Could China take Taiwan in one year?

Could China take Taiwan in one year?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    given how totally serious western support is (thought and prayer + symbolic gestures to avoid escalation), very likely

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Has been living under a rock for the last year

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        are you impressed by the western response to ukraine?
        easily impressionable or your expectation must have been below ground level

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          are you impressed with russia's preformance in ukraine? and we all know that china is not better lmao

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >deflection
            that's about how every argument goes with you russia complex morons.
            but to answer your question, no i'm not impressed by russia, that's about what i expected to see

            Considering Russia threatens Nuclear War everytime a new western arms deal is announced, yes. I am very impressed. They could have easily just sat on the sidelines and do nothing to prevent "escalation"

            so yeah extremely low expectations, response is fairly weak objectively

            considering a dozen HIMARS changed the entire course of the war.

            i guess you're right minimum effort is enough to stall decrepit armies

            The West is now demoralized

            China will flawlessly execute the most difficult kind of invasion known to man, despite having no meaningful military experience. The off-shore Chinese population will graciously accept their brothers and march to the re-education camps with little fuss. China will then hold Taiwan in perpetuity and China will be restored forever as it ushers in an endless era of Asian prosperity.

            kys moron

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >Attempts concern trolling thread
              >Gets rightfully called a moron
              >Immediately loses the bit to seethe
              Many such cases

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You got lost on the way to r/thedonald

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You got lost on the way to vkontakte.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                [...]

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You're a mod there, aren't you?

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Wagner alone btfo Nato in donbas. So, yes, i am.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              wagner lost 50k people fighting 2k ukrainians in bakhmut what the frick are you talking about

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >25:1 K/D.
                The best current estimates as of the previous week suggested anywhere between 5:1 to 7:1 ratio, impressive, but nothing anywhere near what you're suggesting there.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Right. He's sort of correct though, in the sense that Wagner broke its teeth trying to take Bakhmut that was defended by a few thousand ukrainians (constantly being grinded/swapped out themselves)

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Don't get me wrong Russia's continued ineptitude in Bakhmut, in month what is it 9 now? is pretty hilarious. But 25:1 is hyperbole of the highest order.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                dude was making shit up just as the post he was replying to. so fighting fire with fire. or stupidity with stupidity, which is the only language vatniks understand.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >wagner lost 50k people fighting 2k ukrainians in bakhmu

                Source: your mother´s butthole on copium and dickium. lol

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Source: The Kiev Semit

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >10%
              How do people get to this number?
              Do they count every riot control unit and every rusty BMP in storage to get their 100%?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >How do people get to this number?
                Dragonball Z.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >In March 2019 the FSIN has a total prisoner population of 558,778, which included all pretrial detainees. This number makes up 0.4% of the population. Only 8% of prisoners are female, and juveniles make up 0.2%.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Hello GPT-3, generate me a song pls

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I don't think i will.
                Anon asked from where they took
                >50k vatnigs is only 10% of gayner might
                I found it funny that 10% of russian prisoners is 55878 (so close enough).
                Now i feel dirty that i had to explain joke.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              That would be South Africa in the Cold War. lol lmao

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Considering Russia threatens Nuclear War everytime a new western arms deal is announced, yes. I am very impressed. They could have easily just sat on the sidelines and do nothing to prevent "escalation"

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          considering a dozen HIMARS changed the entire course of the war.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >HIMARS
            That's cute

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              -ACK

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Have you seen how divided the EU is on every issue ever? Them actually agreeing on something as much as they do on Ukraine is a monumental occasion

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Russia is losing and you are seething

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          lmfao. update our programming. Have you seen the Russian performance versus expectations?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      The West is now demoralized

      China will flawlessly execute the most difficult kind of invasion known to man, despite having no meaningful military experience. The off-shore Chinese population will graciously accept their brothers and march to the re-education camps with little fuss. China will then hold Taiwan in perpetuity and China will be restored forever as it ushers in an endless era of Asian prosperity.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        implessive

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        It's all ogre

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        +100 social credit

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Vely Implessive, yes..

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          those are awesome, they are like flying motorbikes

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I am thoroughly demoralized. T. Marthin Luther from New York Oblast

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Can't believe what they'll make take place.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Ah, yes, herro, I am 约翰 from the Ohio province, and I prostituteheartedry agree, the West (incruding myserf) is so DEMORARIZED we can hardry get out of decadent western bed every morning to eat tripre hamburger and mirkshake, traditionar Ohio province breakfast. Trury, the Mirrenium of Chinese Dominance is crose at hand, when they recraim that rittre isrand as rightfur Chinese cray.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      The West is now demoralized

      China will flawlessly execute the most difficult kind of invasion known to man, despite having no meaningful military experience. The off-shore Chinese population will graciously accept their brothers and march to the re-education camps with little fuss. China will then hold Taiwan in perpetuity and China will be restored forever as it ushers in an endless era of Asian prosperity.

      Imbressive

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/sV3WWZs.jpg

      Could China take Taiwan in one year?

      Absolutely. The US doesn't recognize Taiwan as a sovereign nation and neither does any country in europe. No association agreement exists, no defensive pact exists. The advantageous situation in ukraine doesn't exist here. There aren't 30 countries more or less openly hostile to china or interested in their demise sharing a landborder with taiwan that could be used to shuffle materiel into the country without repercussions. Only way to bring stuff in is by ship or by plane. Both of which can be easily prevented - even if the chinese only had russian tier capabilities.

      The only real option would be to do cuban missile crisis 2: electric boogaloo and ship nukes to taiwan.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Both of which can be easily prevented - even if the chinese only had russian tier capabilities.
        Their capabilities are worse than that and they know it.

        Russia getting curb stomped by an insignificant border country has triggered an absolute identity crisis in the Chinese government and military.

        HATO and the west are suddenly realizing all of pucciyas strengths are non-existent outside of paper and they are significantly more capable and strong than they thought in comparison.

        Changs will do nothing but seethe and issue final warnings in greater numbers, it’s literally all they can do.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Russia getting curb stomped by an insignificant border country has triggered an absolute identity crisis in the Chinese government and military.
          I think all the chink shilling has been obnoxious but this is also moronic. The PRC maintains the same policy with Taiwan as it had before Ukraine, if anything they've only gotten more aggressive with the war games and airspace violations.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >cuban missile crisis 2: electric boogaloo and ship nukes to taiwan
        Rational Self-Preservation: I do not want WWIII.
        Morbid Curiosity: I want Taiwan to mysteriously acquire nuclear submarines from an unknown source.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Twitter is the right door at the end of corridor buddy

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They would have to build literally hundreds of naval vessels in order to get the US Navy to back off from the immediately Chinese coastal area. Only then could they finally launch the invasion, but at that point it would be decades in the future and any number of geopolitical factors could be different making the invasion untenable for them.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >They would have to build literally hundreds of naval vessels in order to get the US Navy to back off from the immediately Chinese coastal area.
      China builds the equivalent of the entire French navy every 4 years

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        That's not very impressive given the size of the French navy.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >They would have to build literally hundreds of naval vessels in order to get the US Navy to back off from the immediately Chinese coastal area.

      Their entire coast is protected by antiship missiles.

      Ships are only for force projection. They're terribly inefficient for defense. You're paying a billion dollars+ to put a whole bunch of missiles together in a sinkable container.
      The only value is if that sinkable container is projecting force out farther than you could otherwise reach.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        That works two ways though, because Taiwan would also be loaded to the brim with anti-ship missiles.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        So how does that help in an invasion of Taiwan and what;s preventing those missiles from being bombed

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        you need those sinkable containers to patrol the sea and keep the enemy's sinkable containers away from being able to resupply the enemy, also you need more sinkable containers to carry your shit to taiwan, and they also need protection

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I'm gonna say two weeks.

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    no war for taiwan us-occupiers are already there

    >The United States plans to send between 100 and 200 troops to Taiwan, up from about 30 there a year ago, amid rising tensions with China, according to unnamed U.S. officials quoted in the Wall Street Journal.

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    How will they get there? Dig under the strait?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      they'll start by trying to cross in boats, and when they run out of boats they'll try to swim, and when the strait fills up, they'll march across to victory!

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Paratroopers.

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It all depends on how fast they can construct new fleets
    It seems any surprise is impossible

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Taiwan is for luring in the US to fight near China
    China will only attack taiwan if US is on the table

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    China has been awful on the water for most of its history. I honestly doubt they would even manage to establish a beach head and even if they did tons of people would drown trying to wade up to the beach because Chinese people can't swim.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      The PLAN has a consistently good record in the engagements it has experienced. They captured Hainan using wooden junks in 1950. They captured the Paracels using patrol ships and sunk Vietnamese frigates in 1974. They slaughtered Vietnamese again this time using proper warships in 1988.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Hainan had no air defense while they failed to take Islands right off the Chinese coast

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Lol sure the mighty Vietnamese navy in 1970 1980
        They were in worse shape even than the chink after/during Vietnam war and in no position to hold those islands

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    very different war. Taiwan is naturally protected by the ocean, population is soft as shit, and supplying western weapons to them is much harder.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      except we've been arming them with western weapons for years

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Yes, but once war breaks out resupplying them is basically impossible until the war is functionally decided. Taiwan needs to have all the weapon systems and munitions it will need at the beginning of the war, because it's not getting much more once shooting starts. Too easy to blockade. You won't see this kind of rapid influx of materiel mid-war like you see with Ukraine.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          How the hell do you propose blockading against the US navy?

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Have you tried reading about the subject? But either way, if US ships are free to navigate near Taiwan and a proper logistics chain exist to resupply Taiwanese forces, the far is basically over anyway. So the policy still holds. Taiwan needs to start the conflict with all the weapons it will need to hold out until US and allied forces can break any attempt at blockade and shut down Chinese attempts at landing. The amount of weapons they'll need will depend on how long you think it'll take the US to gain dominance over the local sea and airspace, but the principle holds regardless.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Too easy to blockade.
          The US can just resupply them via air. Or alternatively, they can just send a supply ship and dare China to blow it up.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >the U.S. military gives a frick about some half sunk Chinese boats and aircraft deployed elsewhere trying to stop them.

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They'll do it and it'll seem obvious on retrospect
    They will act only when success is very likely and when Taiwan is most vulnerable
    They won't let their 2014 pass without complete success

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It would be an airborn and amphibious landing and no one alive in China has combat experience for either. On top of this, Taiwan has been digging tunnels and storage into the island since forever. I dont see them being successful in a year. Maybe a blockade would be better but then how would they stop the U.S. from bailing out Taiwan? So no, I dont think they'd take it in a year. Level it so it's worthless? Yes they could do that in a year.

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    CSIS says no, albeit with heavy causalities on all sides, if the Allies meaningfully support Taiwan.
    https://www.csis.org/analysis/first-battle-next-war-wargaming-chinese-invasion-taiwan

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They just lost a stick war against based Indians last December, if the chinKKKs attack Taiwan, they'd get demolished fast.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      If they can't beat the fist of poo, there's no way they can handle a country that actually knows martial arts. They can't even win at writing traditional Chinese

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    China could defeat the entire world on a single year if it needed to
    Luckily only the US homosexual state is moronic and egotistical enough to oppose it despite getting its ass kicked by southern Chinese and Talibans it doesn't learn it is too stupid
    So it will be a very easy war for China as they can outproduce the rest of the world combined if needed but they won't even need to
    And the Chinese in Taipei will resent imposition of new rule but ultimately have no recourse after the US is defeated in the first 30 days
    Resistance in such case of obvious defeat is not likely and will be crushed if it does arise anyway
    There is no scenario in which the US inferior industry, military and political unity can compete with China at any time in the next hundred years
    American losers constantly count on a fluke Soviet like collapse but the Chinese learned the lessons and knew they needed a domestic economy. The Chinese people will accept no demand a war to take Taiwan even if it impoverishes them relatively for decades. The decadent fat homosexuals in the US will tolerate only a brief naval and air war and when it turns into more than that they will accept any peace that leaves them with a modicum of "honoring" their obligations
    seethe all you want but this is inevitable and the balance of power is definitely against the morono mutt alliance regardless of how much their other enemies are incompetent jokes the Chinese are not

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >The decadent fat homosexuals in the US will tolerate only a brief naval and air war and when it turns into more than that they will accept any peace that leaves them with a modicum of "honoring" their obligations
      Oh hey that's what the Japs thought in WW2

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Japan in 1941 had industrial output a fraction of the US, less manpower and was occupied with a war in China
        China has 10x the industrial output, 5x the manpower and will not be occupied with any other conflicts
        The calculus of the US continuing to fight after defeated near Taiwan favors making peace since the longer it goes the worse it becomes for them

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >China has 10x the industrial output, 5x the manpower and will not be occupied with any other conflicts
          Actually the USA has far more military industrial output than China, with the top 5 weapons manufacturers all being American, as well as being the largest weapons exporter in the world. China by contrast is actually heavily reliant on arms imports, being the 6th largest weapons importer, and thus critically vulnerable to a blockade in a war. This, combined with their net food imports and their net oil imports, makes them extremely vulnerable in any conflict with the USA, and in a naval invasion their manpower would count for almost nothing since they'd be funneled into narrow landing zones that are pretty much just killzones for all the mines, machine guns, and artillery zeroed in on those locations.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            pre-existing military industrial capacity is not relevant to a long war
            Germany had far better military industry than the US did in 1939 but obviously one of these was better suited for a long war
            The Chinese are better situated for a long war, especially with a newly dependent Russia needing to export raw materials
            The US is entirely dependent on denying the Chinese naval access to Taiwan and when (not if) that fails they will be forced to make peace by simple logic of continuing the war gains nothing

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >pre-existing military industrial capacity is not relevant to a long war
              Except it is because as soon as a war starts you're going to have industry being targeted by smart bombs and missiles, and blockades and embargoes are going to make setting up any military industry that much harder.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                China has access to all of Eurasia by land
                The ability of American bombers to operate over China is nebulous since their air defense is unknown, in any case far better equipped than any country the US has bombed so at the very least there will be teething pains
                If you are counting on that being successful as part of your war strategy then you are beginning the war with huge (&egotistical) assumptions

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                If your plan for the war is to go into it unprepared, allow the US to heavily fortify and supply Taiwan, begin striking China, and only eventually after several years into the war MAYBE you start having a military that can take the island, then you're going to have a hard time, and it's going to accomplish nothing since everything of value on Taiwan would be destroyed even in the off chance that China somehow after millions of dead Chinese later managed to take the island.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The war is the fulfillment of a national unification and anti-imperialism
                They're not going to do it because they're bored but because they always demanded Taiwan and now see Taiwan slipping away from any peaceful submission to China. Chinese power in the Taiwan Straits will dwarf anything Taipei and the US will have there when the operation begins and that is always an assumption of US planning for obvious reasons
                As the Chinese economy grows Taiwanese defense is no longer credible to delay long enough for the US fleet to arrive and the US defense is no longer credible in its ability destroy the Chinese naval and air forces perpetually. at some point retooling of industry for war material will outpace the entire US economy
                The relative risk for Chinese leadership declines with each passing year and as long as they do not see peaceful reunification forthcoming it increases their odds of an invasion
                They could do it right now but in example of typical Chinese restraint are being patient to make it assured victory and to see if Taipei's democracy offers them good alternative options
                gaymericans think they can defeat a country with many times more dynamic industry that war depends on. material other than fat popstars and adtech which admittedly the Americans are quite good at overproducing

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Chinese power in the Taiwan Straits will dwarf anything Taipei and the US will have there when the operation begins
                Any naval invasion of Taiwan would require such massive obvious preparation that the USA would have at least a year to prepare for it ahead of time.

                >at some point retooling of industry for war material will outpace the entire US economy
                Except a massive retooling of the entire Chinese economy would, once again, be such a massive undertaking that the USA would see it and ramp up their own already substantial military production as well.

                >They could do it right now
                By their own admission they're not prepared for an invasion yet and won't be for years to come.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I think Americans do not understand. This isn't a war China will forgo if it is needed. It will be the culmination of their entire rebirth and reunification. All industry and all people will be motivated and mobilized for the effort. For the US it is merely about using some Chinese not wanting to be in a country with other Chinese as a reason to destroy China's military. They have a smaller industry and will be less motivated. They will never be able to ramp up production to match China when it is truly at war. China is the sleeping giant now. Content to make goods instead of war but their patience will wear for reasons outlined here.

                >The relative risk for Chinese leadership declines with each passing year and as long as they do not see peaceful reunification forthcoming it increases their odds of an invasion
                You forget that Chinese power has a projected peak due to the impending demographic crisis. Furthermore they started their military build up during a time when the US was focusing military development and procurement was focused on counter-insurgency warfare in the Mid-East (not helped by the 90s cuts). This means there's lag as the US RnD and procurement shifts back towards a peer war in the Asia-Pacific. The short of it is that China gets a projected window of 2025-2040 or so where conflict is at it's most relative advantage, and then the pendulum will probably shift back towards the allies. In the same way Germany in the pre-war era felt pressure from the perceived future shift in balance of power vs an industrializing Russia, Chinese miltiary thinkers are under pressure to solve the Taiwan issue before it escapes their grasp.

                I do not forget. It simply doesn't matter for two reasons: the war will start before that is relevant and the Americans will never mobilize to the same extent as the Chinese over Taiwan. China will accept total war for a decade with ease. It is their final mission. The US has no great mission anymore and cannot go a decade without domestic issues. You have to remember the US people are too stupid to know if it's Thailand or Taiwan. They do not understand that average Chinese people will never accept a Taiwan that is unwilling to join the rest of China eventually. For the US it is just an excuse to fight their successor before it is too late. A war for Taiwan will never be total war for the US. There will be no treacherous surprise attack. They are preparing obviously for all to see and there will be nothing the US can do to stop it without spending far more on defense than they ever want to. And if they try they will slowly bankrupt themselves trying to match the size and efficiency of Chinese industry

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >. They have a smaller industry and will be less motivated. They will never be able to ramp up production to match China when it is truly at war.
                We've already defeated a mobilized China in one war.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >China will accept total war for a decade with ease.
                Doubt.jpg. The government is already facing challenge from economic instability and covid, sending tens if not hundreds of thousands of sons (who are often the only child in the family) seriously risks toppling the party.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Uh huh, keep hoping for a magical collapse on Chinese unity. It hasn't happened even when the leadership was moronic and starved 60 million. The Chinese are richer now and have some demands but Chinese people have a historical mission and will complete it. Despite US imperialism if necessary

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >but Chinese people have a historical mission and will complete it.
                They gave up the last time they tried to complete it.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Never gave up but thwarted by American naval supremacy. In the past a single US fleet was match for all of China. I realize most Americans are stuck in the past because that was their peak but that is no longer the case. And every year the number of US ships needed to thwart China's completion is rising. Meanwhile the US Navy is hardly able to maintain the capabilities it needs.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Never gave up but thwarted by American naval supremacy
                And then they gave up. They could've kept on trying to take Taiwan, but they gave up, just like they gave up in the Korean War.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Uh huh, keep hoping for a magical collapse on Chinese unity.
                Yeah. Chinese unity has never collapsed before in the face of a crisis. Nope never. History doesn't exist before 1948 btw.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                As usual you are stuck in the past. In the distant future, maybe China will collapse but by that time who knows what the political future looks like. Unlike the Soviet Union there is no national question. There is no unpopular war. There is prosperity. There is dynamism. It is not a stagnated state. You will be waiting a very long time for your collapse.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >It is not a stagnated state
                >Impending population crisis
                >Growth stagnating
                >Instability in the fundamental structure of the economy
                Pathetic. This China simping is so sad. What, are you some 4th generation Chinese in US/Canada/Aus simping based on some false nation of heritage? The PRC doesn't give two fricks about you.

                China would need to take taiwan in a really short amount of time, the job needs done before the US Navy can respond.

                >China would need to take taiwan in a really short amount of time, the job needs done before the US Navy can respond.
                I think you're fundamentally right (they'd need to take it in a short time). It's going to be incredibly obvious as to when an invasion happens because the build up will be impossible to miss, and way to expensive to bluff as a military exercise. But this isn't 1996 and the US navy can't just sail into an obviously hostile warzone. While subs and long range anti-ship missiles can be used to cut down the size of the invasion fleet, it's going to take some time for the US navy and airforce to gain dominance of the space. So Taiwan needs to hold out for that amount of time, and if the PLA can't size control of the island by the time the US is able to establish that dominance they are cooked. At that point the only thing you can do is surrender or escalate (with all the internal and external risks that brings).

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >The PRC doesn't give two fricks about you.
                Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country
                Your rules not mine

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It's not even your country bro.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >So Taiwan needs to hold out for that amount of time, and if the PLA can't size control of the island by the time the US is able to establish that dominance they are cooked
                Ukraine was an absolute clusterfrick and it's mostly flatlands that are ideal for an invasion. I can only imagine the meatgrinder that trying to invade a heavily fortified island with only a few available landing zones in a brief window in between stormy seasons would be. Having to get through countless naval mines, while being assaulted by anti-ship missiles, only to then land on a mined beach, with artillery zeroed in on them, machine gun nests all around, and god know how many tens of thousands of infantry ready to pounce.

                Theoretically it is possible to invade Taiwan but it's the sort of invasion that requires a very long period of bombardment and blockade. It's not something that can be rushed.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Theoretically it is possible to invade Taiwan but it's the sort of invasion that requires a very long period of bombardment and blockade. It's not something that can be rushed.
                Strong agree. This is especially true if Taiwan begins to shift their military procurement towards a force designed for cost effective defense and beachhead denial. Get rid of the ineffective big ticket items like their surface fleet and focus on cost effective procurement specifically aimed at surviving opening bombardments and hindering landings.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                And even if Taiwan didn't, the US would probably have a good two years advance warning that an invasion was about to occur, possibly 5-10 years if the Chinese-posters are to be believed and China decides to shift into a total war economy first (which would basically be committing economic suicide out of pure spite but that's neither here nor there), either way, the USA would have an enormous amount of time to ship over weapons, supplies, food stocks, anti-air defenses, anti-ship defenses, missile defense systems, fighter jets, and instructors to train fricking millions of soldiers (most of whom already have some military training). It would basically require the largest naval invasion in the history of mankind to actually take that fricking island, and it would probably take a wholeass decade if we're being honest.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >No national question in China
                Holy frick I think that's the most uninformed statement I've ever heard on PrepHole, and I've been on /b/ since 2009.
                You know most "Chinese" people can't speak Mandarin right?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >You know most "Chinese" people can't speak Mandarin right?
                Did you time travel from 1950? Every Chinese kid is taught mandarin in school. To the point there are accusations the CCP wants to wipe out dialects, even though they do more than necessary to preserve them

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Dude nobody in Shanghai knows how to speak shanghaiese anymore except the boomers. Everything is in Mandarin, all the subway announcements, everything. You're the misinformed one here

                I guess "most" was a hyperbole.
                https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-23975037
                But no, you don't have to go back to 1950 to make the point that the "national question" in China is not irrelevant.

                > To the point there are accusations the CCP wants to wipe out dialects
                That only means something relative to what the standard was before that. The introduction of Mandarin to any aspect of life where it was hitherto unheard of, no matter how little it affects the actual use of the local language, could be met with such an accusation, because most people don't like change and the government infringing on their way of life.

                Dude nobody in Shanghai knows how to speak shanghaiese anymore except the boomers. Everything is in Mandarin, all the subway announcements, everything. You're the misinformed one here

                I'm not talking about big cities of national importance and economic development like Shanghai, where people from all over the country come to so they need to speak the same language.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >I'm not talking about big cities of national importance and economic development like Shanghai, where people from all over the country come to so they need to speak the same language.
                Well it's the same in all the cities, even the small ones like weifang

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >population: 10 million

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Dude nobody in Shanghai knows how to speak shanghaiese anymore except the boomers. Everything is in Mandarin, all the subway announcements, everything. You're the misinformed one here

                >Beijing says 400 million Chinese cannot speak Mandarin
                >China's Education Ministry says that about 400 million people - or 30% of the population - cannot speak the country's national language.
                >Of the 70% of the population who can speak Mandarin, many do not do it well enough

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >30% of the population - cannot speak the country's national language.
                All boomers

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Dude nobody in Shanghai knows how to speak shanghaiese anymore except the boomers. Everything is in Mandarin, all the subway announcements, everything. You're the misinformed one here

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                This dude is genuinely right about Shanghai but they do speak a dialect that’s fairly distinctive and not all dialects are mutually intelligible. People will often just call it “Shanghai” or “Shanghai Chinese” when speaking English because they are lazy as frick though.
                Think about the difference between a Norf, a redneck, a bogan and an Afrikaner.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >They have a smaller industry and will be less motivated.
                Why would they be less motivated? They're defending against a foreign aggressor while the Chinese are trying to conquer a foreign nation.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                There is no doubt who the foreign aggressor is when both sides who should be party speak Chinese.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                By that logic if the USA invaded the UK tomorrow they wouldn't be the aggressor.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                That is a bad analogy as far as I know the United States and United Kingdom doesn't reaffirm every year that it is the same country. The foreign aggressor is the one sailing far across the ocean to 'defend' moronic separatists with as much legal claim as nationhood as the Donbabweans

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Except in this case the PRC are the separatists fighting against the rightful government of the RoC.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >the rightful government of the RoC.
                Was ended in 1927 by Chiang Kai Shek using violent force. There is no claim to legitimacy

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                By that logic the PRC ended its own legitimacy by using violent force as well.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The PRC is not legitimate as it waited for the opposition to engage in a patriotic defense of their country and then engaged in a civil war while their foe was defending them and everyone else in the country. Cowards.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Bullshit

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                100% historical truth, Mao used the Japanese to weaken the nationalists in order to facilitate his coup, he was a filthy backstabbing traitor right from the start

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Because Japan recognized communist China in 1944 and offered a separate peace. Next

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I'm not sure how this in any way disputes my point?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >At total war with your great regional rival, an evil brutal empire who treat your people as subhuman garbage
                >Desperate alliance with your political arch-nemesis
                >Evil Empire offers you a separate peace, recognizes you as rightful ruler of your land
                >You accept.
                >Evil Empire hasn't surrendered. Evil Empire hasn't been defeated. Evil Empire still rape and pillage your lands.
                >You withhold your forces while your arch-nemesis bleeds out his armies to protect the realm.
                >You sit alone, in your cave, fricking virgin peasants girls and killing their dads if they protest, while patriots under the Blue Sky with White Sun flag die in every rice paddie in China.
                >"All according to keikaku"

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Wait what the frick? I always though mao turned on China after the Japanese were defeated, are you telling me he signed a seperate peace woth the Bakufu while they were still burning chinese lands and massacring chinese people?
                That's unironically fricked up, I knew he was a traitor but I didn't know he was a collaborator as well
                Also, wouldn't a seperate peace woth Imperial Japan mean recognising currently held Japanese territory (which included Taiwan) as no longer a part of China? Where does the CCPs justification for invading the island come from if the very father of Chinese communism itself does not consider the island chinese territory?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Anon that literally isn't what happened. CKS was slaughtering chicoms by the thousands until his underlings, one of whom was the son of a prince assassinated by Japanese officers, literally kidnapped him at gunpoint, forced him to stop killing commies, and start the war with Japan everyone knew was coming by refusing to spread his butthole for them anymore.

                Mao literally thanked the Jap prime minister in person after the war for providing the relief and war exhaustion his men needed to destroy the Kuomintang.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The only legitimate form of government to ever exist is democracy
                one of the two governments claiming sovereignty over Taiwan was freely elected by the people of Taiwan and the other was not
                therefore only that government is legitimate

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >The only legitimate form of government to ever exist is democracy
                And other jokes you can tell yourself

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I encourage you to try and argue otherwise

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                That was legalist version in the past but due to some diplomacy facts on the ground were accepted as legal. Except for a few very based countries the PRC is now recognized as the Chinese government.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Except for a few very based countries
                Lol turd world shitholes are based now on /k/

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, third world shitholes like African American communities in the US are the source of the word and also describes the countries that do not recognize PRC

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >China will accept total war for a decade with ease.
                They had riots over something as small as COVID lockdowns.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                What's your point? COVID restrictions are not popular even with Chinese nationalists. Unifying China has been, is, and will be forever popular in China.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                If Chinese nationalists aren't willing to even slightly suffer for the greater good of their nation, they aren't willing to do what it takes to bear through a war.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Like most people they are willing to suffer if it achieves some objective. You know, they know, everyone knows COVID restrictions do not work and achieve no objective. Don't be stupid, that an uninteresting idea doesn't motivate people is not surprising nor does it point to any weakness in Chinese convictions wrt to unification

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Like most people they are willing to suffer if it achieves some objective
                If they aren't willing to suffer to stop a sickness in their country, why should we believe they'd be willing to suffer to win a war?

                >You know, they know, everyone knows COVID restrictions do not work and achieve no objective
                So the Chinese citizens actively distrust and disobey their government, yet you think they'd fall in line to follow them into a war?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                They are not following the government into war. Talk to Chinese. They are the ones demanding it.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Post proof then. Post the polls that show Chinese people wanting war with Taiwan.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You're not very familiar with the Chinese language internet if you're demanding proof of this

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Sounds like you have no evidence then and are just making shit up.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                No I think you just have autism
                Demanding proofs for one of the most obvious things in the world. Literally the proofs chicken meme

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The vast majority of Chinese people do not desire war with Taiwan. Go outside and talk to Chinese people and you'll see what I mean.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                They are lying. I'm sure all the Russians you talk to would say they don't support the SMO

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Nope. Only the Chinese people who say they want war are lying.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Proof?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Personal experience.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I have more personal experience than you then

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You can bury your head in the sand all you like but Chinese nationalism is real. You can deny it all you like but it doesn't change the objective fact that the CPC and the Chinese people agree on some things (namely that whatever the situation in Taiwan it is always part of China). This is so irrefutable that even Taiwan has never denied it.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Nationalism =/= Blind random warmongering. Chinese nationalists want peaceful reunification with Taiwan, because they consider Taiwanese to be Chinese.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The scenario is a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. You imagine a scenario where they randomly attack unprovoked. I imagine a scenario in which Taiwan has demanded they join the PRC as an autonomous region and were rejected.
                That the majority of Chinese people would support such a war is debatable for delusional Americans clinging onto any hope of power and relevancy but no one else doubts it.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                correction: PRC has demanded Taiwan join the PRC
                sorry I'm ESL as you may have noticed

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                White idealistic homosexual hands typed this post

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You've never been to China, have you?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I have

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >outs himself as a chinese shill
                gotta switch up your tactics, you guys have a stale playbook

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I don't have to shoot myself in the head to know it's a bad idea to do that.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >So the Chinese citizens actively distrust and disobey their government, yet you think they'd fall in line to follow them into a war?
                Yes because anyone in China who isn't a foreign subversive that'd get sniffed out in 2 seconds supports taking Taiwan especially by force. It doesn't help when you see how much hate there is between mainland Chinese and Taiwanese online, even if you weren't a nationalist you might support it just out of spite

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Yes because anyone in China who isn't a foreign subversive that'd get sniffed out in 2 seconds supports taking Taiwan especially by force
                Proofs?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Go outside and talk to people

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I just talked to a Chinese person. They say they have no desire for war with Taiwan.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Go on Bilibili, find literally any popular video on "Reunification", Google translate top comments.
                Proving LongPings are in a perpetual state of genocidal blood-lust requires less than a minute of effort.
                Their desire to see other people die is matched only by their own extreme cowardice.
                >picrel advocating for cannibalising Taiwanese and population replacement

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Go on Bilibili, find literally any popular video on "Reunification", Google translate top comments.
                Go on Weichat and talk to some Chinese and you'll find quite the opposite.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Now your turn for proofs

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You never posted proofs. You must post proofs first. You're the one making the claim.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You yourself know Chinese social media is censored to all hell. This is a "go to RT, find literally any popular post on Ukraine, Google translate the top comments to find the truth" moment. Subversives risk being jailed for speaking against Chinese nationalist tendencies, of course you're not going to see those kinds of feelings in public.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Oh? Why not look at opinion polls of Chinese immigrants on the issue then? Or do you need to be spoonfed that as well?
                Don't be a coward and just fess up that Chinese people want to eradicate the Taiwanese, you'd at least get some kudos for being proud and honest.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Can you read? Chinese """"public opinion"""" cannot be trusted because failing to follow the party line will get the average Chinese person jailed or worse. Immigration status is an irrelevant red herring here, as primarily pro-government individuals are going to be the ones getting visas. The CCP can cook up any "facts" it wants on that basis, because it's perfecting a surveillance state that culls dissent. The problem with this structure is when surveillance breaks down, as it can in a highly destructive and grueling war that collapses a nation's economy, that's when riots happen and revolutions follow.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >They had riots over something as small as COVID lockdowns.
                Chinese COVID lockdowns were going on when everyone else ended them and they were a lot more restrictive including barricading apartments, districts and cities. And the west had lockdown riots anyway e.g. Australia

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >size and efficiency of Chinese industry
                The same fricking clowns who built so much high speed rail to literal nowhere that nobody uses because they go to nowhere and can't even pay for their own maintenance costs from ticket sales?

                The same fricking clowns who built a massive South-North Water Transfer Project with canals and shit to provide the north Chinese farms and cities with drinking water, only to build fricking factories right next to these canals and pollute the frick out of it?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, they build these things because they are relatively cheap. That some infrastructure turns out to be bad investment should not be surprising.
                I could provide recent examples of marginally productive American industry polluting because of lack of infrastructure investments but I do not think it is relevant to the fact that US industry is far less dynamic and being outcompeted by much larger American industry because it is an indisputable fact in basically every industry (except relevantly aviation but its time will come)

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                correction: much larger Chinese industry... hopefully you know what I intended to say

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >relatively cheap
                They are not. Chinese high speed rail runs off German, French, and Japanese technology. The parts they require are at market prices, not cheap Chinese knock-offs (not for a lack of trying to make cheap knock-offs).
                The loss has exceeded $10bn/year in recent estimates and is only growing.
                Chinese high speed rail is the last thing from cheap. It is absolutely blowing up the balance sheet for the central government and the losses will, at this rate, outstrip the central government's appetite for subsidising it in a few years.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yes and Chinese industry is and will be bigger than US industry for the next 100 years. That some enterprises are mistakes is not new and no one is infallible. But the point is that China has more industry. Acquisition of ships and missiles will be cheaper for China than the United States. Some wastage is present in both forms of government.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                After your balloon adventures the mindset of the Americans towards you has changed. You frickers are so loud amd stupid that people are starting to take it seriously.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Americans psy-oped themselves on what was most likely a weather balloon that according to pentagon morons must be a spy balloon because it just is, even though it does nothing that a satellite can't do
                and the response in america wasn't even united, a bunch of people are now claiming it was to distract from east palestine ohio
                now the US is freaking out about chinese spy cranes. it's the US that looks ridiculous, and nothing anyone else does can stop americans from making a fool of themselves and seeing ghosts everywhere

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >on what was most likely a weather balloon
                That just makes the Chinese response even more ludicrous. You don't threaten retaliation for another country shooting a weather balloon.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yet your government make a ruckus and make threats to US, basically taking responsibility without saying. This is the problem with you bugs, just cannot keep shut.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >The relative risk for Chinese leadership declines with each passing year and as long as they do not see peaceful reunification forthcoming it increases their odds of an invasion
                You forget that Chinese power has a projected peak due to the impending demographic crisis. Furthermore they started their military build up during a time when the US was focusing military development and procurement was focused on counter-insurgency warfare in the Mid-East (not helped by the 90s cuts). This means there's lag as the US RnD and procurement shifts back towards a peer war in the Asia-Pacific. The short of it is that China gets a projected window of 2025-2040 or so where conflict is at it's most relative advantage, and then the pendulum will probably shift back towards the allies. In the same way Germany in the pre-war era felt pressure from the perceived future shift in balance of power vs an industrializing Russia, Chinese miltiary thinkers are under pressure to solve the Taiwan issue before it escapes their grasp.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >anti-imperialism
                Does anyone else ever find it kind of weird how naked land grabs are only anti-imoerialist when its non whites doing them?
                Why can't me and the boys launch an anti-imperialist invasion of Indonesia, for example?
                Those Indomie factories are vital to our countries legitimate security interests, after all

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >they will be forced to make peace by simple logic of continuing the war gains nothing
              Why would they not just keep fighting until Tiawan is liberated again?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          China is almost a net importer you moron. I post this not for you, because you're either being paid or a moron, but so your target audience of impressionable morons doesn't get the wrong idea

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        few points - we're not the 1940s 90% white monolithic patriotic nation that we were then. therefore morale and ability to commit millions of lives and 100% of our industrial capacity is not as great as it was in the 1940s. It would be preposterous to suggest otherwise. Also, we're talking about a very different scenario here.

        Taiwan is not a US state, it's halfway around the fricking world. There would be no allies to hide behind and soak up casualties - America would be doing it alone. Would Europe really commit its navy to fricking Taiwan, with their own major regional conflict for the first time in a century? I don't think so senpai.

        Maximum would be providing Taiwan with SIGINT and satellite data, throwing them some starlink subscriptions, evacuating TSMC's entire production facility and talent across the Pacific, and wishing them best of luck

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >therefore morale and ability to commit millions of lives and 100% of our industrial capacity is not as great as it was in the 1940s
          This has never held true yet people keep falling for this trick.

          >Taiwan is not a US state, it's halfway around the fricking world. There would be no allies to hide behind and soak up casualties
          We can't know for certain but we're looking at Japan, Vietnam, South Korea, India, and the UK all being potential allies. Not that they would be necessary, but still. Also, there would be no need for "soaking up casualties", in a naval invasion like this you're looking at a huge K:D ratio in favor of the defender, and Taiwan would already have a pretty large army at the ready.

          The simple fact is China isn't anywhere near capable of taking Taiwan within this decade. After this decade, perhaps, but by then they'll be feeling the pains of their demographics more and more. Besides, Taiwan serves its purpose to China far more by being outside of its hands, since it can serve as a rallying cry to unite the Chinese around whenever they're pissed about something on the homefront.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      It's like last year didn't happen.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      implessive

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      VELY implessive

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      1. World stops exporting food to China.
      2. China fricking dies.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Don't forget about oil too. China has the same weakness Japan did in WW2 with oil dependence.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        this is incorrect and you can look up the figures easily
        They are by value a net food exporter
        Most their food staple imports come from countries with which they have stable relations and good rail connections (Russia)
        They import some meat and animal feed but as Chinese will eat anything this isn't a problem for wartime ersatzmeat

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >and good rail connections (Russia)
          Their rail and pipeline connections to Russia are pretty thin. When there's only a couple railroads and pipelines to strike, it becomes very easy to disrupt trade.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Exactly, it’s not like all that food runs through a very narrow strait….

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            it may now but in war supply would switch to the Asiatic route
            Countries that have food surplus bordering China include Russia, Kazakhstan and even Burma amazingly
            all of whom would be willing and it would be hilarious to see the US try to interdict the supply of food with a straight face denying it isn't some kind of genocide campaign to starve the Han people
            they wouldn't even try, they'd focus on oil which would come from Russia and Kazakhstan
            The entire food thing is a delusional belief of people who are stuck in the past before Chinese green revolution and proper profit accumulating shared enterprises solved their food deficit problems from 1980 to the mid 90s

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              The whole point is moot because as you have already noted the western wprld explicitly refuses to use food as a weapon
              The only supplies blockaded will be energy, consumer goods and dual use/military technology

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It's a good thing shit like oil and gasoline isn't necessary to launch the largest naval invasion in the history of mankind. Oh, wait...

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        China is the world's biggest producer of food and they have over 300 million people working in food production, almost as many people as the entire population of the US.
        Americans have somehow convinced themselves that they'll also totally starve to death without overseas imports.
        Propaganda really knows no bounds.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          "Biggest producer" means frick-all when you're still in a food deficit to start with chinkoid.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Let's do an exercise, type this into your browser
          >________ imports by county.
          Replace the line with any grain or vegetable you want and see the results.

          Then this do this,
          >________ exports by county.
          Replace the line with any grain or vegetable you want and see the results.
          Indeed, propaganda.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            the bulk of that corn import to other western/advanced countries is for animal feed.
            Do you know of a way of finding out what ratio of that corn import to china is feed/for direct human consumption

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Google?
              I only used corn as an example.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I've tried googleing it but can't find anything

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          I’ve been to China, the farming country, not the big cities. It’s very small fields, property of the government, with a permit for 1200 square meters per farmer. They are worked by hands with wooden hoes, they use homemade wheelbarrows like picrel. The rich farmers have a buffalo. The richest farmer in town has a horse to pull a cart. People put stones on the side of the road in front of their house, for makeshift raised beds, just to get an extra yard by 2 feet band of soil to plant a few more vegetables.
          China is still an extremely poor country, even if they have a lot of money now by exploiting the misery of their poors to manufacture stuff for the world. They just don’t have enougth wealth for so many people, and it’s extremely poorly distributed.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >I’ve been to China, the farming country
            Please tell us how many of those people spoke Mandarin, I'm genuinely interested given the above debate.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Everyone in China speaks different dialects of Chinese. It’s a bit like how tons of people speak various forms of Arabic but there’s an International Standard Arabic they use for the Koran and certain broadcasts etc which is sort of what mandarin ends up being.
              >NTA
              >T. Dating a Chinese
              Don’t know about the far flung minorities. Btw Chinese are pretty prejudiced against western born Chinese kek

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              I was mostly in Han country, or areas where ”ethnics” were very small minorities, everyone I spoke to spoke mandarin. Two exceptions, the chinese parts of Tibet (the other side of the mountains) and the Hakka region. In the Tibet, we weren’t allowed to talk to the locals, the control was way stricter than in other areas. And in the Hakka region, they still spoke the language, but it has evolved separatly from those that emigrated a century ago, and my diaspora friends had a really hard time understanding them. The pronunciation changed and some mandarin words sneaked in.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                hakka round fort villages. Made out of straw, soil and shit, they are round forts where multiple allied families live in.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                There are common houses in the middle, for reunions, a temple and the water wells.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                People live in the small wooden rooms, on 3 or 4 floors, surrounding the central place.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >China is the world's biggest producer of food
          according to chinese statistics, do you believe the CCP annon?
          >hey have over 300 million people working in food production
          again are those ccp stats. Hut that would be about 1/4-1/5 of their population in just the food part of the primary sector. That is comparible to the high middle ages and not something to brag about. You are admitting that the chinese have in essence a pre industrial economy where a quarter of the population scratches a meager living out of the ground.
          If that economy is blockaded, it might not starve but will degrade back to musulle loaders in a decade or so

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Muh indecadent enemy
      Didnt work for the nazis, japs, italians nor the modern ruskies

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    the PLA couldn't do it a century ago, why would they be able to now?

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They will raise the eyebrow, and Taiwan will understand.

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Doesn't the US OWN Taiwan?

    The nips seceded control of it to the US after the war.

    Shi only had it as it was allowed by the US for him to rebuild his forces in order to retake the mainland which he never did.

    Wouldn't China trying to take it basically be the same as attacking a vassal state lol?

    maybe I'm just super high rn, idk man.

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    动态网自由门 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 六四天安門事件 The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tiananmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama 法輪功 Falun Dafa 新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 諾貝爾和平獎 Nobel Peace Prize 劉暁波 Liu Xiaobo 民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗 肅清 胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨 獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 活摘器官 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Winnie the Pooh 劉曉波动态网自由门

  19. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Short answer: No
    Long answer: No, because there's no feasible way for them to make landfall on the island without first getting any support vessels blown the frick out. Taiwan merely needs to last long enough for any nearby US carrier group to show up, and the US will absolutely not, under any circumstances, allow a valuable resource like TSMC to fall under Chinese control.

  20. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    if China's existence depended on it? Yes, China could definitely take Taiwan in a year, hell probably in a month.

    Better question is under what circumstances China conquering Taiwan is worth it.

    Or under what circumstances is it worth to just bomb Taiwan out of existence instead of invading Taiwan.

  21. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >amphibious invasion
    >with 3 LHDs and 8 LPDs
    >across 80+ miles of ocean
    >in the body of water with the single highest US-submarine-to-water ratio on the planet outside of Severodvinsk and Polyarny on the Barents Sea
    >to attack an island Biden has repeatedly made clear the US will defend despite futile efforts of White House staffers to preserve strategic ambiguity
    good luck

  22. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    China couldn't take Hanoi in a year if they committed full mobilisation to the effort. Let alone even dreaming about amphibious warfare.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      No one could take Hanoi, this isn't debatable.

  23. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    China hasn't been able to take Taiwan in the last 60, why would they be any more successful in one more?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      What a stupid question.
      60 years ago China had no economy and no navy. The US could send a single fleet to the Taiwan Strait and all the PLA could say was "well shit, let's fire some missiles I guess". You can remain stuck in the past but it will surprise you that this is no longer the case and will not be the case.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >well shit, let's fire some missiles I guess
        that is still literally their entire plan for dealing with the US navy

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          no they have submarines, mine layers too
          and I mean they fired missiles as a threat, they were not not aiming at anything. now they are acquiring the tools to fight the US navy. i don't know why it is any benefit to burry your head in the sand about this. prepare yourself

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            The US navy has those things too, only better (nuclear vs non nuclear subs, for example) in larger numbers and with more experienced crews
            matching the US navy in the pacific will not be sufficient, if China wants to take Taiwan it needs to overmatch the entire US navy (most crucially its air power) and that simply isn't happening anytime soon

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Well we agree there except on two parts. The proximity of China allows it to resupply its air bases and missiles easily and interdict or frustrate USA supply to Taiwan. As such China can over local overmatch even if the US has a total superiority of forces. Secondly, the proximity of total overmatch of US forces. In American terms it may be a long time but it is only 20-30 years before Chinese naval and air forces are collectively superior to US-Taipei forces.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                another correction: China can achieve local overmatch

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >but it is only 20-30 years before Chinese naval and air forces are collectively superior to US-Taipei forces.
                By which time the demographic decline of China will be taking a much bigger toll. China's smart, they're not gonna throw away tens of millions of young chinese soldiers invading an island that serves no strategic purpose beyond being a rallying cry for nationalists which they desperately need those young chinese for the future.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Unfortunately, they do no think this way. And moreover personally I am not convinced the every multiplying prostitute of Amerifats will be any more productive while each year productivity increases greatly in China

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Unfortunately, they do no think this way
                The Communist Party thinks this way, and that's all that matters.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                They do not think that way. It is clear from every single statement they make toward Taipei. That the CPC are willing to send Chinese soldiers to fight and die is not doubted by US policy makers. The exact scenarios in which they would choose to do so is not clear and is debatable.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >They do not think that way. It is clear from every single statement they make toward Taipei
                Statements like being dedicated to peaceful reunification with Taiwan?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Among others. They have explicitly said that movement to Taiwanese independence will be met with strong action
                The meaning of this is clear

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Taiwan has made no moves towards independence, so yes, the meaning is clear and that's that there will be no war.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The point of the thread is if China could complete unification. And they will. By force or peacefully. Any Amerifat delusions about that are exactly that.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                China will complete unification eventually, yes. But it could be centuries. They're in no rush.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Maybe. I think there is no urgency. But to me there is no way US instability does not present a very appealing opportunity to the PRC in the near future. China present Taiwan with an agreement to join China as an autonomous region. Rejection leads to an invasion. It isn't a surprise at all but if the US wasn't spending 2x as much as China before the war started there is a good chance Taipei falls in under a year. Perhaps the US doesn't resist militarily at all.

                the major delusion is that the US would even lift a finger to "help" taiwan or themselves.

                This is also entirely possible.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >But to me there is no way US instability does not present a very appealing opportunity to the PRC in the near future.
                What instability?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Well if you'd like to avoid the obvious then consider that It just takes one US administration ran by midwits to reveal that it doesn't believe in fighting for Taiwan. As the imbalance in forces goes away from favoring the US the odds of China seizing an opportunity increases.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The U.S is literally shifting it's focus directly to the Pacific and to China.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Well if you'd like to avoid the obvious then consider that It just takes one US administration ran by midwits to reveal that it doesn't believe in fighting for Taiwan.
                What administration?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Any? I'm not saying it's inevitable or a policy of any American politician. But there are some parties or wings within parties that have very internal focused objectives and may announce they will spend less on defense, for example.
                In China this is unlikely unless they see Taiwan becoming more pliable.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >But there are some parties or wings within parties that have very internal focused objectives and may announce they will spend less on defense, for example.
                That's a fringe minority. Heavy defense spending has remained a cornerstone of both parties.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                For now. To match Chinese procurement the US will need to spend an increasingly larger portion of their economy due to China's continued superior economic growth and higher increases in productivity.
                All economic, political, diplomatic, legal factors point to restoration of Chinese rule in Taipei. And if it comes to war the whole affair will be over in China's favor in under a year. Because American political class are not as stupid as the people they rule they will make peace rather than try to fight a war from which China will not backdown and economics are on the Chinese side.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You aren't preaching to a captive Chinese audience here. Drop the internal Chinese propaganda and start talking reality

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >To match Chinese procurement the US will need to spend an increasingly larger portion of their economy due to China's continued superior economic growth and higher increases in productivity.
                It'll be decades before it reaches that point, at which point the demographics will have shifted in favor of the USA.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                the US doesn't have favorable demographics. it has a low birth rate supplanted by immigrants from cartel land. the US can't win by just waiting for China to shrink enough when it's facing a different kind of demographic crisis, south africanization

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >it has a low birth rate supplanted by immigrants
                Which gives it favorable demographics compared to China who are losing the primary thing that gives them power, their large population.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                no, China's advantage is its high IQ educated urban population supported by the infrastructure that's been built in the last 70 years. having a large population in the past provided it no advantage whatsoever. neither for india

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The main draw that drew so much investment to China in the past and affords it so much influence abroad now is its large population. If it had a small population it'd just be another developed but otherwise standard country like France or Germany.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                january 2021 on a larger scale (guaranteed to happen in our lifetimes)

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Unification by force will be attempted within Xi Xinpengs lifetime
                If he was the kind of man willing to let someone else take the credit for an important success like that he wouldn't have made himself president for life

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Doubtful. Xi's whole MO has been peaceful diplomacy.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                He's a megalomaniac, one he starts feeling the cold wind of his own mortality on the back of his neck he will lose it and start doing moronic shit, just like Putin did

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Xi isn't nearly as powerful as you think. powerful sure but he's still a successor and a figurehead. the communist party made him who he is, not the other way around. it's different for Putin who basically built modern Russia himself

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The communist party has no way of removing him from power, he basically is the communist party at this point

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                the major delusion is that the US would even lift a finger to "help" taiwan or themselves.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I don't understand where this idea comes from when the US is sending massive aid to the middle of bumfrick Ukraine, a country that's less important to it than Taiwan fighting an enemy that's less important to it than China.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Absolute delusions from Anti Americans

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Because the Ukraine is an actual country, recognized by most countries in the world as a sovereign nation. Taiwan is not.
                The logistics would also be incredibly difficult to pull off. China easily could blockade taiwan and cut it off from foreign support. Then there's the trade economics. Someone brought it up in another thread, but even the robots used at lockheed martin to fabricate F35 parts are from a chinese owned company.

                In a potential sanction scenario, spare parts, support and further deliveries of these products would likely cease.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                China doesn't have the ability to blockade Taiwan

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                it can do an effective blockade by making it too dangerous and therefore cost ineffective to ship anything to/from taiwan (insurance rates would make it impossible to continue business). then the only way to supply taiwan is to subsidize it and accept heavy losses

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                And they get past the U.S navy how?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                all of taiwan's ports are in range of chinese land based missiles. I don't see how the US navy can intercept every missile fired. once the port infrastructure is destroyed, and the risks of losing a container ship is high enough, no one will cover the insurance, and business ceases. taiwan would become dependent on very generous aid, which is possible, but a tough situation, and I actually doubt american willingness to send aid to taiwan given the reaction we're seeing to ukraine

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                US can just airdrop supplies in such a case.

                >and I actually doubt american willingness to send aid to taiwan given the reaction we're seeing to ukraine
                Massive aid being sent and the aid being ramped up?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                airdropping is expensive and easy to sabotage. if that becomes the course of the war it becomes spending attrition in favor of china, forcing the US to escalate or leave

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                So you think that China would launch missiles at Taiwan's ports with no retaliation from any party?

                > I actually doubt american willingness to send aid to taiwan given the reaction we're seeing to ukraine

                You slip in from an alternative timeline or something pal because you are just full blown delusional at this point

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >So you think that China would launch missiles at Taiwan's ports with no retaliation from any party?
                we are talking about a hypothetical war where they feel the need to do this, and have already accepted escalation (during peacetime half of taiwan's trade is with mainland china and neither side has any reason to bomb the other)

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >attacking civilian infrastructure and flagged container ships in international waters
                >not begging for a NATO no fly zone to be enforced
                Changs get their shit pushed in and NATO goes full force on funding.
                The last thing China can sustain is a protracted engagement against an island fortress.

                The fight happens in the strait or they don’t make it to the island at all, and if they don’t make it in under 48hrs, it doesn’t happen at period.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                why are you talking about NATO in relation to china? NATO explicitly excludes any defensive assistance outside of europe.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                the logistics supply chain from IDK poland to ukraine is orders of magnitude easier to manage than a supply chain from the US to taiwan.

                I honestly don't understand why an effective blockade of taiwan would be outside the PLAN's capabilities.

                Cuba is 3 times as big as taiwan, and during the cuban missile crisis the US created a 500 mile blockade line using one aircraft carrier, two cruisers, 22 destroyers, and two guided missile frigates. While this is more than the east sea fleet, it is logistically and technologically absolutel feasible.

                Furthermore, taiwan's status as NOT being a sovereign nation defuses the diplomatic and international law liabilities a blockade would normally have - it cannot be considered an act of war.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >I honestly don't understand why an effective blockade of taiwan would be outside the PLAN's capabilities.
                It would be possible, but are they ready to keep that shit up for decades?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Why would they need to keep it up for decades? The prize is TSMC. Taking control of taiwanese manufacturing capabilities is the priority. That should not take decades to ship across to the mainland.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Taking control of taiwanese manufacturing capabilities is the priority
                Which would be impossible. The invasion of Taiwan would result in all urban infrastructure becoming ruins. There would be nothing left to take.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Which would also render the decade long blockading timeline moot. Reunification would happen either way within a shorter timeline. With TSMC either being captured or as you said more likely destroyed.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It would still take a decade to siege regardless, the island would be an absolute fortress unlike anything seen before.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >The logistics would also be incredibly difficult to pull off. China easily could blockade taiwan and cut it off from foreign support.
                Not really. The US could just supply it via ship and by air. China isn't going to blow up a US ship.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >China easily could blockade taiwan and cut it off from foreign support.
                lol so why haven’t they?
                >pro tip, they can’t and they know it

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                That sure is clear. It looks like we have another final warning in our future.
                >this joke is seventy years old btw

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >it is only 20-30 years before Chinese naval and air forces are collectively superior to US-Taipei forces.
                That's a dangerous assumption to make given that the americans are continuously upgrading and modifying thier own forces across that same time frame as well
                There is simply no garauntee that the US military will not improve in capability to an even greater degree than china does, I would even go so far as to call that the most likely outcome given its significant head start in the race for technological superiority
                Not to mention the fact that (all else being equal) modern democracies are just plain better at war as a result of their organisational culture

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It's a fact of simple economics. Chinese industry has scale of capital accumulation on its side and so it will progress faster.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You cant buy scientific progress, its a human resource and it relies in part on factors that PRC society actively works to suppress, such as the free and open sharing of ideas and information
                China will always be a little bit behind (technogically speaking) as a result of this, no matter how rich they become
                Furthermore, a good chunk of the chinese economic miracle was a result of western capital inflows and open international trade. Both of these things will disappear for China the very instant it starts shit

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >scale capital accumulation on its side
                But anon, capital accumulation is the growth of wealth via investments and profits. Whether you believe China is capable of materially outproducing the States, America objectively has the scale of capital accumulation on its side. I don't think you really know what you're talking about at all.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                how do you figure? the US has a significant trade deficit, meaning more capital flows from the US than coming to the US. It doesn't help that the largest trade deficit is with china.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                I figure in two ways. First, that's not what a trade deficit means. For example, if I buy a truck from you for $60k, I have a trade deficit with you. I've exported nothing to you, and imported $60k worth of goods from you, bam, trade deficit. If I turn around and use that truck on a construction job and make $500k though, I still have that $60k trade deficit with you- but you've made sixty grand, and I've made four hundred and forty grand after accounting for that little deficit.
                Secondly, the majority of American capital accumulation isn't about the exchange of goods whatsoever. It's mostly a matter of making money off of possessing and controlling more money than anyone else. Can we imagine a theoretical future where that's not the case? Sure, we could. But right now, America possesses and controls more money than China does, and it invests more of that money in profit-seeking endeavors. That is to say that it has a superior level of capital accumulation.

                The ownership of the most profitable firms in the world is heavily linked to China.
                They invest all over the world, in their industry and infrastructure because the Chinese people are currently accumulating so much profit
                Currently the US has more but the rate of growth is much higher for Chinese firms than the US

                >The ownership of the most profitable firms in the world is heavily linked to China.
                A fascinating assertion! Let's check.
                >Apple: American
                >Microsoft: American
                >Alphabet Inc.: American
                >The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China: Chinese
                >ExxonMobil: American
                >China Construction Corp: Chinese
                >Shell: British
                >Agricultural Bank of China: Chinese
                >JP Morgan Chase: American
                >Bank of China Limited: Chinese
                So that's... 5/10 American, 4/10 Chinese, and none of the Chinese companies are in the top three. China's most profitable firm makes more than half but less than two-thirds of America's.
                >They invest all over the world,...
                So does America! Chinese foreign aid totaled about $4.7B USD in 2018. American foreign aid in that year totaled... $46.9B USD. Whoops!
                >Currently the US has more but the rate of growth is much higher for Chinese firms than the US
                This is the only thing you've said that's correct.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You are not understanding the principle. Foreign aid for example, that's not it. Chinese workers take their money and save it. The Chinese banks take this and invest in companies all over the world. The American workers do this too albeit mainly via their retirement fund. But China has created more wealth in the last 10 years than the USA. This is simple measured fact that even though the US has more money, they are not achieving as good as rate of returns.
                At some point these may equalize but that is not the case for the forseeable future.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Chinese citizens are forced to invest their savings in construction companies.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >Foreign aid for example, that's not it. Chinese workers take their money and save it. The Chinese banks take this and invest in companies all over the world.
                Chinese foreign aid takes the form of loans, anon.
                >But China has created more wealth in the last 10 years than the USA.
                China's GDP has increased more over the last 10 years than America's. China has not, by any metric except growth and exports, generated more wealth. This is not at all surprising: it is much easier to grow smaller economies at relatively high rates because of how percentages work. 3 is a 50% increase over 2, for example, but 101 is only a 1% increase over 100. Further, the smaller your economy is, the less money gets tied up in maintenance, because you simply do not have as much to maintain.

                I have no problems characterizing China as a faster-growing economy. What's ridiculous is using inaccurate terms to push irrelevant narratives and describing it as somehow having an advantage over the States' today, or even in the near future, either economically or when it comes to cranking out materiel in a wartime scenario.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                China GDP increased 10.2 trillion in the last 10 years. The US GDP increased 9.8 trillion in the last 10 years.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                So basically you're saying that
                >China's GDP has increased more over the last 10 years than America's. China has not, by any metric except growth and exports, generated more wealth.
                Because yes, like I said, their GDP has increased more. But over the last 10 years, American GDP totals $177T. Chinese GDP over the same span totals $115T. That means that despite China's larger percentage increase in GDP, America has produced $62T more than China. In other words, America has created more wealth- by a factor of nearly 54%.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The wealth statement is based on household wealth. But apparently it switched in 2021 to favor the US too. In any case, by the end of the this decade it will be the other way since 2021 was quite a nice fluke for the US.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >gets BTFO
                >shifts the goalposts
                >gets BTFO again
                >shifts the goalposts again
                >gets BTFO again
                >shifts the goalposts once more
                Yawn. I'm not even going to entertain measuring economic output on the basis of household wealth after we've explicitly been discussing GDP. Goodnight.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Sleep well knowing China is stronger than the US economically and will always be for the next century.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah, because their outstanding capital accumulation- I mean the trade deficit- I mean their profitable firm ownership- I mean their larger foreign investments- I mean their GDP- I mean their household wealth is just so scary.
                I hope you enjoy your lunch.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                The ownership of the most profitable firms in the world is heavily linked to China.
                They invest all over the world, in their industry and infrastructure because the Chinese people are currently accumulating so much profit
                Currently the US has more but the rate of growth is much higher for Chinese firms than the US

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >X has never happened before why would it now?
      Get off this board

  24. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    If Russia can't beat Ukraine what makes you think a weaker military (china) could defeat a stronger military than Ukraine (Taiwan) in less time?

  25. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    If China wanted to wage war against Taiwan it would be the most obvious thing ever.
    They know they'll be blocked from SWIFT, lose access to all key tech, and have severely disrupted SLOCs that they rely on for food/livestock feed.
    For them to go to war with Taiwan and not immediately die, they'll need to stockpile absolutely gargantuan amounts of goods of all kind especially gold bullion, machine tools, precision equipment, and basedbeans.
    The world would know of a full-scale Chinese attack on Taiwan at least 6 months before it happens, maybe even more.
    That's 6 months to prepare militarily, diplomatically, and economically for the defense of Taiwan.
    It's not like China is going to prepare for a one-month war and everyone else just sits by and twiddles their thumb.

  26. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Any invasion of Taiwan would probably have 2 years of forewarning before it actually happened given the preparation needed, so the US would have plenty of time to turn Taiwan into an absolute fortress that could withstand siege for a decade without even needing to get directly involved.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >2years forewarning
      It started like a good 10yrs back.

  27. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      this has simply never happened (unless its US tabloid media making shit up)

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >PAK-FA
        >Hypersonic missiles
        >J-20
        >T-14

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          no one in China ever hyped these. it was the US media that hyped hypersonic missiles in these bizarre news articles about how a Chinese hypersonic test "defied the laws of physics". this despite the test having happened months before these headlines, and widely being seen as a failure in China due to being off target

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Nah I knew a few chinks
            Many of them did hype all that shit, some even think China is hiding more real shit and what on the news are only tip of the iceberg
            They legit think China is very closed if not already reach, even surpass the technology progression of the west
            It’s only a few more years until they become the real big boy

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              The chinese problem was created by the West, we were betrayed by the rich capitalists and our politicians that took our jobs and moved all that manufacturing to China, transfered the technology, the tools, empowering them. Just so that they could make an extra buck by lowering cost (but not the price).
              And now we have to deal with the fricking chinese that wouldn’t be a problem if they had stayed poor as frick.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                china is a problem that is fixing it's self thanks to the one child policy
                they even admited that their offical statistics are are shit and they have fewer mostly younger people.
                Chinas demographics are worse than japans and south korea but they don't have the wealth build up to take the body blow of the massive number of people about to retire.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Happened throughout the cold war

  28. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Without US intervention Taiwan could fall in weeks.

    With US direct intervention or if Taiwan is provided with a massive amount of anti ship missiles than it will likely not happen and china would have to to do a blockade like the US did with Cuba.

    The blockade would be the main issue as if it's not with military attacks it would be hard for the US to give an appropriate response.
    Ultimately china can ruin Taiwan easily but bringing and maintaining a large force on the ground it's very different as we have seen that ships are increasingly vulnerable to missiles and drones.
    The new set of military bases in north Philippines is also a problem for China adding more places from which the US can launch missiles and planes.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >The blockade would be the main issue as if it's not with military attacks it would be hard for the US to give an appropriate response.
      Just do what the USA always does. Sail a ship right through the blockade and watch as China backs off.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >The blockade would be the main issue as if it's not with military attacks it would be hard for the US to give an appropriate response.
      The US could simply escort convoys to and from Taiwan. China can then either fire on US warships and face annihilation, or sit back and be humiliated on the international stage like they were when Pelosi visited Taiwan.

  29. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah, probably, but I don't think that'll happen. KMT wins election next year, and it won't be a war at all, it'll be like HK, where pro-recombination candidates win, take over.
    There will be some protests that will eventually be crushed with pro-western leaders being shipped to the gulag.
    NATO wants a war tho, either way, I hope israel gets nuked

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      KMT has been making pro-USA moves.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >KMT wins election next year, and it won't be a war at all, it'll be like HK, where pro-recombination candidates win, take over.
      Ma Ying-jeou tried in 2014 and got btfo by a bunch of university students. KMT was much more powerful back then. Even with good results on the last mayoral election, and holding office, I just don't see them pulling some shit like that again.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        China might 'fortify the elections' and ensure a victory.
        This year and next are gonna be fun, wrt geopolitics.
        We have a kino slavshit v slavshit&natoshit slugfest war, and possibly a chinkshit v natoshit naval battle, possible amphibious assault or blockade

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >KMT wins election next year, and it won't be a war at all, it'll be like HK, where pro-recombination candidates win, take over.
          Ma Ying-jeou tried in 2014 and got btfo by a bunch of university students. KMT was much more powerful back then. Even with good results on the last mayoral election, and holding office, I just don't see them pulling some shit like that again.

          This is more realistic imho. That way china can get Taiwan without any sanctions, war or other bullshit. They'll just claim they're "saving the chinese democracy".

  30. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >use 1 billion bugmen to dig a tunnel
    >come up under Taiwan
    >???
    >profit

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >earthquake
      >tunnel floods
      >1 billion bugmen drown
      I see this as an absolute win.

  31. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They couldn't take it in 20.

  32. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >are there decades of nuclear plant coordination between Taiwan & Japan?
    >do either possess ballistic missiles capable of strike the 3 Gorges Dam & Beijing?
    >has Communist China been caught red handed bragging about bioweapons use and the ambition to conquer Lebensraum?
    China could nuke it into glass and occupy the ruins and face starvation after the geopolitical blowback. The demographic writing on the wall for the old Sino-Soviet shitholes incentivizes big moron behavior that only overwhelming and devastating punishment can deter. We'll just have to see, won't we?

  33. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >There's no national question in China btw
    >Every kid learns Mandarin in school
    >Only boomers speak Shanghaiese in Shanghai

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      The blue is 95% of the population

  34. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    No, because China wants to claim Taiwan's economy, so the infrastructural damage needs to be minimal.

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *