20 is that Taiwan doing nothing and bet on the PLAAF doesn't have a modern airpower doctrine.
What is this Holy! Mighty! Powerful! Modern air power doctrine you are talking about? Is it the bottom right doctrine that can give F16 +30 stealth and E2-D +20% anti-stealth detection range?


422743084.jpg
 
Last edited:
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom