Chinese invasion on Taiwan

[FlyingFrog]

thank you flyiing frog (what a name...i like it sorta has a poetry all its own)

well that summed it up very nicely. however, i believe the status quo will preval this year, and maybe the next. I think matters on taiwan will stand as they do today.

Yah I am FlyingFrog becaues too many Chinese on web choose the name of FlyingDragon

In the coming 4 years there will be no problem in Taiwan at all, they just held their election in April, and most people there didn't vote for independence.

Even after 2008 I don't think they will go independece at all, the economic relation btw Mainland and Taiwan is just developing so fast recent years.

Well USA is the vital factor in the Taiwan issue.
USA can help a lot for a peacefull Taiwan Straits, but pity I think US government just wants to create trouble btw Taiwan and China sothat they can make big benifit from there

 

[Marksman]

U know that that would lead to overall war,and allies would have to react on both sides
So........i say new WW

 

[RnderSafe]

USA can help a lot for a peacefull Taiwan Straits, but pity I think US government just wants to create trouble btw Taiwan and China sothat they can make big benifit from there

You make enough trouble on your own, the US doesn't need to.

 

[Marksman]

well..........i think that ur both half right,but dont wanna be involved in this specific topic

 

[SAINT]

You see, the leaders of the Chinese government will not be so stupid as to start a war with the US when these Chinese leaders are enjoying their rule and leadership. Why endanger your own power and status thru a war? Once there's a total or even regional war, the Chinese military may seize power from the central government and that's exactly what the Chinese leaders are afraid.. more so because they are not from a military background. Secondly, as the Chinese government is not elected, there's not reason for the Chinese people to continue their support for them if and when the Chinese military (their generals) takeover the government or at least control the present Communist Party leaders as puppets.

If the Chinese military achieves victory (it is possible that the US will not want to get involved in a total war with China. What for?) over Taiwan, the present Chinese leaders may just be a puppet governemnt under the military who has reunited the country and so has the right to rule. That's the way the government of mainland China was established in 1949 -- thru guns. It is still possible today. But it will be more complex in its operation today and it takes pages to analyse the possible situation and impact (economic and political) on the world if such a thing happens in the future. Will China be like Japan in WW2 when the Japanese military had control over everything in Japan? If China be under their military leaders, then their politics will only be war and not talk. The Chinese military are hardliners. :? [/b]

 

[BmrSooner451]

4. Ya thinks all those jets are within attacking range? Think about their fighting range while taking into consideration of Chinese subs. We will keep you away from Taiwan at least 500 miles in open sea.

No offense, but do you seriously believe Romeo, Ming, Kilo, and Han class boats could compete with the USN's Improved Los Angeles and Seawolf class boats? Your submarines will be too busy dodgeing MK48 ADCAPS than attacking US CBG's. It is in my firm belief that in the event of war with the PRC(god forbid it happens) the chinese submarine fleet, and it's surface navy, would be blown out of the water.

 

[SAINT]

4. Ya thinks all those jets are within attacking range? Think about their fighting range while taking into consideration of Chinese subs. We will keep you away from Taiwan at least 500 miles in open sea.

No offense, but do you seriously believe Romeo, Ming, Kilo, and Han class boats could compete with the USN's Improved Los Angeles and Seawolf class boats? Your submarines will be too busy dodgeing MK48 ADCAPS than attacking US CBG's. It is in my firm belief that in the event of war with the PRC(god forbid it happens) the chinese submarine fleet, and it's surface navy, would be blown out of the water.

But how will the US Navy deal with the Chinese intermediate range missiles against the carrier fleets? These missiles are guided by Chinese satellites, hard to intercept and cheap to make. I just wonder what are the possible ways the US carrier fleets can avoid being hit by one of these high speed missiles should the Chinese military rain the carrier fleets with such missiles? Not to forget that the Chinese now also has cruise missiles. Can the F-14 Tomcats on CAP intercept so many missiles? It may not be possible and you will know it if you had played the Fleet Defender (F-14) -- an old but good PC game by Microprose in 1994. 8) 8)

 

[BmrSooner451]

HERO, Have you ever seen an AEGIS warship in action? I've seen the SM-2MR and the AEGIS system defeat multiple small, fast moving "threats". now you gotta figure how many AEGIS ships are in a CBG. Not only can they protect the CBG from air attack, not to mention that the missile cruisers/destroyers would be attacking teh chinese fleet with Harpoons, and TASM's(if equiped). Not to mention the CAW and foward deployed SSN's.




and when I was young i played AEGIS: Guardian of the Fleet, Harpoon II, and Fleet Commander

 

[SAINT]

HERO, Have you ever seen an AEGIS warship in action? I've seen the SM-2MR and the AEGIS system defeat multiple small, fast moving "threats". now you gotta figure how many AEGIS ships are in a CBG. Not only can they protect the CBG from air attack, not to mention that the missile cruisers/destroyers would be attacking teh chinese fleet with Harpoons, and TASM's(if equiped). Not to mention the CAW and foward deployed SSN's.

and when I was young i played AEGIS: Guardian of the Fleet, Harpoon II, and Fleet Commander

:roll: What you say is true regarding the AEGIS. But what I'm concerned is that the US fleet will be threatened by intermediate range ballistic missiles, not the classic naval warfare scenario. The use of ballistic missiles is not a new concept but one that was developed by the Soviets in the 1960s. By then, the attacks could be carried out by Backfire bombers or intermediate ballistic missiles. In the '60s, some experts had even said that the era of fighter jets had come to an end as entire airbases could be destroyed by ballistic missiles even before the fighters or bombers could take off. The use of jets or Airforce was severely limited to conventional warfare, which if superpowers were involved in any conflict, easily escalated to a nuclear confrontation.

This scenario is the same for carrier fleets as their mobility is only about 20 to 30 knots an hour -- not much. So that's why US carrier fleets were avoiding being too close to the coast of China in 1996 during the Chinese missile test over Taiwan, at least beyond a few hundred miles from possible land-based missile attacks. Even the shorter range missile attacks are considered dangerous to the US fleet http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm/include/detail/storyid/258778.html
http://www.rense.com/politics5/stealthmiss.htm
About using ballistic missiles against US fleet http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28271
:cen:

 

[Uncle_Sam]

The prioritay for the USN, USAF, US Army is Laser defence, which will be operational, and very much in use by 2010, after that US of A should not fear from ICBMs, planes.........

 

[SAINT]

The prioritay for the USN, USAF, US Army is Laser defence, which will be operational, and very much in use by 2010, after that US of A should not fear from ICBMs, planes.........

I realise that too. But many experts are worried about the instability of the laser system in war. Our technology is still not advanced enough to employ such laser systems effectively. :rambo:

 

[SAINT]

The prioritay for the USN, USAF, US Army is Laser defence, which will be operational, and very much in use by 2010, after that US of A should not fear from ICBMs, planes.........

I realise that too. But many experts are worried about the instability of the laser system in war. Our technology is still not advanced enough to employ such laser systems effectively. :rambo:

 

[Mark Conley]

Just FYI: Taiwan is only 200 KM from Mainland.

I keep thinking about this one little detail for a sucessful invasion of taiwan: even if the US Navy wasnt involved with any naval operation at all:

How will Main Land China get all the men and equippment needed to subdue that little island 120 miles from its shore, without taking a whole lot of casualties from the Taiwaneese? When the Nationalists moved onto the island, they didnt incour resistance until after they established themselves on the island: It kind of occours to me that unless the PLA Air Force and PLA Navy really takes away the ability to remove that islands means to resist...this is going to be a very large fish food operation...with the PLA providing the repast.

:?

 

[BmrSooner451]

ahh, i didnt think you were talking about IRBM's. But I think an AEGIS equiped warship, if it had adquate warning, could target and destroy multiple IRBM's, now if the IRBM's were carrying nukes, all it would take was one, If only conventional warheads, it's not worth the cost as teh CEP against a moving ship would make a hit almost impossible

 

[FlyingFrog]

Next time I will post some info of the newest Chinese DDG's.

They do look not bad I think.

This is the Chinese "AEGIS": DDG 170.

DDG 170 and 171 is currently under construction, will go sea trail very soon.

DDG 170:

 

[SAINT]

Next time I will post some info of the newest Chinese DDG's.

They do look not bad I think.

This is the Chinese "AEGIS": DDG 170.

DDG 170 and 171 is currently under construction, will go sea trail very soon.

FlyingFrog.. the Chinese warships look like they got their construction blueprint from the French Navy. Most of the weapon and radar systems in the Chinese destroyers are a mix of different systems purchased or adopted from different countries. It's not going to work well in warfare situation. Another thing is, even when the Chinese Airforce manufactures its own fighter jets, the engines were either purchased from UK or Russia. The Chinese Airforce seems to have to rely on external sources for the main components of its fighter jets. That's rather disappointing, isn't it?
:?:

 

[SAINT]

Just FYI: Taiwan is only 200 KM from Mainland.

I keep thinking about this one little detail for a sucessful invasion of taiwan: even if the US Navy wasnt involved with any naval operation at all:

How will Main Land China get all the men and equippment needed to subdue that little island 120 miles from its shore, without taking a whole lot of casualties from the Taiwaneese? When the Nationalists moved onto the island, they didnt incour resistance until after they established themselves on the island: It kind of occours to me that unless the PLA Air Force and PLA Navy really takes away the ability to remove that islands means to resist...this is going to be a very large fish food operation...with the PLA providing the repast.

:?

It's one of the main difficulties in landing troops onshore. Not to say equipment. This Taiwan Strait is like a natural ditch or moat to a castle. What an attacker needs to do to attack Taiwan is the same as how the invader will do to a castle, only on a larger scale. One way is to sacrifice many troops to get into the castle or onto the island. That's by brute force. It's possible if you do not bother about casualties. Another way is by besieging the island like you do to a castle.

It's useless to keep bombing the island without landing troops onto the island. It'll be like WW2 Germany bombing Britain for years but didn't have amphibious landings. It'll be draggy. No results.

Landing onto the Taiwan island is not difficult. Why? Because the coasts are long and the invader can choose to land troops at different points at the same time. The different points can be tens of miles apart and so stretch the Taiwanese coastal defences to the minimum. Once you established a few beachheads, the invader can take his time to transport the heavier equipment. Taiwan must understand that China has a lot of resources like small vessels. Hundreds or thousands can cross the Strait easily when the Taiwanese airbases are first crippled by missiles attacks, making the Taiwanese difficult to strike landing vessels using aircraft.

Secondly, different from D-Day is the use of helicopters to transport troops and equipement quickly and safely with air cover. There was extensive use of helicopters during the Vietnam war. Thousands of Huey helicopters were used that time. The same thing the Chinese forces can do once the coast is quite clear and under the cover of night. D-Day couldn't be at night. No advanced equipment for night operations at that time yet. Not now. Night goggles are so common. You can find them in a toy shop too. Just check your mouse and harddisk of your computer -- Made in China. Even the US army uniform is made by cloth imported from China. Pentagon says it's good fabric. Take a look :roll: around your house. Many things are made in China. It's frightening...

Third, the morale of the Taiwanese soldiers. Are they willing to fight? That's crucial in any battle. :?:

I'm old.. so I talk a lot :9mm:

 

[Big_Z]

I think the past proves that people fighting for real freedom have the uptmost morale. Because even if they fail they will die free.

 

[SAINT]

I think the past proves that people fighting for real freedom have the uptmost morale. Because even if they fail they will die free.

When the Japanese attacked Singapore in WW2, there were 80,000 British, Australian and Indian soldiers guarding the island. Yet General Percival decided to surrender them to the only 30,000 strong Japanese troops across the shore in Johore. It's unbelievable yet true. Probably the general thought it's better for his troops and himself to live as POWs than to die fighting for others. There may be a chance to go home to England... later.

Sometimes even if the soldiers are willing to fight, but the general is not, brave men will become POWs. Like the 80,000 did and suffered through the 3 years and 8 months of life as POWs. Many died as captives.

So it's sometimes just talk that soldiers will die for this or that, or for country. Still, many of them will prefer to live as captives than to die fighting for freedom and then where will they be? :?:

:lol:

 

[Big_Z]

Yea but the difference is the tiawan soldiers have no hope but themselves. There will be no rescue. Those soldiers you mentioned weren't fighting for their own homeland they had a home to return too the soldiers of tiawan wouldn't.