• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

The Coming War Over Taiwan Part 2

SFC13557

NES Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2019
Messages
4,229
Likes
5,436
Location
Central Ma.
Feedback: 0 / 0 / 0
"In the long term, China’s woes will make it less competitive. It probably can’t outpace America in a superpower marathon, let alone America plus its allies. But in the near-term, we should expect a more dangerous China—one that gambles big to reshape the balance of power before its window closes.

Taiwan is the most likely target of this anxious expansion. Reclaiming Taiwan would eliminate a government whose very existence disproves the Chinese Communist Party’s claims that Chinese culture is incompatible with democracy. It would give Beijing a commanding position in the Western Pacific and terrify U.S. allies like the Philippines and Japan. Not least, it would cement Xi Jinping’s legacy as a leader on par with Mao Zedong.

For decades, a confident, rising China was content not to force the issue, seeking to gradually lure Taiwan back through peaceful means. Today, though, the prospects for peaceful unification are fading fast. Most Taiwanese don’t want to be ruled by a genocidal dictatorship. Popular support for unification has nearly disappeared while support for incremental moves toward independence has doubled since 2018.

But between now and the end of the decade, China has a tantalizing opportunity to secure unification by force. Mr. Xi’s reforms of the PLA—meant, among other things, to make it capable of taking Taiwan—are nearly complete. China is rapidly deploying missiles, aircraft, warships and rocket launchers that can pummel Taiwan; it is assiduously rehearsing large-scale amphibious assaults.

Meanwhile, U.S. military power is about to dip. The mid-2020s will witness the mass retirement of aging U.S. cruisers, guided-missile submarines and long-range bombers, leaving the U.S. military with hundreds fewer missile launchers—the key metric of modern naval firepower—floating and flying around East Asia. While Washington, Tokyo and Taipei are all undertaking much-needed defense programs focused on denying Chinese hegemony in Asia, those efforts won’t bear fruit until the early 2030s. Mr. Xi has repeatedly said that the task of “liberating” Taiwan cannot be passed down from generation to generation. In the mid- and late 2020s, he’ll have his best chance to accomplish that mission.

If war comes, it is likely to feature the massive application of force. Beijing could theoretically try to coerce Taiwan into unification with a more limited operation, such as an air-sea blockade or the seizure of Taiwan’s small offshore islands. Yet none of these options can guarantee Taiwanese capitulation, and all of them would give Taipei, Washington and other democracies time to mount a punishing response. To achieve its goals, China has to go big and brutal from the start.

Its war plan could well involve a surprise missile and air attack against Taiwan and U.S. military bases in the Pacific, strikes on the satellite communications that underpin the American way of war and a wave of sabotage and assassinations within Taiwan—all as prelude to a massive airborne and amphibious invasion.

Both U.S. and Taiwanese forces could be crippled as the PLA rushes toward its objectives. Even if America avoids rapid defeat, the nightmare scenario currently envisaged in Ukraine—direct clashes between the U.S. and a nuclear-armed great power—would be the reality at the outset. A Sino-American war could escalate rapidly because it will involve technologies that work best when used first, including cyberattacks, hypersonic missiles and electronic warfare. The side that is losing might decide to use low-yield nuclear weapons to turn the tide or force its opponent into submission.

The economic fallout would also be horrendous. Vital waterways would become shooting galleries; the world might find itself cut off from the more than 90% of cutting-edge semiconductors that are manufactured in Taiwan. According to the RAND Corporation, one year of fighting would reduce America’s gross domestic product by 5% to 10% and China’s by 25% to 35%. A global depression would be all but guaranteed.

American officials aren’t blind to the problem, but Washington—thanks to a mixture of inertia, distraction and simple denial—isn’t racing to address it. President Biden has pledged, albeit ambiguously, to defend Taiwan from Chinese attack. Speaker Pelosi has joined a growing list of lawmakers to visit Taiwan. The Pentagon calls China its “pacing challenge.” Yet such symbolic gestures will amount to cheap and provocative talk if not backed by a strong and resilient defense—something the U.S. and Taiwan currently lack.
 
NES has been eagerly predicting a Chinese invasion of Taiwan for many years now.

Might it happen someday? Maybe. But I’m not holding my breath this time any more than I did the previous 43 times I’ve read this prediction.
 
NES has been eagerly predicting a Chinese invasion of Taiwan for many years now.

Might it happen someday? Maybe. But I’m not holding my breath this time any more than I did the previous 43 times I’ve read this prediction.
'Teach' do you believe Wu-Flu came out of the Wuhan fish market as well? No-one with an ounce of brain matter wants to see an all out slugfest between the US it's allies and China, but nevertheless the signs are all there.
 
one more time, posts are limited to 10,000 words so I had to divide article into 3 parts which I labeled Parts 1, 2, 3.
You could cut the initial post into two or three replies on one thread. Now it's a mess, no one will read more than the first thread and whatever point you wanted to make will get lost. Then someone will call dupe and a mod will either close a bunch of threads or have to merge them. Also, don't reproduce entire articles in a post, that's just begging for someone to slap around a copyright claim and bust D's balls. Quote excerpt(s) that sustain your point and provide archive.today link to full article(s) with attribution. I enjoy this site and don't want some greedy globocorp to squish it like a bug.
 
Are we doing comments on Part 2 now?

one more time, posts are limited to 10,000 words so I had to divide article into 3 parts which I labeled Parts 1, 2, 3.
You could cut the initial post into two or three replies on one thread. Now it's a mess, no one will read more than the first thread and whatever point you wanted to make will get lost. Then someone will call dupe and a mod will either close a bunch of threads or have to merge them. Also, don't reproduce entire articles in a post, that's just begging for someone to slap around a copyright claim and bust D's balls. Quote excerpt(s) that sustain your point and provide archive.today link to full article(s) with attribution. I enjoy this site and don't want some greedy globocorp to squish it like a bug.

Here:
 
You could cut the initial post into two or three replies on one thread. Now it's a mess, no one will read more than the first thread and whatever point you wanted to make will get lost. Then someone will call dupe and a mod will either close a bunch of threads or have to merge them. Also, don't reproduce entire articles in a post, that's just begging for someone to slap around a copyright claim and bust D's balls. Quote excerpt(s) that sustain your point and provide archive.today link to full article(s) with attribution. I enjoy this site and don't want some greedy globocorp to squish it like a bug.
I'm sure the Wall Street Journal will NOT slap me down for providing free of charge their articles to interested gun owners. If so they can come after me. If you guys stopped bitching and started reading you would be much better informed on the threat from China. All 3 parts to my post are on the same page so if that's to much for you so be it.
 
I'm sure the Wall Street Journal will NOT slap me down for providing free of charge their articles to interested gun owners. If so they can come after me. If you guys stopped bitching and started reading you would be much better informed on the threat from China. All 3 parts to my post are on the same page so if that's to much for you so be it.
China is not a threat.
 
These are the posts, I mean threads, that keep on giving....

[pot]

"One more time"....love it...

[rofl]
 
Back
Top Bottom