EPTIt turns out, trying to ship tens of thousands of soldiers across water is very difficult to do if your opponent is shooting at them while they cross.
The China Politics Thread - Page 29
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
gobbledydook
Australia2593 Posts
It turns out, trying to ship tens of thousands of soldiers across water is very difficult to do if your opponent is shooting at them while they cross. | ||
KwarK
United States41934 Posts
On July 25 2022 17:42 winteriscoming wrote: Ah that's very interesting, I'm also amazed that you don't believe PLA has the ability to take the island in seconds. Our main artillery is type PHL-03, which has a horrible 480KM range(not 48). We have a 60thousands men airborne force , 3 elite divisions. Our missles and planes will block everything enters east china sea.We have 270 H-6 bombers and we are soon to declare H-20 stragetic stealth bomber whose performance is believed to surpass B21 or LRS-B. We have prepared for 70 years to take it.....think about it ,man. If you check on taiwanese forums you will find no twainese thinks they can hold 24hours if we decided to take some action. I don't where do you get the impression that mere US carrier fleets can stop us now. It's not in the 1990s, it's 2020s now. Wanting to take it for 70 years but being unable to do so isn’t the brag you think it is. The US carrier fleet is sufficient to block any amphibious assault. Everything else the US has is sufficient to deter any attack on a US carrier fleet. We live in a world with exactly one superpower and it’s not China. | ||
|
winteriscoming
38 Posts
TW is an island, you can't even get close when PLA announce 200k㎡ is a forbidden zone. Maybe Americans woud not drop a single blood for TW. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11310 Posts
And from what i gather, they very much do not want to become part of the PRC. What right does the PRC have to take over an island with a population that does not want them there? This should be the only thing that matters. Not that the PRC wants to have Taiwan. The will of the people living there. Taking over a country with a population that does not want you there is an aggressive act of war. No matter if you declare that it is not a country and that you actually own it beforehand. And the very peaceful chinese people who do not want to take any aggressive action seems to be salivating heavily just from the idea of starting this war. I don't care if it was part of china before WW2. It is not now, and the people there do not want to be part of china. That should be respected, because anything else is oppression. | ||
|
KwarK
United States41934 Posts
On July 25 2022 18:03 winteriscoming wrote: ok, you have do some reasons, but urkrainian have the whole NATO support and russians rushed into war with their old equipments, even so, americans stepped back, TW is an island, you can't even get close when PLA announce 200k㎡ is a forbidden zone. Maybe Americans woud not drop a single blood for TW. China routinely declares water it’s sovereign territory and America routinely declares that the water is actually disputed and then disputes it by sailing a carrier group through it. You can announce as many forbidden zones as you like but nobody has to listen, it comes down to whether you’re willing to enforce it. China lacks the navy to deny a carrier group passage in disputed waters and even if it had the navy, they lack the second strike capability to try. NATO isn’t in Ukraine because Ukraine isn’t in NATO. Some NATO powers are choosing to give Ukraine some second hand hardware, that’s all. | ||
|
winteriscoming
38 Posts
On July 25 2022 18:03 Simberto wrote: One thing i feel gets completely ignored here is what the Taiwanese people want. And from what i gather, they very much do not want to become part of the PRC. What right does the PRC have to take over an island with a population that does not want them there? This should be the only thing that matters. Not that the PRC wants to have Taiwan. The will of the people living there. Taking over a country with a population that does not want you there is an aggressive act of war. No matter if you declare that it is not a country and that you actually own it beforehand. And the very peaceful chinese people who do not want to take any aggressive action seems to be salivating heavily just from the idea of starting this war. I don't care if it was part of china before WW2. It is not now, and the people there do not want to be part of china. That should be respected, because anything else is oppression. My thoughts are not contradictory. I said we have the ability to take it , and to tell you the truth, I personally don't really like the land,taiwanese, in my eyes their boys are sissy and girls are shallow，if you watch their tv programmes..... they don't like us too, very well, if I were the supreme leader I would consider to let them get independent，cut-off relationship, and drive all the tw merchans outof mainland, in like 10 or 20 years they may regret on their choice, begging to rejoin the family.. sorry, our unfilial boy you should take the reponsibilies on your own. My thoughts are dangerous and naive I know,so I can only tell you guys . | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11310 Posts
On July 25 2022 18:16 winteriscoming wrote: My thoughts are not contradictory. I said we have the ability to take it , and to tell you the truth, I personally don't really like the land,taiwanese, in my eyes their boys are sissy and girls are shallow，if you watch their tv programmes..... they don't like us too, very well, if I were the supreme leader I would consider to let them get independent，cut-off relationship, and drive all the tw merchans outof mainland, in like 10 or 20 years they may regret on their choice, begging to rejoin the family.. sorry, our unfilial boy you should take the reponsibilies on your own. My thoughts are dangerous and naive I know,so I can only tell you guys . Why do you think those thoughts are dangerous and naive? They are factually already independent. Just make that official and get on with your lives. But somehow that is not possible and even dangerous? Also, i don't understand why you bring your personal judgement of the people from Taiwan in here, that is 0 percent relevant. Judging people by nationality is always problematic. And using sentences like "their boys are sissy" tends to reflect negatively only onto you. | ||
|
gobbledydook
Australia2593 Posts
On July 25 2022 18:27 Simberto wrote: Why do you think those thoughts are dangerous and naive? They are factually already independent. Just make that official and get on with your lives. But somehow that is not possible and even dangerous? Also, i don't understand why you bring your personal judgement of the people from Taiwan in here, that is 0 percent relevant. Judging people by nationality is always problematic. And using sentences like "their boys are sissy" tends to reflect negatively only onto you. It is in fact dangerous, for the Party's rule. They have been insisting for seventy years that they will liberate all of China including Taiwan. They have raised generations of Chinese people to believe that it is the just and righteous thing to do. To admit now that it was no longer their aim, would be devastating to the legitimacy of the Communist Party's right to rule. They would not be able to explain why after seventy years they had now given up on the glorious cause of reunification. Edit: To make it clear, such a change of direction is possible, but it would most likely involve a huge change in China's politics similar to Deng's reforms (probably following the death of Xi like how it happened after Mao died), or an external shock like losing a war (like how Argentina renounced military reunification of the Falklands after losing the war). | ||
|
winteriscoming
38 Posts
On July 25 2022 18:08 KwarK wrote: China routinely declares water it’s sovereign territory and America routinely declares that the water is actually disputed and then disputes it by sailing a carrier group through it. You can announce as many forbidden zones as you like but nobody has to listen, it comes down to whether you’re willing to enforce it. China lacks the navy to deny a carrier group passage in disputed waters and even if it had the navy, they lack the second strike capability to try. NATO isn’t in Ukraine because Ukraine isn’t in NATO. Some NATO powers are choosing to give Ukraine some second hand hardware, that’s all. Well, maybe you are right, maybe I'm right, who knows. Unfortunately wars usually take place when both sides thinks they are on the superior side...... We don't want enemies, we don't even criticize on our neighbours when they are wrong(like RU,NK....) And when we are wrong, we tend to solve it in our own way. We don't want anyone to tell us what is right, especially when these "kind advices" would lead to something unpredictable. | ||
|
winteriscoming
38 Posts
On July 25 2022 18:27 Simberto wrote: Also, i don't understand why you bring your personal judgement of the people from Taiwan in here, that is 0 percent relevant. Judging people by nationality is always problematic. And using sentences like "their boys are sissy" tends to reflect negatively only onto you. yes I am not a serious man, do not judge me  I think I not a very typical Chinese. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11310 Posts
On July 25 2022 18:39 winteriscoming wrote: yes I am not a serious man, do not judge me I think I not a very typical Chinese.I don't know, i don't judge people based on their nationality. | ||
|
KwarK
United States41934 Posts
On July 25 2022 18:36 winteriscoming wrote: Well, maybe you are right, maybe I'm right, who knows. Unfortunately wars usually take place when both sides thinks they are on the superior side...... We don't want enemies, we don't even criticize on our neighbours when they are wrong(like RU,NK....) And when we are wrong, we tend to solve it in our own way. We don't want anyone to tell us what is right, especially when these "kind advices" would lead to something unpredictable. I am right. This happens frequently. The way sovereign waters work, assuming no existing treaty, is that you only get what everyone else recognizes that you get. Same situation as breakaway states vs civil wars, a state only exists when everyone else agrees that it exists. China routinely asserts that the South China Sea is sovereign waters vs disputed waters and if other countries were to listen then it would become true. For that reason the US has to deliberately and flagrantly sail through the sea to dispute the claim of Chinese sovereignty. China lacks sovereignty because they are disputed waters and they are disputed waters because they are being disputed. It’s a bit of a tautology. The US says that they would never trespass in Chinese waters so the fact that they are there must mean that the water they are in must not be Chinese. The point is that we don’t have to speculate on who is right and who is wrong here. This happens all the time. I am right. China can assert that waters are closed to US carrier fleets but a carrier fleet is going to go wherever it wants. | ||
|
winteriscoming
38 Posts
On July 25 2022 18:53 KwarK wrote: I am right. This happens frequently. The way sovereign waters work, assuming no existing treaty, is that you only get what everyone else recognizes that you get. Same situation as breakaway states vs civil wars, a state only exists when everyone else agrees that it exists. China routinely asserts that the South China Sea is sovereign waters vs disputed waters and if other countries were to listen then it would become true. For that reason the US has to deliberately and flagrantly sail through the sea to dispute the claim of Chinese sovereignty. China lacks sovereignty because they are disputed waters and they are disputed waters because they are being disputed. It’s a bit of a tautology. The US says that they would never trespass in Chinese waters so the fact that they are there must mean that the water they are in must not be Chinese. The point is that we don’t have to speculate on who is right and who is wrong here. This happens all the time. I am right. China can assert that waters are closed to US carrier fleets but a carrier fleet is going to go wherever it wants. But as China has been at pains to point out, the United States isn't among the 180 countries that have ratified the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea--potentially undermining its clout on this issue. sorry, just quoted some examples on translation software. Not willing to persuade you, you are ALL right. | ||
|
winteriscoming
38 Posts
On July 25 2022 18:48 Simberto wrote: I don't know, i don't judge people based on their nationality. oops,here's jumps out another misunderstanding. I didn't mean "do not judge me (by my nationality)", I mean "do not judge me (by my words) . Though I don't think we Chinese are right on everything, I am still very pround of my nationality. | ||
|
KwarK
United States41934 Posts
On July 25 2022 19:39 winteriscoming wrote: But as China has been at pains to point out, the United States isn't among the 180 countries that have ratified the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea--potentially undermining its clout on this issue. sorry, just quoted some examples on translation software. Not willing to persuade you, you are ALL right. You claimed that if the PLA declared the straits forbidden then the US wouldn’t be able to intervene. This implies that they would listen to any Chinese declaration. The US, as well as many other nations, have an existing deliberate policy of sailing through any disputed water that China declares is forbidden. They do it a few times a year. We don’t have to guess what the US would do if they were forbidden from the straits. They’d sail right through. We know this because it’s what they already do. There’s no speculation or argument to be had here, there’s observable evidence. You can either believe the evidence or close your eyes but it’s true either way. | ||
|
Ardias
Russian Federation605 Posts
https://www.chinasmack.com/taiwan-president-mainland-china-is-still-our-territory https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/24/china/china-taiwan-conflict-explainer-intl-hnk/index.html As for PRC military capabilities to take Taiwan - maybe not now, but at the rate of growth of PLA Navy in 5-6 years it would be possible. Breaking the US naval blockade further from their own shores - that's what would be a problem. I did some counting about a month ago, and in the last decade PRC commisioned roughly the same amount of combat ships by tonnage as the next 3 navies combined (1077k ton against US 629k ton, Russia 260k ton and UK 182k ton, though there may be some margin of error in figures). Granted that US Navy had large established fleet beforehand and still twice as large as PLA Navy, even a bit more. But since PLA Navy doctrine revolves around control of South China Sea/Yellow Sea and confrontation with Taiwan, their ships are generally less in size than US ones, who need to project their power all over the world. Hence more ships for similar tonnage. And that's why it would be hard for US to concentrate even half of the carrier groups within 3-4 days in one place (especially those stationed in Atlantic Ocean). If South Korea and Japan would enter the fray though, it would be different matter, since both posses very capable navies (especially Japan). But even then trying to prevent Chinese forces movement through Taiwan strait would be extremely difficult due to Chinese having huge home advantage in terms of long-range air defence and land-based air force. But then to break the US-imposed naval blokade somewhere in line of Southern Vietnam-Phillipines-Okinawa-Kyushu would be much harder for PLA Navy, and China is very depndant on it's trade. That's possibly one of the reasons why China is so invested into "Belt and Road" through Central Asia, investing ton of money there and actively seeking to expand BRICS and SCO, to have alternate routes for imports and exports and secure favourable resource concesisons. | ||
|
winteriscoming
38 Posts
On July 25 2022 19:48 KwarK wrote: You claimed that if the PLA declared the straits forbidden then the US wouldn’t be able to intervene. This implies that they would listen to any Chinese declaration. The US, as well as many other nations, have an existing deliberate policy of sailing through any disputed water that China declares is forbidden. They do it a few times a year. We don’t have to guess what the US would do if they were forbidden from the straits. They’d sail right through. We know this because it’s what they already do. There’s no speculation or argument to be had here, there’s observable evidence. You can either believe the evidence or close your eyes but it’s true either way. yeah I know americans dare to do anything they want, especially when they are told not to. But if it clearly means a direct war, will you do it with no hesitation? Maybe you will, but I guess your goverment will consider more. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11310 Posts
On July 25 2022 19:45 winteriscoming wrote: oops,here's jumps out another misunderstanding. I didn't mean "do not judge me (by my nationality)", I mean "do not judge me (by my words) . Though I don't think we Chinese are right on everything, I am still very pround of my nationality. If you were to openly voice that sentiment that you think Taiwan is a different country from the PRC, and the best solution would be to just sign a treaty where Taiwan renounces any claims on PRC territory and the PRC renounces any claims on Taiwan territory, in China and on the chinese internet, how well do you think that would go for you? Would this have negative impacts on your life, safety and future career? | ||
|
winteriscoming
38 Posts
On July 25 2022 20:52 Simberto wrote: If you were to openly voice that sentiment that you think Taiwan is a different country from the PRC, and the best solution would be to just sign a treaty where Taiwan renounces any claims on PRC territory and the PRC renounces any claims on Taiwan territory, in China and on the chinese internet, how well do you think that would go for you? Would this have negative impacts on your life, safety and future career? if you want to murder me you can speak it out directly lol | ||
|
KwarK
United States41934 Posts
On July 25 2022 20:18 winteriscoming wrote: yeah I know americans dare to do anything they want, especially when they are told not to. But if it clearly means a direct war, will you do it with no hesitation? Maybe you will, but I guess your goverment will consider more. This is called brinksmanship. Obviously it is insane for the US to risk a potential war to sail through a strait. But obviously it is also insane for PRC to risk a potential war to stop someone sailing through a strait. So the game is to try to act insane to force the other party to make a concession in the name of sanity. That is why the US does this with no hesitation, they believe that PRC will give in. However there is a counterplay, called “salami tactics”. This is where you don’t grab the whole stick of salami from the other side at once, instead you cut yourself a thin slice. Nobody could object to you taking a thin slice, especially when they still have the rest of the salami. They may protest the slice but it is not worth firing nukes over. Then you take another slice. Then another. This is what PRC does in the South China Sea with artificial islands. It would be insane to go to war simply because PRC landed some engineers on a reef. And it would be insane to go to war because they’re putting down concrete to expand it into an island. And it would be insane to go to war because they are converting it into an airfield. And it would be insane to go to war just because they’re keeping bombers on that airfield. And so on and so on. Grabbing the whole salami at once may cross a red line but it is hard to justify how any slice by itself does. Every great power plays this game. It is why the US is slowly escalating the arms it sends Ukraine. Each arms shipment that carries a new weapons system is another slice of salami but Russia will not go to war with the US simply because they gave slightly better shells to an existing artillery platform. | ||
| ||
