Xi Jingping: China must prepare for war

[Jayjay]

The way I see it, Xi has two paths.

1) He might see that the war in Ukraine is a unique opportunity to take Taiwan while USA is tied up in Europe. This means an attack could happen in very short time, as early as this year, but more likely 2024-2026. This could get very messy, because US supporting Taiwan would also mean China ramping up support to Russia which escalates the war in Europe as well.

But we aren't tied up in Europe. Only a few trainers are in Ukraine. And if it comes to a battle for Taiwan the army doesn't have much of any role. It will be the Air Force and Navy that fight. If China can force the straight they'll win regardless of our army because of the much shorter supply line (and thus we should not commit ground troops other than operators of heavy weapons.) If they can't force the straight they'll lose without a ground engagement in the first place.

One problem: ammunution. Especially artillery shells and rockets. US is already straining to produce what Ukraine needs, and in case of a second front in Taiwan some prioritization would have to be made.

However, I do hope Xi is not crazy enough to attack.

 

[Patooka]

US is already straining to produce what Ukraine needs

I seriously doubt that. It's far more plausible someone working at Raytheon called an active buddy, gave them the heads up a journalist is coming their way and asked "as a favour" to give a coached answer about stockpiles.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The way I see it, Xi has two paths.

1) He might see that the war in Ukraine is a unique opportunity to take Taiwan while USA is tied up in Europe. This means an attack could happen in very short time, as early as this year, but more likely 2024-2026. This could get very messy, because US supporting Taiwan would also mean China ramping up support to Russia which escalates the war in Europe as well.

But we aren't tied up in Europe. Only a few trainers are in Ukraine. And if it comes to a battle for Taiwan the army doesn't have much of any role. It will be the Air Force and Navy that fight. If China can force the straight they'll win regardless of our army because of the much shorter supply line (and thus we should not commit ground troops other than operators of heavy weapons.) If they can't force the straight they'll lose without a ground engagement in the first place.

One problem: ammunution. Especially artillery shells and rockets. US is already straining to produce what Ukraine needs, and in case of a second front in Taiwan some prioritization would have to be made.

However, I do hope Xi is not crazy enough to attack.

The battle for Taiwan will be a matter of forcing a landing. There's not a lot of artillery needed for that.

 

[bilby]

The way I see it, Xi has two paths.

1) He might see that the war in Ukraine is a unique opportunity to take Taiwan while USA is tied up in Europe. This means an attack could happen in very short time, as early as this year, but more likely 2024-2026. This could get very messy, because US supporting Taiwan would also mean China ramping up support to Russia which escalates the war in Europe as well.

But we aren't tied up in Europe. Only a few trainers are in Ukraine. And if it comes to a battle for Taiwan the army doesn't have much of any role. It will be the Air Force and Navy that fight. If China can force the straight they'll win regardless of our army because of the much shorter supply line (and thus we should not commit ground troops other than operators of heavy weapons.) If they can't force the straight they'll lose without a ground engagement in the first place.

One problem: ammunution. Especially artillery shells and rockets. US is already straining to produce what Ukraine needs, and in case of a second front in Taiwan some prioritization would have to be made.

However, I do hope Xi is not crazy enough to attack.

The battle for Taiwan will be a matter of forcing a landing. There's not a lot of artillery needed for that.

Yes, there is.

Defending a coastline is ideally done with artillery, both to sink the invasion fleet and to pulverise any invading forces on the beaches and immediate littoral area.

Shipborne artillery (naval bombardment) is a necessary part of the softening up process to make a landing possible on a fortified coastline.

On D-Day, vast amounts of naval artillery were employed against both the immediate beach defences and the reserve areas behind the Atlantic Wall, to reduce the availability of both men and materiel to reinforce the defenders at the landing sites.

And the lack of adequate artillery for defence was one of the key factors in choosing Normandy as the target - the area around Calais, and further North into Belgium and The Netherlands, was far more heavily armed with artillery, as well as having more robust defensive emplacements.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The difference is, at Normandy, there were no smart weapons. No guided anti-ship missiles, no guided artillery rockets, no smart artillery shells. No smart anti-aircraft missiles. I have no idea what Taiwan has, but China may well pay a heavy price for any invasion.

 

[Copernicus]

The difference is, at Normandy, there were no smart weapons. No guided anti-ship missiles, no guided artillery rockets, no smart artillery shells. No smart anti-aircraft missiles. I have no idea what Taiwan has, but China may well pay a heavy price for any invasion.

To create a landing beachhead, China might use long range guided and ballistic missiles, not to mention drones, in place of artillery bombardment from ships that could be targeted. The US Navy would be critical in the defense of Taiwan, and China could target American ships easily. Navies these days are essentially a bunch of sitting ducks, except for submarines. Taiwan supplies the world with 92% of its logic semiconductors, so it would be a tremendous prize for the Chinese military and huge loss to the US military, if that supply were to be cut off. They are essential to all of these new smart technologies that the militaries use all over the world to slaughter their fellow human beings with.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Taiwan leader, US Speaker McCarthy meet in California despite Chinese warnings

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The way I see it, Xi has two paths.

1) He might see that the war in Ukraine is a unique opportunity to take Taiwan while USA is tied up in Europe. This means an attack could happen in very short time, as early as this year, but more likely 2024-2026. This could get very messy, because US supporting Taiwan would also mean China ramping up support to Russia which escalates the war in Europe as well.

But we aren't tied up in Europe. Only a few trainers are in Ukraine. And if it comes to a battle for Taiwan the army doesn't have much of any role. It will be the Air Force and Navy that fight. If China can force the straight they'll win regardless of our army because of the much shorter supply line (and thus we should not commit ground troops other than operators of heavy weapons.) If they can't force the straight they'll lose without a ground engagement in the first place.

One problem: ammunution. Especially artillery shells and rockets. US is already straining to produce what Ukraine needs, and in case of a second front in Taiwan some prioritization would have to be made.

However, I do hope Xi is not crazy enough to attack.

The battle for Taiwan will be a matter of forcing a landing. There's not a lot of artillery needed for that.

Yes, there is.

Defending a coastline is ideally done with artillery, both to sink the invasion fleet and to pulverise any invading forces on the beaches and immediate littoral area.

Shipborne artillery (naval bombardment) is a necessary part of the softening up process to make a landing possible on a fortified coastline.

On D-Day, vast amounts of naval artillery were employed against both the immediate beach defences and the reserve areas behind the Atlantic Wall, to reduce the availability of both men and materiel to reinforce the defenders at the landing sites.

And the lack of adequate artillery for defence was one of the key factors in choosing Normandy as the target - the area around Calais, and further North into Belgium and The Netherlands, was far more heavily armed with artillery, as well as having more robust defensive emplacements.

Old school. Any artillery piece that sits around firing will get nailed by a missile. It will have to be shoot and scoot. On the flip side, naval artillery has to be on a ship--and that ship will likewise draw missile fire. If China can get a solid beachhead they win, but getting such a beachhead will be extremely difficult.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The difference is, at Normandy, there were no smart weapons. No guided anti-ship missiles, no guided artillery rockets, no smart artillery shells. No smart anti-aircraft missiles. I have no idea what Taiwan has, but China may well pay a heavy price for any invasion.

To create a landing beachhead, China might use long range guided and ballistic missiles, not to mention drones, in place of artillery bombardment from ships that could be targeted. The US Navy would be critical in the defense of Taiwan, and China could target American ships easily. Navies these days are essentially a bunch of sitting ducks, except for submarines. Taiwan supplies the world with 92% of its logic semiconductors, so it would be a tremendous prize for the Chinese military and huge loss to the US military, if that supply were to be cut off. They are essential to all of these new smart technologies that the militaries use all over the world to slaughter their fellow human beings with.

And submarines can't conduct invasions. It will be Chinese ships at sea vs missiles and some artillery putting up a gauntlet. Landing ships do not mount good anti-missile defenses and will have very little ability to use them even if they had them because the missile tracks will be so short. I don't think current technology permits an opposed landing against a modern defender short of turning said defender to rubble first.