If China Invades Taiwan

[Zardnaar]

Once the pipelines are complete, China can import oil from Russia by land.

They cant build them atm due to sanctions. They're reliant on western companies to do it.

And those plans fell through. The pipes don't exist and won't exist anytime soon.

The wouldn't carry enough either even if they did build them.

Russia will struggle to maintain what they've got.

And even if built USA can hit them in a hot war.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Oh, please; the primary requirements for building land pipelines are steel tubing and
pumps, and China can provide both and completely independently of the West.

They are unlikely to mistake the strategic mistake of again purchasing of complicated
western optimising technology that the west can sanction them by stopping its support.

It simply doesn't need the most advanced made in Taiwan chips.

 

[Zardnaar]

Oh, please; the primary requirements for building land pipelines are steel tubing and
pumps, and China can provide both and completely independently of the West.

They are unlikely to mistake the strategic mistake of again purchasing of complicated
western optimising technology that the west can sanction them by stopping its support.

It simply doesn't need the most advanced made in Taiwan chips.

Thise pipelines that don't actually exist and they've been talking about for years?

It's also building them in that terrain and it's a bit more complicated than pumps and steel tubing. Chibas also a bit more temperate than Siberia.

They're also horribly vulnerable to military strikes.

 

[EnglishEdward]

A lot can happen in the next ten years.

China may well decide to make the strategic investment to develop a fuel supply chain not subject to a naval blockade.

As for being vulnerable to military strikes, the pipeline is likely to be a long way from the sea, and resilience can be designed in.

I.e. with lots of separated small underground pumping stations rather than a few big ones clustered on the surface
that might as well have a "bomb me" sign on them.

And China is diversifying away from ICE transport anyhow.

Now that is an interesting choice; do they concentrate on a pipeline or increase their diversification rate or try for both.

 

[Ordnael]

I maintain my initial question will Kamala or Trump risk WW3 by intervening in China's grab of Taiwan?
We know China's been encroaching hard on the South Seas beleaguering any small nation that tries to stand by it's international recognised exclusive maritime border's...and what has or can the US really do about it? Should they?

 

[amadeus]

I have heard it said they are very vulnerable to a navel oil blockade.

I guess that would hit them right in the belly!

As I’ve heard it described, they are effectively an island for trade purposes: dependent mostly on its ports, little going through its land connections to Siberia, over the mountains, through the deserts, etc., so as far as a blockade goes, that would be very effective in cutting off supply if it could be done.

 

[amadeus]

Oh, please; the primary requirements for building land pipelines are steel tubing and
pumps, and China can provide both and completely independently of the West.

But you would be talking about a massive undertaking of thousands of miles of pipe running at high capacity. I’m not an engineer but I suspect it would be more than welding a bunch of tubes together from Siberia to Beijing or wherever.

And then, and this is another area I’m not greatly familiar with, but advances in drone warfare and high-speed missiles and such, any pipeline would also need to be defended against an outside attack. Is that possible to do in a wartime situation?

 

[EnglishEdward]

Let us be clear, long distance pipelines already exist. The technology is established.

Now a naval blockade is one thing; in that it can be threatened, started eased up, eased down and finished.

However launching a sustained attack on inland infrastructure, of such severity that it can not be readily
repaired, with high speed missiles is technically possible but very likely leads to full scale war.

Is the USA going to start WW3, that would likely go nuclear, over Taiwan ?

I suspect the reason they have not already built it that they are haggling over terms.

 

[amadeus]

However launching a sustained attack on inland infrastructure, of such severity that it can not be readily
repaired, with high speed missiles is technically possible but very likely leads to full scale war.

I meant it being fired or done on the part of one of the combatants, not through U.S. direct intervention—the Ukrainians with their limited military power compared to Russia have still been able to launch things at Moscow, so I have little to doubt that a more economically advanced country could not do the same to the CCP.

 

[Ordnael]

I meant it being fired or done on the part of one of the combatants, not through U.S. direct intervention—the Ukrainians with their limited military power compared to Russia have still been able to launch things at Moscow, so I have little to doubt that a more economically advanced country could not do the same to the CCP.

Yes...but Ukraine is massive while Taiwan is so tiny compared to China, maybe even an underwater a single nuke detonated at closed proximity to island could cause Armageddon.

 

[Voidwalkin]

The thing is that Xi's drive for Taiwan is very likely posturing. I do not believe he'd risk war.

In China, it's well understood that the people tolerate the government as long as it leads to prosperity. More than anything else, the ability to deliver observable economic progress within a person's lifetime is the source of the government's legitimacy.

That of course doesn't mean he can't buy into the propaganda or become overcome with grand ambitions. But Westerners often judge this with the presumption that the US will yield because China wants it more. It's not really so clear how badly Xi wants it. A Taiwan US war could directly cut off not simply the flow of oil to China, but also effectively the legitimacy of Xi and the Communist party.

The current state, where he tries to actively show that Taiwan is his sphere, but stops short of war, is unlikely to change. It won't until either their prosperity is self-sufficient to a much greater degree(probably never gonna happen in a global economy), or the US is totally uninterested in maintaining the network of bases and blue water power that could effectively threaten China's trade lanes(decades away, if ever. Continental US is a decent spring of power)

Edit: if Xi really wants Taiwan his best move is to funnel ungodly amounts of money into Nvidia. We might be unwilling to defend Taiwan with less interest in their chip manufacturing. Which, looking at Nvidia's current stock price, maybe he is, lol

 

[Theov]

The thing is that Xi's drive for Taiwan is very likely posturing. I do not believe he'd risk war.

In China, it's well understood that the people tolerate the government as long as it leads to prosperity. More than anything else, the ability to deliver observable economic progress within a person's lifetime is the source of the government's legitimacy.

That of course doesn't mean he can't buy into the propaganda or become overcome with grand ambitions. But Westerners often judge this with the presumption that the US will yield because China wants it more. It's not really so clear how badly Xi wants it. A Taiwan US war could directly cut off not simply the flow of oil to China, but also effectively the legitimacy of Xi and the Communist party.

The current state, where he tries to actively show that Taiwan is his sphere, but stops short of war, is unlikely to change. It won't until either their prosperity is self-sufficient to a much greater degree(probably never gonna happen in a global economy), or the US is totally uninterested in maintaining the network of bases and blue water power that could effectively threaten China's trade lanes(decades away, if ever. Continental US is a decent spring of power)

Edit: if Xi really wants Taiwan his best move is to funnel ungodly amounts of money into Nvidia. We might be unwilling to defend Taiwan with less interest in their chip manufacturing. Which, looking at Nvidia's current stock price, maybe he is, lol

The only time I'd get a little worried - is at the end of Xi's leadership. When he can say "f it, let's attack" as one last show of power, and can risk his position of power in an attempt to attack Taiwan.
But then again - the Communist Party could not agree, because they're afraid it will cost them too much economically.
By far, the most important point on the agenda of the CCP is the economy. As long as people can continue their every day life, the communist party is safe. But when this life is threatened, the support can dwindle quickly.

 

[Theov]

Yes...but Ukraine is massive while Taiwan is so tiny compared to China, maybe even an underwater a single nuke detonated at closed proximity to island could cause Armageddon.

Detonating a nuke under-water to cause Armageddon to Taiwan?
How is that going to help China?

 

[Ordnael]

Detonating a nuke under-water to cause Armageddon to Taiwan?
How is that going to help China?

Realm of sci-fi I know.

Some of you, @Voidwalkin for instance, are framing the CCP grasp on the country as dependent on their citizens economical prosperity. I fail to see as why a dictatorship needs economical prosperity to keep themselves in power, specially when the CCP has such a powerful big brother method of control of their masses. I am not trying to argue against that idea, it's in their best interests to keep China an industrial and trade powerhouse but I can't see why war weariness would loosen up that grasp of power. I look at Russia and I see Putin and his oligarchs still holding the reigns of power over the masses with a firm clasp.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Realm of sci-fi I know.

Some of you, @Voidwalkin for instance, are framing the CCP grasp on the country as dependent on their citizens economical prosperity. I fail to see as why a dictatorship needs economical prosperity to keep themselves in power, specially when the CCP has such a powerful big brother method of control of their masses. I am not trying to argue against that idea, it's in their best interests to keep China an industrial and trade powerhouse but I can't see why war weariness would loosen up that grasp of power. I look at Russia and I see Putin and his oligarchs still holding the reigns of power over the masses with a firm clasp.

Unrest in China has destroyed many a régime and a 1% disaffected group is 10 million+ people. There is an ongoing undercurrent of "unapproved by CCP" content on China's web that is active. Xi is right to fear that unhappy people can make big trouble for him and force a crack down that is reminiscent of Tiananmen square. The Chinese people have never been docile.

 

[Zardnaar]

Let us be clear, long distance pipelines already exist. The technology is established.

Now a naval blockade is one thing; in that it can be threatened, started eased up, eased down and finished.

However launching a sustained attack on inland infrastructure, of such severity that it can not be readily
repaired, with high speed missiles is technically possible but very likely leads to full scale war.

Is the USA going to start WW3, that would likely go nuclear, over Taiwan ?

I suspect the reason they have not already built it that they are haggling over terms.

We are assuming that a Wars gone hot because China gas invaded Taiwan perhaps with a first strike on Guam or sonething.

Even if tgey play it safe and don't shoot at USAfirces a pipeline is still hypothetical.

Since US missiles can hit individuals in a car these days they xan hit it.

Any such hypothetical pipeline would need togo where the fuels needed. That's eastern China.

USA coukd hit ot pretty much anywhere though at least in range of a B2.

Not counting any missiles whoose exact range is a state secret.

USA invading Chiba xsnt be done by time soon that's WW2 levels of mobilization. Blockading South China Sea very iffy.

Indian Ocean/Persian gulf China can't do much.

Even worse tgey haven't been to war since 1979 abd tgat was a shambles. Their carriers are basically a joke and tgey have no institutional knowledge of using them in an actual conflict. And they don't have effective dedicated naval planes in any event.

USA weapons are a generation or two ahead of what they've been supplied Ukraine with.

Chinas energy supply could be constrained to domestic production and Kazakhstan. Assuming that pipeline doesn't get hit.

And Taiwan has indicated they'll fire missiles at the 3 Gorges dam.

China still doesn't gave the technological edge over Russia in several cases. Jet engines being one. It's why they don't have an effective naval fighter. They cant launch anything with a USA style combat load.

When you're reliant on shipping whoever controls the waves (hint that's USA). Ironically China benefits from the USN.

 

[r16]

the Chinese are getting their carriers with catapults . This will let them carry definitely more warload compared to USN's F-18s . When you have to launch with a ramp , you simply can't carry stuff . Unless you are in a Harrier .

plus , trouble in US is more likely than trouble in China . This is NOT the 70s with the hope that hippies will fix things . Not the 80s with the Great Communicator at the helm . Not the 90s with the unipolar world order . Not the 00s with Dabya spewing Axis of Evil and forcing people to any random Coalition of the Willing . The horror of 9/11 is long over , isn't it ?

edit: Spelling

 

[Moriarte]

USA weapons are a generation or two ahead of what they've been supplied Ukraine with.

The Houthis and the Afghanis armed with AK's from the seventies sent those athletes armed with photon blasters sprinting tail between the legs.

Reading your posts is like watching a Cold War movie from the eighties.

Entertaining, but detached from reality.

Have a nice evening.

“Bravado is often the mask of fear, worn to disguise the hollowness within.” – Dwight D. Eisenhower

 

[Zardnaar]

The Houthis and the Afghanis armed with AK's from the seventies sent those athletes armed with photon blasters sprinting tail between the legs.

Reading your posts is like watching a Cold War movie from the eighties.

Entertaining, but detached from reality.

Have a nice evening.

“Bravado is often the mask of fear, worn to disguise the hollowness within.” – Dwight D. Eisenhower

We are talking about conventional war.

USA great at thise. They suck at insurgency.

Pulling out of kabal they used hellfires with blades atrached non explosive. They can hit individuals now.

We have see what a handful of 30 year old systems do in Ukraine. That's what a 800 billion per year budget gets.

 

[Zardnaar]

the Chinese are getting their carriers with catapults . This will let them carry definitely more warload compared to USN's F-18s . When you have to launch with a ramp , you simply can't carry stuff . Unless you are in a Harrier .

plus , trouble in US is more likely than trouble in China . This is NOT the 70s with the hope that hippies will fix things . Not the 80s with the Great Communicator at the helm . Not the 90s with the unipolar world order . Not the 00s with Dabya spewing Axis of Evil and forcing people to any random Coalition of the Willing . The horror of 9/11 is long over , isn't it ?

edit: Spelling

You need catapult plus good engines to get the planes launched with a combat load.

China has the catapults that may or may not work as advertised. They don't gave engines as good as USA or Russia.

Means tgey xant use their carriers like the USA does. They gave no experience at combined arts warfare, they've never used the carriers in combat conditions.

Vs the USN I would argue it's a very bad idea vs someone with 100 years give or take of institutional knowledge.

Chinas missiles in South China Seas would be very dangerous. No talking about WW2 Midway here.

We can't nake any comparison to China they haven't gone to war since 79 and that was a shambles.