Why don't they take Jinmen and Mazu?

[cmdjing]

In a words yes, and no I am not jokeing with you.

[Mr_He]

@cmdjing

You raise an interesting scenario littlebuddha, would the PRC unleash nuclear weapons against Taiwan if defeat looked possible and the future of the communist party uncertain? I have generally come to the same conclusion as you have though for different reasons. It doesn’t seem likely with China’s nuclear arsenal at its present condition. If the PLA did drop the bomb on Taipei and certain other cities, I’d imagine the international condemnation would be far worse than a mere invasion. China would become overnight a pariah state which probably wouldn’t happen with just an invasion. Japan would also almost certainly develope nuclear weapons of its own. However, Washington is almost certain not to engage in nuclear retaliation. For one thing, Taiwan is not part of Washington’s nuclear umbrella and the U.S. would never accept losses if they could be avoided. A nuclear attack on China would mean a nuclear retaliation on the U.S.; a consequence the U.S. would not accept. India had asked in the late 60’s to be either part of the U.S. or even Soviet MAD shield, for fear of a nuclear China and was rebuffed leading to the developement of its own nuclear weapons. The U.S. would more likely opt for a simple yet no less efficient retaliation by cutting off China from the international community altogether. Afterall, why go engage in a suicidal nuclear exchange when you don’t have to?

As far as I know, the Chinese ICBM’s are stationary. Therefor, 2-3 US thermonuclear warheads should make them unusable for the next 10,000 years. The problem of nuclear retaliation from China against the US is therefore easily solved.

Secondly, the dropping of nuclear bombs on Taiwan will at the very least force the US to some kind of action. After all, it counts as a huge challenge to the status quo. I would imagine that the US at the very least would Zip China’s nuclear arsenal, and then perhaps make sure that every Chinese nuclear research facility was somewhat nuked.

Third of all China would not do it, simply because they would be literally cut off from the world at the very least to the CCP was no longer in power and the top leadership had been tried and executed for them ordering the attack.

@cmdjing

I myself am a nihilistic and spiteful little bastard and have come to view the PLA’s limited deterrance doctrine as useless in the 21st century. If anything, China needs to massively expand its nuclear arsenal on an exponential scale to assure its interests. The current nuclear forces are insufficient and I feel the PLA needs to adopt the triad (well biad really since the strategic bomber force concept is a bit antiquated) integrated nuclear strike force the U.S. and Russia are capable of deploying. The PLA needs at least a few thousand mirved missiles; mobile, silo, and sub launched to complement traditional military modernization. The nuclear card is too valueable to ignore and even the mere knowledge that China has a sufficient arsenal to annihilate every potential hostile power could facilitate in the “liberation” of Taiwan. For one thing, the U.S. would be a lot less inclined to intervene if they thought a massive nuclear war was a possible outcome and the size of China’s present stockpiles is simply not intimidating enough. The reunification of Taiwan is of paramount importance and an existential struggle for China, which is why I believe that the threat of nuclear force, if not neccessarily the application of it, needs to be an essential part of the equation. If a nuclear standoff is required for reunify Taiwan, then a nuclear standoff it should be. However, the PLA needs to make sure it has the capacity to carry out on its threats. With a few thousand more ICBM’s, I believe a sufficient insurance policy would be acheived. Inflicting horrendous damage is simply not enough and I hate to leave a job unfinished. In the event a nuclear gambit for the reunification of Taiwan goes awry, instead of China merely suffering the crushing weight of defeat, it should instead seek to make sure that everyone and I mean everyone dies. I believe this is the only secure way to insure reunification. To let Washington be aware that the reunification issue is deadly serious. The neoconservatives in the Whitehouse and the generals of the PLA, far removed as they are, seem to share the same ideological outlook. That diplomacy is for the weak, negotiation is simply “appeasement”, and that compromise equates to surrender. Only a political dance on the knife’s edge will ensure that Taiwan is returned to the fold. And if things do go horribly wrong, at least we can live secure in the knowledge that we will all be too dead to care.

Oh, do you work as a policy adviser to the Chinese government? I hope not.

Also, will Taiwan and China count as unified, when everybody is dead? Nobody will be around to enjoy the PLA march thru the streets of Taipei, as there will be no PLA and no Taipei.

[cmdjing]

I disagree with your assessment about China’s inability to launch a retaliatory nuclear attack. Pentagon planners are certainly not nearly as hopeful as you are in their ability to nullify all Chinese nuclear retaliatory capability. A number of missiles would in all likelyhood hit U.S. targets in such a scenario. What I’m argueing is that this is simply not enough. It isn’t enough that the enemy has to pay, or pay big, any enemy has to pay with his life as the struggle will be life and death for China. Which is why it is essentiall, especially in light of a proposed U.S. nuclear defense, that those few missiles become a few hundred, or better yet, a few thousand. Instead of a mere wait and retaliate strategy, the PLA needs the ability to launch a nuclear first strike, it is essential for future deterance, peace and stability, and of course Taiwan reunification.

[Jive_Turkey]

@cmdjing

I myself am a nihilistic and spiteful little bastard

Really? Well damn, I’m sure nobody here had noticed up until now.

@cmdjing

and have come to view the PLA’s limited deterrance doctrine as useless in the 21st century. If anything, China needs to massively expand its nuclear arsenal on an exponential scale to assure its interests. The current nuclear forces are insufficient and I feel the PLA needs to adopt the triad (well biad really since the strategic bomber force concept is a bit antiquated) integrated nuclear strike force the U.S. and Russia are capable of deploying. The PLA needs at least a few thousand mirved missiles; mobile, silo, and sub launched to complement traditional military modernization. The nuclear card is too valueable to ignore and even the mere knowledge that China has a sufficient arsenal to annihilate every potential hostile power could facilitate in the “liberation” of Taiwan. For one thing, the U.S. would be a lot less inclined to intervene if they thought a massive nuclear war was a possible outcome and the size of China’s present stockpiles is simply not intimidating enough. The reunification of Taiwan is of paramount importance and an existential struggle for China, which is why I believe that the threat of nuclear force, if not neccessarily the application of it, needs to be an essential part of the equation. If a nuclear standoff is required for reunify Taiwan, then a nuclear standoff it should be. However, the PLA needs to make sure it has the capacity to carry out on its threats. With a few thousand more ICBM’s, I believe a sufficient insurance policy would be acheived. Inflicting horrendous damage is simply not enough and I hate to leave a job unfinished. In the event a nuclear gambit for the reunification of Taiwan goes awry, instead of China merely suffering the crushing weight of defeat, it should instead seek to make sure that everyone and I mean everyone dies. I believe this is the only secure way to insure reunification. To let Washington be aware that the reunification issue is deadly serious. The neoconservatives in the Whitehouse and the generals of the PLA, far removed as they are, seem to share the same ideological outlook. That diplomacy is for the weak, negotiation is simply “appeasement”, and that compromise equates to surrender. Only a political dance on the knife’s edge will ensure that Taiwan is returned to the fold. And if things do go horribly wrong, at least we can live secure in the knowledge that we will all be too dead to care.

Or Beijing could just recognize the ROC as a legitimate, equal political entity tomorrow and most of the problem would be solved. You’ve made some intelligent posts in the past. You’ve been treated a bit rough by a few people here and I’ve spoken up when that has happened (not for your sake but for the sake of preserving the civility of the discussion), but there is really only one suitable response to your advocacy of using nukes on Taiwan: you’re a fundamentalist, ideological freak. You rant on and on about Taiwanese being traitors. Has the thought crossed your mind that you yourself are a traitor for advocating the indiscriminate incineration of 23 million Chinese and whoever else gets in the way? I’ve discussed the same thing with a lot of mainlanders. Some of them were open to using nukes against the US or Japan to take Taiwan, but all of them were completely against using nukes on Taiwan. You are an absolute freak.

[Elegua]

Possibly his post is a troll - but after spending time in China I’ve come to the understanding that there is a large percentage of the population that thinks the way cmdjing talks.

I forget who said it cmdjing or AC_Dropout - the scariest thing to happen yet is a democratic China - you can’t undo 50 years of brain-washing with 10 years of capitalism and expect people to be rational

In 1996 I remember vividly how a senior member of the Shanghai city gov. got drunk and started spewing about how the US carriers pulled back after China dispatched their subs (he didn’t catch the idea about the reach of sensors and weapon systems) and about how the US was useless in the face of Rising China. I also remember a number of Chinese citizens that worked for US firms nod in complete agreement.

Basically this kind of hyper-nationalism is stupid and dangerous and will all end in tears. China thinks that unlike those that came before her, she is special and different and won’t befall the fates of other rising powers that exhibited this kind of belligerent attitude. Possibly…but not likely. Pride goeth before the fall

[cmdjing]

I wouldn’t say freak, but I suppose you are correct in asserting that I am fairly hardline when it comes to the Taiwan issue. Afterall my position is hardly unique, I’m not the first to advertise the use of nuclear weapons against my fellow countrymen for the sake of unification. Jiang Jie Xie himself was known to have wanted to nuke a couple mainland cities to eradicate the communists. U.S. defense planners during the cold war also planned for every contingency, and in the event of a nuclear exchange, plans existed to strike a number of non combatant nations with nuclear weapons out of sheer principal that if the U.S. was going down, everyone was goind down with it. Likewise similar plans exhisted in the Soviet Union.

Besides Jive Turkey, you misread me, or perhaps I didn’t make myself too clear. I don’t want Taiwan to be nuked, nor do I believe it will ever come that far. In a long term full war, Taiwan will lose and those nuclear weapons won’t be neccessary. The nuclear deterrant is only to keep everyone else from interfering. In any case, how is my attitude really all that different from any number of Taidu proponents here. A number of people have spoken openly and admiringly of Taiwan developing nuclear weapons to strike Shanghai or Hong Kong or Beijing if the PLA ever invaded. The PLA wouldn’t even need to strike with nuclear weapons first, simply a conventional force and the Taidu’s would advocate the unleashing of such weapons. The reason why is because they too see the scenario unfolding as an existential struggle between Taiwan and the concept of a unified China. I do not want Taiwan nuked, but if military circumstances dictate that tactical nuclear weapons be used on the battlefield, and is essential for reunification, then they should be used.

[redwagon]

[quote=“Grasshopper”]
As an aside some of my students were interested in computer wargames, I made them two copies of Steel Panthers II and Steel Panthers III.[/quote]Your students aren’t the only ones interested. In this CCP-approved news footage crack PLA troops gain hands-on combat experience.
Well, I guess it’s some kind of training, and it makes a change from slaughtering unarmed student protesters…

[wolf_reinhold]

Get on topic or I will start nuking.
If you must talk of nukes, try:
China to “resolve Taiwan problem” by 2020

[robert_storey]

[quote=“wolf_reinhold”]Get on topic or I will start nuking.
If you must talk of nukes, try:
China to “resolve Taiwan problem” by 2020[/quote]

I hate to say this, Wolf, but I think you effectively killed this thread. And just when it was getting interesting. Well, time for me to head back to the technology forum.

[kategelan]

wolf, nuke me if you insist… but I have to say:

[quote=“cmdjing”]
[…]
I myself am a nihilistic and spiteful little bastard and have come to view the PLA’s limited deterrance doctrine as useless in the 21st century. If anything, China needs to massively expand its nuclear arsenal on an exponential scale to assure its interests.

[…]

The reunification of Taiwan is of paramount importance and an existential struggle for China, […]

Inflicting horrendous damage is simply not enough and I hate to leave a job unfinished. In the event a nuclear gambit for the reunification of Taiwan goes awry, instead of China merely suffering the crushing weight of defeat, it should instead seek to make sure that everyone and I mean everyone dies.

[…]

Only a political dance on the knife’s edge will ensure that Taiwan is returned to the fold. And if things do go horribly wrong, at least we can live secure in the knowledge that we will all be too dead to care.[/quote]

There are no words to respond to this kind of madness!

[redwagon]