Both, actually and you post mentioned that you've seen both War and Crime.
Human mind is a complicated organ, I mean crimes or war are not to different in my opinion unless there is a noble cause attach to it, but than who will decide that which cause is noble and which is not ? we have Jihadi's claiming their cause is noble and we have Allied forces fighting for " Freedom & Liberty " claim their cause is noble, in my opinion both are wrong. The psyche of War and people signing up for it is not as simple as we some time assume to be, there are many people who join Military services because of their own innate tendency for killing, Killing without question just because my superior said so is never something I can wrap my head around.
That is why I wish to stay away from all of this, just live simple life which is nothing short of some battlefield these days.
Wars are very simple, yet, extremely relative, this convo somehow reminded me of the time I was doing some studying Philosophy of War (Was thinking I was going to be a lifer, so I went the path that will get me to National War College, anyway). War Philosopher such as Hugo Grotius or Carl von Clausewitz would argue the aim or reason of war is always correct and always not correct, because no two sides can agree to a term of war, and that's why war happened in the first place.
A war is a clash of ideology that cannot be solved civilly, some like Clausewitz would argue war is the extension of Policy, other would argue war itself is a policy. But either way, whichever side you are on, the reason is always right according to your side, whether you agree with or not.
On the other hand, the saying goes, theirs are not to reason why, but to do or die. That is the hierarchy of soldiers, you don't really question why you are in a war, you are there to do as told, and that's what soldier do.
I think China might do some sort of shock and awe strategy, I mean quicker they destroy the Taiwanese Defense the better, I wonder if China can afford to extend the war and let it turn into asymmetrical warfare, Plus another question here is does Taiwan has the Terrain for it ? I mean Afghanistan was a whole different level, plus Asymmetrical warfare is more effective with crazy lunatics who will strap themselves with bombs to blow on Chinese convoys, Are Taiwanese up for that ? If Chinese start turning the streets red, I think the Taiwanese will give up rather quickly, they can't (in my opinion) resist like Iraq/Afghans/ and other ME'rn country which US fought. As for the cost, It would be interesting to see how Chinese Military industry can hold, I remember watching a documentary on US military industry at world war 2, and the way they turn many factories and other industries to make weapons and stuff, is China capable of it ?
The simpilest term is there are NO shock and awe if you are facing a near peer enemy, with today ISTAR asset, you know from the moment your enemy build up force to the moment they launch the attack.
The problem for China is, they would need to mass enough troop and board them, so they can be transport on the other side of Taiwan strait. And that cannot escape scrutiny the moment they did that, I mean you will need troop, ship, and supply, all of which is shown quite openly, which will give Taiwan time to prepare.
On the other hand, it really depends on how Taiwan sees themselves, Ukraine stays and fight while Afghan melt like butter, both are different case, I mean, until there such a time they were really under attack, we don't know, and as such, as a war planner, you cannot afford to make an assumption that they don't. It's not smart to assume your enemy will not fight back, Putin made a giant *** out of himself and drag Russia down because of that, would Xi want to gamble the same way? A smart man will bet on no. But asymmetrical warfare can be fought anytime and anywhere, again, if you are talking about a determined foe.
Also worth notice that US is fighting a expeditionary war in Both Iraq and Afghanistan, that being the case, China will most likely face the same issue US has, which is supply and logistic issue, Military Strategy dictate you never outrun your supply line, otherwise you are just dangle out to dry, thing is, island warfare is probably the worse on supplying invading troop, because everything you have, you will have to come in piecemeal, unlike ground base logistic, naval base logistic take a longer lead time to load and unload, it generally take 2 days to unload a ship, and then you have to distribute those supply and put them forward, that time WILL jam up your operation. In WW2, we solved that by creating the "Red Ball Express" system. Would China be able to replicate that? I don't know.
So this is more technical discussion, so take my opinion as a laymen who never hold a real gun or see a military base, my very simple logic dictates that it should not be a issue for China because China will secure the ports, and Airports, I mean surely they know about the importance of it, so their priority would be taking out Taiwan's Navy and Airforce, land troops they can easily handle with their sheer firepower, plus China can use the fishing ships or that fleet to load small stuff like weapons and ammunition, now 1 or 10 or 100 ships won't make a difference but Chinese fishing ships are crazy in numbers, they can also be utilized to neutralize any counter attacking force from Taiwan navy or even US/Allies, swarms of ships loading with explosive can make a decent tactic in my opinion.
I would ask some Chinese guy to expand more on that, that would be helpful.
Well, that's a dilemma for the Chinese. In WW2. and in Ukraine, both case when the invader (We in WW2 and Russia in Ukraine) try to take those port and airfield, it will ended up destroying them, Cherbourg was out basically until October 1944 before the Allied can use it for their own, and in Ukrainian case, Zhuliany Airport and Hostomol Airport were outright denied by the Ukrainian and Mariupol and Berdiansk were bomb to beyond any use. All those contribute to the logistic woe greatly to the Russian, to a point they have to abandon the entire Northern Front and seriously relied upon Crimea to supply both Western Offensive and Southern Offensive, and that directly contributed to why they can't go pass Mykolaiv and attack Odessa.
On the other hand, if Taiwanese did what the Ukrainian did in Mariupol and basically just suck in Chinese troop for as long as they could (Mariupol lasted 84 days) that will seriously hamper the Chinese schedule for war, and without those area capture, there are no way Chinese can advance further inland, which will give Taiwanese time to organise their defence. Sure, China can most likely capture Keelung or Taichung port for example, but how much resource the Chinese have to divert and how long the delay will be is the consideration here.
At the end of the days, it's never capturing those port is an issue, how intact and how much use you can get from those area is the issue, and how much blood drawn and how much delay you can take is also an issue here.
And the fishing boat swamping tactics won't work on navy with capable coastal defences.
I think Allies will keep their distance, I mean saw that in Ukraine war, China if they ever took the Russian route will also be seen the mad man of Asia, and I think Allies although have treaties with America but no one wants to risk their country/troops/people on the expense of keeping US the sole Superpower, US will surely try to involve more countries so their intervention will have more legitimacy like they did in War on Terror or ME'rn wars. Plus Nuclear Gamble can pay off in their conquest as well, I mean its hard to believe China only have roughly 300-400 Nukes, I bet they have more. So if they are threaten by the combine power of West than they use the same Nuclear card to boo off the world, its either Taiwan that falls or the world. I am not sure even US is not ready for that, Is US ready to risk it all for a tiny Island ? given the fact that US has seen significant rise in voices who are fed up with US acting like world police and getting involved in foreign wars, plus the coming Gen Z and their ideas, things are changing rapidly in fact I believe that even if US enters the war there will be a Vietnam like protests that US will face back home.
The problem is, while I do agree direct influence will not be likely, but the west will most likely do what they are doing to the Russian now to China, and what they are supplying now to the Ukrainian, and that alone could be a problem. China will most likely like Russia that would not be able to do anything as long as the West does not cross a certain redline. While you can say Western Allies may not have the stomach to fight a war with China, the reverse is also true for China because if they really do fight the west, it will jsut get their war so much harder, that's the risk matrix Russia has to made when US and the West supplies weapon to Ukraine. Would you want to risk going after Western asset and drag the West into the war? Or you keep it small and manageable by ignoring the weapon supplies as long as it is on a acceptable level??
The West is a very funny business, as long as they were not directly involved, money mean literally nothing to the people, which mean as long as there are no western troop fighting in Taiwan, the chances of anti-war protest in US is small, in fact, I would imagine the hurdle is smaller than provide arms to Ukraine, because Taiwan can literally buy them off US instead of sending it to them as aid, which US will probably see this as an opportunities.
And if US supply arms to Taiwan, which they are already doing in a great deal now, the changes of landscape will not affect US as much, not too sure about EU because EU is not a traditional arms supplier to Taiwan.
Well if US just did what they are doing in case of Ukraine then that won't help Taiwan, China can blockade the Taiwan Island and any threat to their Navy from the USN can be met but Ballistic Missile and we all die, again the question always comes down to two, 1) Does China have Balls to take the initiative against the Taiwan ? 2) How Far US is willing to go to save a Tiny Island that serve little to no purpose to US except a counter force against the Chinese dominance in the region ? .
China can never blockade Taiwan completely, they just don't have enough ship, and with the Anti-Ship asset Taiwan have, Chinese Navy will be push to 100 miles away from Taiwan. On the other hand, if US is going to do what they are doing to Ukraine to Taiwan, China cannot blockade those, because that would mean boarding or even firing at US flagged ship, I am pretty sure that is considered as an act of war with the US.
en.m.wikipedia.org
worldpopulationreview.com
