"In War Over Taiwan, We Lose Every Time"

[DennisPTate]

Pentagon-adviseur lijkbleek na geheime briefing. “In oorlog om Taiwan verliezen we élke keer”

Toen een nationale veiligheidsadviseur de details van de uiterst geheime ‘Overmatch Brief’ tot zich liet doordringen, trok hij lijkbleek weg. Dit ontluisterende document, waarover ‘The New York Times’ bericht, doorbreekt het Amerikaanse zelfbeeld van militaire onaantastbaarheid: in een oorlog om...

www.hln.be

How about, instead of relying on aircraft carriers to bail out Taiwan, we use large destroyers equipped with 10K RPM AA guns and hypersonic missiles of their own?
Combined with drones that explicitly send out signals impersonating real US naval assets, we could perhaps tip the balance of power in our favor again?

Or enforce a total boycott on a high percentage of Chinese goods exported worldwide so that the economy of China collapses and soon the people go looking for the leaders of the Communist Party?

That is a risky path to take though, all we have to do is remember that Japan was responding to a major boycott on Japan receiving oil, that preceded their attack on Pearl Harbour.

 

[Zavulon]

Only if we decide not to use tactical nukes.*

Given that your only type of tactical nukes is obsolete and practically useless gravity bomb B61, and you have only few hundred of them, your choice to use them won't change a thing. Most of them will be destroyed before usage anyway.

 

[DennisPTate]

Pentagon-adviseur lijkbleek na geheime briefing. “In oorlog om Taiwan verliezen we élke keer”

Toen een nationale veiligheidsadviseur de details van de uiterst geheime ‘Overmatch Brief’ tot zich liet doordringen, trok hij lijkbleek weg. Dit ontluisterende document, waarover ‘The New York Times’ bericht, doorbreekt het Amerikaanse zelfbeeld van militaire onaantastbaarheid: in een oorlog om...

www.hln.be

How about, instead of relying on aircraft carriers to bail out Taiwan, we use large destroyers equipped with 10K RPM AA guns and hypersonic missiles of their own?
Combined with drones that explicitly send out signals impersonating real US naval assets, we could perhaps tip the balance of power in our favor again?

I feel that I should give you a rather funny response to all of this but it will come across as a "Conspiracy Theory." It is based on "Operation Paperclip" though and that is a very interesting part of USA and world history.

 

[Zavulon]

Just a piece of Austria.
Just a piece Czechoslovakia.
Just a piece of France.
Just a piece of Poland.

Just another piece and then you have Peace.

A piece here and a piece there didn't result in peace.

But don't forget WWI that started because nobody wanted to show a bit of flexibility, too. Both flexibility and rigidness lead to wars.
Or you can recall Perestroika and forty years of peace that were given by it. You can buy a lot of peace time for your inner reforms by giving up unnecessary (at least not-vital) alliances.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

Pentagon-adviseur lijkbleek na geheime briefing. “In oorlog om Taiwan verliezen we élke keer”

Toen een nationale veiligheidsadviseur de details van de uiterst geheime ‘Overmatch Brief’ tot zich liet doordringen, trok hij lijkbleek weg. Dit ontluisterende document, waarover ‘The New York Times’ bericht, doorbreekt het Amerikaanse zelfbeeld van militaire onaantastbaarheid: in een oorlog om...

www.hln.be

How about, instead of relying on aircraft carriers to bail out Taiwan, we use large destroyers equipped with 10K RPM AA guns and hypersonic missiles of their own?
Combined with drones that explicitly send out signals impersonating real US naval assets, we could perhaps tip the balance of power in our favor again?

I've been beaten up on this board by saying the same thing

Trump's kind of on the right track.He wants to build battleships. With rail guns ..... bristling with missiles and conventional weapons

large cruisers and destroyers are the way to go

 

[toobfreak]

Given that your only type of tactical nukes is obsolete and practically useless gravity bomb B61, and you have only few hundred of them, your choice to use them won't change a thing. Most of them will be destroyed before usage anyway.

Boy, they sure fill your head with a lot of bullshit over there, don't they? Or is your problem that you already know that and are just trying to spread disinformation?

It never fails; every time any Russian comes on here (at least claims to be), it seems their main occupation is just to spread a lot of BS about how superior Russia is. We used to have a guy on here who went on and on about the history of scientific firsts and all of the superior advances in everything from Russian food to Russian women.

Are you that same guy?

 

[kyzr]

But don't forget WWI that started because nobody wanted to show a bit of flexibility, too. Both flexibility and rigidness lead to wars.
Or you can recall Perestroika and forty years of peace that were given by it. You can buy a lot of peace time for your inner reforms by giving up unnecessary (at least not-vital) alliances.

Flexibility, a word Putin does not understand.
Are you hearing that the "peace" negotiations about Ukraine are discussing "buffer zones" between Russian and Ukrainian territory? I'm curious how wide it is and if peacekeepers are allowed to patrol it.

 

[Stryder50]

Given that your only type of tactical nukes is obsolete and practically useless gravity bomb B61, and you have only few hundred of them, your choice to use them won't change a thing. Most of them will be destroyed before usage anyway.

My use of "tactical nuke" refers to targeting application of devices used, not any specific type of device.

 

[Stryder50]

But don't forget WWI that started because nobody wanted to show a bit of flexibility, too. Both flexibility and rigidness lead to wars.
Or you can recall Perestroika and forty years of peace that were given by it. You can buy a lot of peace time for your inner reforms by giving up unnecessary (at least not-vital) alliances.

Sorry Komrade Z. your history lessons were incomplete.
Blackmail and bribes are temporary solutions at best, and seldom that. More often they backfire and add to reasons for, causes of going to war.

A certain military strategists once said something to the effect;
"The purpose of War is a better Peace."
Of course that's one perspective. Another is that you only have war when side resists the use of military aggression that is being applied to it by the other side. If you don't resist the violence and aggression you don't have a war, but will have submission and subjugation.

Another perspective is that WWI AND WWII started for the same reasons; Germany wanted to focus attack on Russia, but sought to neutralize France and the West as threat to it's backside once engaged with Russia. This plan depended on Russia being passive to Germany aggression in the West, just sit there and wait to let Germany get done on the one side before then attacking Russia.

Didn't quite work out that way.

 

[JoeB131]

Sorry Komrade Z. your history lessons were incomplete.
Blackmail and bribes are temporary solutions at best, and seldom that. More often they backfire and add to reasons for, causes of going to war.

A certain military strategists once said something to the effect;
"The purpose of War is a better Peace."
Of course that's one perspective. Another is that you only have war when side resists the use of military aggression that is being applied to it by the other side. If you don't resist the violence and aggression you don't have a war, but will have submission and subjugation.

Another perspective is that WWI AND WWII started for the same reasons; Germany wanted to focus attack on Russia, but sought to neutralize France and the West as threat to it's backside once engaged with Russia. This plan depended on Russia being passive to Germany aggression in the West, just sit there and wait to let Germany get done on the one side before then attacking Russia.

Didn't quite work out that way.

Well, no, in WWI, Russia was defeated. Completely. Had to sue for peace.

In WWII, Hitler completed his business in the West, because

Stalin made an alliance with him. After Hitler turned on Stalin, Stalin BEGGED the West to open a second front.

None of this has to do with us getting involved in an internal Chinese squabble over what kind of government they should have.

 

[Zavulon]

My use of "tactical nuke" refers to targeting application of devices used, not any specific type of device.

And the usage of Nuclear Scientists (and it is quite common understanding), refers to specific types of devices.

 

[Zavulon]

Boy, they sure fill your head with a lot of bullshit over there, don't they? Or is your problem that you already know that and are just trying to spread disinformation?

It never fails; every time any Russian comes on here (at least claims to be), it seems their main occupation is just to spread a lot of BS about how superior Russia is.

No reason believe to me. Believe to Bulletin of Nuclear Scientists. Most authoritive open western source.

Or, if you posses different first hand information, I'll be happy to read your sources.

 

[Zavulon]

Well, no, in WWI, Russia was defeated. Completely. Had to sue for peace.

Actually, Russia made separate peace, temporarily retreat for certain regions, used that time for modernization and making necessary reforms.

In WWII, Hitler completed his business in the West, because

Stalin made an alliance with him. After Hitler turned on Stalin, Stalin BEGGED the West to open a second front.

In WWII Russia was more successful in playing different western states and NGOs to fight against each other.

None of this has to do with us getting involved in an internal Chinese squabble over what kind of government they should have.

May be. May be it has. You know, something like the attempt of peaceful returning of Taiwan in China.

Legislature passes motion to start impeachment proceedings against Lai - Focus Taiwan

The Legislative Yuan on Friday approved a motion to initiate impeachment proceedings against President Lai Ching-te (賴清德), arguing that he has undermined Taiwan's constitutional order and democracy.

focustaiwan.tw

 

[Zavulon]

Sorry Komrade Z. your history lessons were incomplete.
Blackmail and bribes are temporary solutions at best, and seldom that. More often they backfire and add to reasons for, causes of going to war.

A certain military strategists once said something to the effect;
"The purpose of War is a better Peace."
Of course that's one perspective. Another is that you only have war when side resists the use of military aggression that is being applied to it by the other side. If you don't resist the violence and aggression you don't have a war, but will have submission and subjugation.

Yep. But with a bit lesser level of oversimplification, one can refer to Konrad Lorentz book "On Aggression" ("Das sogenannte Böse"). This book based on the bulk of zoo psychology observations and experiments. The book is very interesting, entertaining and educative by itself, but now there are two interesting moments:
1) Territorial animals are more motivated to fight when they are closer to "home". Human being, so far, are better fighting defending their homes. When they far from home they are more prone to retreat.
2) In any conflict an animal can play "hawk" or "dove". If "dove" fights "dove" it's long and mostly demonstrative game, after which one of sides safely retreats. If "hawk" fights "hawk" it is short but fierce combat, in which one of sides is dead or heavily wounded. If "hawk" fights "dove" - "dove" runs away unharmed, but "hawk" takes the prize.
In practical terms there is no "universaly winning strategy" it depends on what kind of prize, what type of content, and so on ...
In our practical life it is better to talk about more hawkish or dovish strategy.

America retreated from Vietnam, and it prevented nuclear war with Soviet Union and gave opportunity to achieve certain agreements with China, play it against Russia and convince Russians that Poland is not that important for Russia's safety (and that NATO have no intention to take Poland either).

Russia retreated from Poland, bought forty years of peace, make agreements with China and reformed itself.
But when NATO came to Ukraine and started to kill Russians, Russia has no other option but to play "hawk". And the USA now have the choice: play "hawk" too, and fight against Russia until death of one of sides or play "dove" and run away. I believe that "ran away and have years of peace" is the best option for you, but only you can make that choice.

 

[Zavulon]

Flexibility, a word Putin does not understand.

Of course he understand it. Actually, in inner policy Putin is more than flexible. But there is no place for flexibility in the question of safety of Russian people and Russian Federation. I mean, you wouldn't be flexible in the question of deployment of Chinese IRBMs in Canada and genocide of WASPs there.

Are you hearing that the "peace" negotiations about Ukraine are discussing "buffer zones" between Russian and Ukrainian territory?

It's pretty stupid idea. There will be no any "buffer zones".

I'm curious how wide it is and if peacekeepers are allowed to patrol it.

There will be no any "buffer zones" and no any "peacekeepers". Just imitation of diplomatic activity. Like saying "good doggy" while opening your holster.

 

[Dekster]

Pentagon-adviseur lijkbleek na geheime briefing. “In oorlog om Taiwan verliezen we élke keer”

Toen een nationale veiligheidsadviseur de details van de uiterst geheime ‘Overmatch Brief’ tot zich liet doordringen, trok hij lijkbleek weg. Dit ontluisterende document, waarover ‘The New York Times’ bericht, doorbreekt het Amerikaanse zelfbeeld van militaire onaantastbaarheid: in een oorlog om...

www.hln.be

How about, instead of relying on aircraft carriers to bail out Taiwan, we use large destroyers equipped with 10K RPM AA guns and hypersonic missiles of their own?
Combined with drones that explicitly send out signals impersonating real US naval assets, we could perhaps tip the balance of power in our favor again?

Taiwan is too close to China with most of its population on the China side of the island. Even after we sacrificed a big chunk of our navy for a big chunk of theirs, China could still carpet bomb the island. Fortunately, China has no particular need to invade Taiwan so we have no need to defend it.

 

[Zavulon]

Taiwan is too close to China with most of its population on the China side of the island. Even after we sacrificed a big chunk of our navy for a big chunk of theirs, China could still carpet bomb the island. Fortunately, China has no particular need to invade Taiwan so we have no need to defend it.

In practical terms, pro-Chinese majority of Taiwan's "Parliament" decided to impeach "pro-American" "President".
And it may open the way to peace reunion of Taiwan with Continental China.

 

[Dekster]

In practical terms, pro-Chinese majority of Taiwan's "Parliament" decided to impeach "pro-American" "President".
And it may open the way to peace reunion of Taiwan with Continental China.

As far as the US is concerned, we have had a one china policy since the brits handed it over. This is really something the US shouldn't meddle with to begin with. We also shouldn't sell them any weapons we don't want in Chinese hands at some point.

 

[peacefan]

"Feet of clay?" $900b a year buys a **** of a lot of clay.

The Dutch OP should focus on the EU's army if he can find it.

So why hasn't China taken Taiwan yet before we move the chip-making factories to the US?

to win without a real fight, requires that the opposing side be given the chance to flee.
-- Sun Tzu + me

 

[peacefan]

"Feet of clay?" $900b a year buys a **** of a lot of clay.

The Dutch OP should focus on the EU's army if he can find it.

So why hasn't China taken Taiwan yet before we move the chip-making factories to the US?

please allow me, on behalf of those friendly gym-freaks here in my country, to ask you what the hell the real purpose of that top side pincer (Taiwan, South Korea, Japan) even is these days, with fast boats, aircraft and long range missiles, before we go comitting our entire treasurechest and gym populations to the cause of American unipolarist emperial pride.

"it's to protect our spiceries and bananna farms and sugar plantations in Asia, in Indonesia and the Phillipines and all those countries on the shores of the boat trip through the Suez towards say, The Phillipines or JAPAN".

well, can't we hydroponically grow these locally these days?
will some one or some group or some set of groups please release the economical viability of nuclear fusion power generation already?
farming needs it. on Earth and in this solar system.

point is : China is ruled emperically. And Xi has no doubt indoctrinated not just his daughters, but his entire nation around the line of thinking that they too should be treated as a world-power.
with full control over their territorial waters.

the Chinese stated over and over again how they see Taiwan as an integral part of China, that will eventually be conquered by force.
yet we see globalist corrupt gov after globalist corrupt gov in that country use their tiny population as total pawns to be indoctrinated around the idea that the West will save them.

so you grudgingly comply, Americans. because it keeps your arms industries supplied with rare raw cash.
we know.

meanwhile, last thing Europeans wanna do these days is die in far away lands!
now whatcha gonna do about it?
i'd love a headsup first!