How can China take Tawain?

[Officer of Engineers]

Originally posted by Praxus
Well that's obvious:D

I mean conventionally because China won't resort on Nuclear weapons because that would almost surely mean a US pre-emptive strike on their ICBM's and MRBM(Is that correct for Medium Range Ballistic Missile?) with either nuclear weapons or conventional.

Also I edited my post.

I saw that, my reply is following but nukes is always in the back of my mind when talking this scenario.

Let's get one thing straight right off the bat, the PLA acknowledges that once the US is involved, they have no chance of conquering TW. Their actions is planned on preventing/delaying (may in fact even a matter of hours) US involvement.

There is a very strong possibility the Chinese would resort to nukes not because of desire but in the "use them or lose them" scenario. The CMC HQ would be the one running the TW ops. It would be a very tempting target for the US. It is, however, also the national nuclear authority. If the CMC HQ is targetted, the Chinese may in fact launch nukes before they lose the ability to do so.

Originally posted by Praxus
but he is also ignoring the fact that even if they could(which they may very well be able to do) establish a beachhead it would be extremely hard for them to push foward into the mainland and win within a couple month period.

It would help if you know how the PLA thinks. Read this thread, it is a summary of over five years work.

CDF & TMF's work on the PLA WZC in the TW Context

[Ironduke]

Originally posted by Praxus
Well that's obvious:D

I mean conventionally because China won't resort on Nuclear weapons because that would almost surely mean a US pre-emptive strike on their ICBM's and MRBM(Is that correct for Medium Range Ballistic Missile?) with either nuclear weapons or conventional.

Also I edited my post.

We might as well face it though, neither side is willing to risk a nuclear exchange over Taiwan.

What I do see as a probability in the event of a conflict is that the United States will do everything short of outright war. This means giving Taiwan up-to-the-minute intelligence information, stationing a carrier fleet off the coast of China, probably embargoes and sanctions against PRC, piloting fighter jets for the ROCAF, supplying arms, clandestine ops, etc.

[UnitedDiversity]

To: Everyone

China VS. Taiwan? check out this thread. It's a very very long thing to read but it has some good points on why China cannot take taiwan, and some good points on why China can take Taiwan.

http://www.pakistanidefenceforum.com...0&#entry253391

Oh and people like Ironman, or M21sniper don't have to bother reading it, it's only the same old discussion that has been inactive for like 2 months.


My point of view on the Taiwan matter is that, in any case, there are too many variables to determine the winning side. So I will stay nuteral on this matter, although when I do feel like debating, I will be biased towards the Chinese side because I am Chinese.

[Praxus]

China can not invade Taiwan and win at this point of time and it is that simple. PAC-3 and PAC-2 GEM would greatly deminish the Ballistic missile threat which at the moment is China's only stick. China can't bring Taiwan back into the fold and they know it. That's why a war hasn't started yet.

[UnitedDiversity]

To: [Praxus]

the war hasn't started yet is not because that China can't take Taiwan, it's because no one want a war.

[Praxus]

the war hasn't started yet is not because that China can't take Taiwan, it's because no one want a war.

If they don't want a war they should stop threatening Taiwan with a war. The fact is that China is making empty threats and pretending they are less impotent then they really are.

You claim it will take 6 Carrier Groups to take out the PLAN yet a single Carrier Group contains more fire power then all of the PLAN ships combined.

[UnitedDiversity]

To: [Praxus]

the threats are half empty. If Taiwan really crossed the line, China would think twice before attacking, but that doesn't mean they won't eventially attack.

Remember that just becaue China doesn't want a war, doesn't mean they won't fight one.

[Bill]

It will likely never happen, which means everyone wins.

[Ray]

I was re reading Simpkins Red Armour. This book brings out an intereting lesson - We must not look at other countries with OUR mindset. That is the cardinal mistake.

I read one article on the CDF by the Colonel. it gives an insight into the mind of the Chinese leadership. Though the Colonel is not a Chinese national and still far removed from the cultural mindset of the Mainland Chinese, yet he is far closer to the mindset than, let us say, me - even though it is just the Himalayas which requires a small climb which separate the Chinese and me, while the Colonel has to swim the Pacific to reach!:D

[Officer of Engineers]

Sir,

My thanks for your compliments but that insight came from years of being wrong and butting my head against brick walls. I've made so many mistakes concerning the PLA that for every one article, I could write a book about my wrong assumptions.

[Ray]

Honestly, this thread is getting as interesting as the 'friendly' banter I had with my good and close friend Sniper M21 and 155. In fact, I count him as a dashed fine bloke after the banter. Good fellow. Likewise, I am sure Prax and Col will appreciate each other's views since both have jolly fine points to offer and I am grateful that I am getting enlightened.

Though not quite on the subject, I must confess my visitation and observation of the threads on this board has made me understand a wee bit better of the mindset of the US folks. The rather 'inhumane and callous' military actions post Iraq war in Iraq used to shock me. But I have now understood the vast cultural, ethnic and historical gulf that divides us. Yet, the gulf that divides us from you palls when I realise that that is the way you all view life. You detest the UN, I can't help but think it is the salvation of the weak against the strong. You fire first and then talk, I feel lets talk and then fire. Therefore, nothing shocks me any more. It's the way you are and it's the way we are East of Suez.

The Russians may have had an agenda, but I think let them gas. We will understand them better and when the time comes to interact for a common good, we will know exactly how 'the cat shall jump'. Even Shield had his value.

I wish to thank Ironman, Tophatter and the Colonel for being such sobering influences on this board and for being so tolerant. Ironman has made the board interesting by his posting info from around the world so that we could express ourselves.

I thank Sniper for being 'difficult' and teaching me that I must build in myself more tolerance. I thank Colonel to understand the expatriate Chinese mind, even though he has never seen China and I hope I shall wend my way there soon. And beat his to that. BTW, did you know Shanghai was sinking?

Bring back Shield even if he is racist. We are all racists in some way or the other.

Admins, wipe this post from the face of the earth if it is offending, though it is not meant to be so.

[TopHatter]

Originally posted by Ray
Honestly, this thread is getting as interesting as the 'friendly' banter ...Though not quite on the subject, I must confess my visitation and observation of the threads on this board has made me understand a wee bit better of the mindset of the US folks. The rather 'inhumane and callous' military actions post Iraq war in Iraq used to shock me. But I have now understood the vast cultural, ethnic and historical gulf that divides us...
I wish to thank Ironman, Tophatter and the Colonel for being such sobering influences on this board and for being so tolerant.

Ray
Thanks for the good words, I know I certainly appreciate them. I really like the banter as well and I agree with Ironman that debate and differences of opinion are what really make a board work.
Now, as for me being sober...well, :ermm

[Officer of Engineers]

Sir,

I have to say that it is an honour to have met your aquaintance. I know we had our difficulties but once we reached common ground, I believe that we were able to explain to each other our thoughts without clash though we do disagree on our views.

I must say that your introductions have been an eye openner for me, especially to the ethos of the InA. If you're any reflection, Sir, then the InA must be the most honoured bound army on earth, valuing honour above combat efficiency, a most facinating view and one that I'm afraid that I fail to embrace as much as you do.

[Blademaster]

Thank you for the compliments of the InA. But remember always, there is always a bad apple in every buschel. We must be vigilant to weed those bad apples out and if the damage is incurred, we must contained the damage and then repair the damage. The key action is VIGILANCE. This is true for every army and witness the history of those who failed to take this lesson to heart.

[Ray]

Honour is indeed an important aspect of our Armed Forces. Legacy of the British? After all, its an Officer and a GENTLEMAN.

It may surprise you, but in the Battle of Shakargrh [1971], the Pakistani Battalion Commander led a Counter Attack personnally and was mowed down.

After the war, the Indian Commanding Officer Lt Gen [the Lt Col] VP Airey, handed over a citation to the Pakistanis lauding the bravery and courage of the Pakistani Commanding Officer.

The Pakistani Commanding Officer was awarded the highest gallantry award by the Pakistani govt based on an Indian citation!

We learn to dislike the enemy, but we also learn to keep our heads firmly on our shoulders and not go berserk or seek vengance.

Didn't a US President say - Speak softly but wield a big stick?:dbanana