Theoretical Question - Taiwan, and YOU as U.S President
- Thread starter Chancellor Kremlin
- Start date
Russia and China are not allies by default. They work together when they can oppose US hegemony but Russia is worried about chinese encroachment upon Eastern/Southern Siberia. There's already several areas there where overwhelming majority of population is chinese immigrants. It's just that at the moment, Russia has enough troubles in Caucasus and central-Asia. Russia would most likely stay away from any war, hoping that their international position would strengthen as their biggest rivals are weakened.
Also, China doesn't have nuclear missiles in the vast amounts that USA and Russia have. So they can be disabled - just requires resources and planning.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/china/icbm.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/china/missile-facility.htm
See? Saying that these few installations couldn't be disabled by air strikes or by special ops is pretty silly.
And humilitiating single events aside, China's Navy can't match up to USN unless operating under land-based air-cover and even then USN has enough subs and Tomahawks to render those harbors useless. Sure, they'd cause damage but it's not like they can hope to defeat USN in a standup fight and force them to retreat indefinately.
China does have the power to turn Taiwan pretty into an pile of rubble so the only question is would any US President be willing to wage a full-out war against China when there might be pretty slim chance of "liberating" anything meaningful.
Edit: oh and to the OP, do you mind if I post your original questionaire over to Paradox-forums? Might get some good answers from there as well.
Also, China doesn't have nuclear missiles in the vast amounts that USA and Russia have. So they can be disabled - just requires resources and planning.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/china/icbm.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/china/missile-facility.htm
See? Saying that these few installations couldn't be disabled by air strikes or by special ops is pretty silly.
And humilitiating single events aside, China's Navy can't match up to USN unless operating under land-based air-cover and even then USN has enough subs and Tomahawks to render those harbors useless. Sure, they'd cause damage but it's not like they can hope to defeat USN in a standup fight and force them to retreat indefinately.
China does have the power to turn Taiwan pretty into an pile of rubble so the only question is would any US President be willing to wage a full-out war against China when there might be pretty slim chance of "liberating" anything meaningful.
Edit: oh and to the OP, do you mind if I post your original questionaire over to Paradox-forums? Might get some good answers from there as well.
Bal-Sagoth
Water Chip? Been There, Done That
GarfunkeL said:
That is what I thought. There are a few Russian forum goers on military.com and they do not have very nice things to say about China at all.
I admit I am not to knowledgeable on the situation but from the image they painted it sounded like Russia had quite a bit to fear from China as well.
Roflcore said:
No, it's 2008.
Oh yes, because only ICBM's mean anything nowadays?
Shees, Siberia is a huge, resource-righ area which is sparsely populated. It would give China both space for their population and resources for their economy, both things that they already lack. Japanese called it the Northern Economic Zone during 30's and 40's but thanks to Zhukov they went south instead. And I did not say it's the most important thing to Russia at the moment.
As I posted, Caucasus and Central-Asia are way more important to Russia at the moment.
And China has border disputes with both Kazaksthan and Kyrgystan, along with Russia since the borders have never been fully marked. And China is trying to get into the Central-Asia powerplay as well.
So, they are regional rivals who only work together when it's an convenient way to oppose US hegemony. Realpolitik is the name of the game, both in Kreml and Beijing.
Chancellor Kremlin
Mildly Dipped
GarfunkeL said:
Mate, do you know what a second strike capability is? If not im going to point you to some topics on GlobalSecurity about the chinese nuclear submarines and their nuclear ballistic missiles.
Not to mention thinking you could disable the entire chinese nuclear arsenal is whishful thinking at best. What about mobile launchers? What about hidden facilities? A single missile going off which possible MIRV's would destroy say 5 major cities in the U.S You now have millions of people dead.
GarfunkeL said:
That as it may be, the U.S would suffer some serious setbacks in a naval war, if only because your fleet is vastly bigger. There have been at least two incidents where diesel powered chinese submaries have simply popped up in the middle of carrier groups in the pacific, without being detected. If the Chinese feel they can let the U.S know how their subs can come up undetectable, can you think other of their capabilities the Chinese have?
Just because China does not chose the 'weapon brandishing' attitute of the U.S does not make it any weaker.
GarfunkeL said:
Sure go ahead.
Roflcore said:GarfunkeL said:No, it's 2008.
So why do your style of strategy and politics sounds like 1940, along with your informations? So many flaws, I'd like to start with the fact that china is not capable of taking taiwan.
Thats debatable.
Roflcore said:GarfunkeL said:No, it's 2008.
So why do your style of strategy and politics sounds like 1940, along with your informations? So many flaws, I'd like to start with the fact that china is not capable of taking taiwan.
I don't know in what world you live, but let's recap what I've been saying:
1) China has the ability to reduce Taiwan into a big pile of rubble
-I didn't say "taking" see? It's a well-known fact that at the moment they are lacking enough equipment to make opposed landings. They do have enough conventional missiles and aircraft to overwhelm Taiwanese defences and bomb the shit out of them.
2) Russia is worried about China's encroachment at south/east Siberia
-In what part did I talk about Chinese blizkrieg? I thought I was pretty clear that I meant the way illegal Chinese immigrants are coming over the border. The area is not very populated by ethnic Russins to start with and now there's overwhelming numbers of ethnic Chinese living and working around them. The area is the only worthwhile place currently in Siberia and it's also the gateway to the resource-rich northern Siberia.
So, please tell me in detail how I'm stuck in 1940's thinking and information? And what are the flaws?
Chancellor Kremlin said:
Let's see, they have 2 ways of getting nukes into continental US - ICBM's and subs.
They have only 24 ICBM's and these are in silos. USAF has easily the capability to destroy those silos all at the same time.
They have five nuclear submarines, of which 3 are ancient Han-types which don't have the range to get anywhere near California, leaving only 2 subs. Saying that the USN couldn't track and sink them when US would be preparing for a first-strike against China is silly.
So that leaves them with hundreds of short-range missiles. Sure, they can equip those with nuclear warheads and turn Taiwan and Japan into parking lots but that's it. They don't have MIRVS's either, though they are trying to develop them.
So I don't see it that much as wishful thinking but rather planning and execution.
I'm actually Finnish and our fleet is kinda a joke
Actually, those are pretty bad strategic mistakes from the Chinese. Scaring USN like that is stupid since now they will review their equipment and training doctrines so it wouldn't happen again. In other words, you are warning your possible future opponent to improve their 'game'. Foolish in my book. It still doesn't change the fact that even if the Chinese sailors would be vastly better by training and equipment (which they are not), they would still be outnumbered.
Agreed and I was not implying that. One would need to quite a retard to actually invade Chinese mainland. Even with the nearly comically incredible Air-to-Ground capability of USAF.
Honestly, US fleet could lose a carrier or two, and still win the naval war. Chinese navy is outclassed, and outnumbered when it is compared to the US navy.
But any landing attemp on mainland China would be near suicidal, because if there is one thing that the chinese have, that is numbers and infantry equipment. There really is no way for a invasion from sea would work against current China, with PLA being as large as it is. US airforce might win air war, and thats not certain, but US army couldnt win land war inside China. The amount of infantry the PLA can throw at them would be similar in scale, or even larger to what the germans faced in east front during WWII.
But any landing attemp on mainland China would be near suicidal, because if there is one thing that the chinese have, that is numbers and infantry equipment. There really is no way for a invasion from sea would work against current China, with PLA being as large as it is. US airforce might win air war, and thats not certain, but US army couldnt win land war inside China. The amount of infantry the PLA can throw at them would be similar in scale, or even larger to what the germans faced in east front during WWII.
Chancellor Kremlin
Mildly Dipped
GarfunkeL said:
Well first you would have to silently deploy bombers to destroy all these silos, which I find near impossible even with the B-2 fleet, as there are only 21, and that not being the case, the Chinese would surely spot the attempt and launch their missiles before you got there.
Secondly, you do not take into account secret silos, mobile launchers, etc. You cannot surely think the U.S has a fully up to date and 100% accurate map of the Chinese nuclear arsenal do you?
GarfunkeL said:
No, its not. They have a Xia class submarine still in operation, and two Type 094 submarines. Do you really think you can track 3 submaries all through the pacific ocean? Do you know how big that ocean is? Im sorry, but it would be imposible. You may get lucky, but I highly doubt you can sink all three subs at the same time. Its not happening.
GarfunkeL said:
Well thats what I said at the end of my post, I think the Chinese know how 'foolish' their 'mistake' is. I don't think its a mistake. Its like I said, if the Chinese feel confortable enough to let the enemy know their subs have that capability, its probably because they also feel they have some other tricks up their sleeve the U.S is unaware of, and feel they can let this one out the hat. Trust me, the Chinese are well versed in The Art Of War. Deception is everything. Make your enemy haughty.
Paladin Solo
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Chancellor Kremlin said:
That didn't stop the British from bending them over a barrel.
Chancellor Kremlin
Mildly Dipped
Paladin Solo said:
Be that as it may, I would not underestimate them. The U.S is not as omnipotent as some seem to think.
Paladin Solo
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Chancellor Kremlin said:
I'm sure Iraq is a work of fiction for those people, but things aren't as simple as a lone Chinese missile sub encroaching on the US coastline and the US giving up fearfully and unconditionally. Maybe I'm wrong, but historically speaking, it's not likely.
And maybe I'd be comically skewing things by referencing Operations Prime Chance and Earnest Will, but the USN is definitely a tested one, both past and present. I could swing my dick around all day and sing patriotic songs, but I'm not stupid enough to say something will certainly happen or won't happen. However, my money is on the USN.
Chancellor Kremlin
Mildly Dipped
Paladin Solo said:
Nobody in this thread has suggested that, I am not sure what you are referring to here.
My money is also on the USN, all I am saying is there will be some losses on the U.S side also, in contrast to those who think the U.S would sweep the PLAN clean off the face of the South China sea.
Paladin Solo
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Chancellor Kremlin said:
"China invades Taiwan. U.S does not intervene. Taiwan and China reunite syombolicaly ending the 1949 civil war. The U.S has to all intents and purposes ceded regional hegemony to China. China amasses a fleet of equal capabilities as to the U.S. A pacific war begins and the U.S is defeated. Chinese orchestrate invasion of U.S homeland. With a massively bigger military aparatus and human resources, invasion and subjugation is easy. China becomes global hegemon. U.S humiliated, becomes semi-communist. Eventually, the Chinese empire begins to desintegrate. U.S resistance and independence movements gain ground. China forced to leave U.S. Regime change at home means China in political turmoil and in no position to be a hegemon no longer. U.S declares independence and begins to regain its former glory. "
This scenario dictates the US restrains its own nuclear arsenal, but in a reverse scenario of the US invading China, the Chinese let loose theirs? The above scenario suggests that the US will simply forfeit its positions like clockwork, and yet, it seems absurd to you to think the same of China in a similiar scenario?
In my opinion, it is more likely that if the Americans are in situation where China has already invaded Taiwan, and is defending it, americans wont start a war.
Sure if they are in a position to send help, they will send it, and fight against China in a war. In this one thay have Navy near, and can prevent invasion of taiwan, and have troops and planes to send defend it. This would result in most likely destruction of chinese navy, with some american naval losses. Then there would be a likely slow season of naval and mainly air warfare, with very little land fighting. Us cant invade mainland China, and china cant invade Taiwan or anything else, as their navy cant defend any such operations.
But the Americans arent going to start a war when it is already too late for that. War would have large economical and political effects. This would be in a scenario, where large part of US Army is already "entrenched" in a war, like the current situation in Afganistan. In this one they would however, still use economic and diplomatic measures to "hurt" China indirectly. But they wouldnt declare war. The thing is, China cant invade US mainland, simply because US navy is too strong.
Sure if they are in a position to send help, they will send it, and fight against China in a war. In this one thay have Navy near, and can prevent invasion of taiwan, and have troops and planes to send defend it. This would result in most likely destruction of chinese navy, with some american naval losses. Then there would be a likely slow season of naval and mainly air warfare, with very little land fighting. Us cant invade mainland China, and china cant invade Taiwan or anything else, as their navy cant defend any such operations.
But the Americans arent going to start a war when it is already too late for that. War would have large economical and political effects. This would be in a scenario, where large part of US Army is already "entrenched" in a war, like the current situation in Afganistan. In this one they would however, still use economic and diplomatic measures to "hurt" China indirectly. But they wouldnt declare war. The thing is, China cant invade US mainland, simply because US navy is too strong.
Bal-Sagoth
Water Chip? Been There, Done That
Patton89 said:
I would love to see any nation attempt to invade and conquer the US mainland.
No kidding, with gun nuts like you... 
Well, joking aside, it would be rather unplausible, FIRST they would have to defeat US navy, to secure supply line and landing fleets safety. Then they would have to do succesfull landing, which is not easy.
And if they would land in to US west coast, they would get pinned by attack from all sides.
North the US/Canadian forces, south and east US forces and behind lines the communist hating American partisans* , and im not joking here.
They probably would have to have armored vehicle escorts to get supplies to front lines in worst areas.
*(having the help of US military of course)
Well, joking aside, it would be rather unplausible, FIRST they would have to defeat US navy, to secure supply line and landing fleets safety. Then they would have to do succesfull landing, which is not easy.
And if they would land in to US west coast, they would get pinned by attack from all sides.
North the US/Canadian forces, south and east US forces and behind lines the communist hating American partisans* , and im not joking here.
They probably would have to have armored vehicle escorts to get supplies to front lines in worst areas.
*(having the help of US military of course)