OT Taiwan

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

...dead man walking;

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...15/china-defense-minister-missing-li-shangfu/


China’s defense minister under investigation for corruption
U.S. and Chinese officials say Li Shangfu, who has not been seen in public for weeks, likely will be removed from his position

Chinese Defense Minister Li Shangfu attends the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation meeting in New Delhi in April. Li is under investigation for corruption, U.S. officials say. (AFP/Getty Images)

Chinese Defense Minister Li Shangfu is under investigation for corruption and likely will be removed, two U.S. officials said this week, in what would be the latest in a series of top-tier purges of Beijing’s security ranks.

The expected purge of Li, who has been noticeably absent from public view for the past two weeks, in the wake of other dismissals will heighten a sense of uncertainty over how China’s day-to-day foreign policy is being managed.


It will also further call into question Xi’s leadership as he consolidates power, analysts say. They note that the narrowing of his inner circle to yes-men has deprived him of opinions and advice that could avert damaging decisions.


One Chinese official said that Li’s dismissal was imminent, but said it was for “health issues,” not corruption. Two people involved in the Chinese defense industry, however, said there is broad consensus that Li’s absence is related to corruption charges relating to his previous position as head of military procurement.


Li, 65, who was appointed defense minister in March, is one of five state councilors — high-level officials — tapped by Xi to form China’s leadership cabinet this year.

Li was last seen on Aug. 29, when he gave a keynote address at the China-Africa Peace and Security Forum in Beijing. Earlier last month, he traveled to Belarus and Russia, meeting in Moscow with his counterpart, Sergey Shoigu. He is due to take part in a major international defense and security conference in Beijing next month, the Xiangshan Forum.

China’s military shake-up may hint at corruption — or Xi Jinping’s weakness

Li’s apparentcashiering would come months after the purge of China’s foreign minister, Qin Gang, and the leadership of the People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force, its premier military unit in charge of the country’s growing arsenal of nuclear weapons and conventional missiles.


“These are some of the most important outward-facing positions in China,” said one senior U.S. official, who like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the matter’s sensitivity.


Li “is under serious investigation and in all likelihood is being removed,” the official said, noting that the Rocket Force leadership purge also involved allegations of corruption. The Financial Times reported Thursday that U.S. officials think that Li is under investigation.

Should Li be sacked, he would be the second state councilor to be removed from a ministerial position within three months.

“It could be even worse than that,” the official said, alluding to the potential for further purges.
 
Britain is recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation making it the first major nation to re-establish diplomatic ties with the country. Good move Britain! Much respect! The entire world needs to follow suit and step up.
 

It's sabre rattling as Taiwan election campaigns are going on. It would be economic suicide for China to isolate itself in the Pacific Rim from all of it's neighbors to invade the island. They can't afford to be another Kim or Putin with his frozen assets all over the free world and sanctions. China lacks water and raw materials.
 
It's sabre rattling as Taiwan election campaigns are going on. It would be economic suicide for China to isolate itself in the Pacific Rim from all of it's neighbors to invade the island. They can't afford to be another Kim or Putin with his frozen assets all over the free world and sanctions. China lacks water and raw materials.
Yep. You'd see about 500 million dead Chinese within a year or so.

Far worse than any other outcome they could imagine.

*Edit* I mean, maybe, MAYBE Xi is dumb enough to do that. But it would be a blunder of monumental proportions.
 
Last edited:
I don't know. I think they can and probably will do it, and they'll get away with it.

We'll support Taiwan for awhile, but we'll soon get bored with it as we have with Ukraine.

And after it's done, it's not reversible. We'll impose sanctions, sure, but many countries (and companies) will ignore/evade the sanctions.

And @jonnyboy will explain that Taiwan was really to blame for the invasion.

barfo
 
I don't know. I think they can and probably will do it, and they'll get away with it.

We'll support Taiwan for awhile, but we'll soon get bored with it as we have with Ukraine.

And after it's done, it's not reversible. We'll impose sanctions, sure, but many countries (and companies) will ignore/evade the sanctions.

And @jonnyboy will explain that Taiwan was really to blame for the invasion.

barfo


Of course Taiwan is to blame, how dare they try to be an independent country and democracy.
 
If there was a land mass China could use to invade Taiwan, no contest.

However, conducting an amphibious and parachute attack against a fortified area is the most difficult and dangerous mission for a large army to complete.

Add to this all of the satellites and electronic surveillance equipment monitoring China. China could not keep the moving and loading of so many troops and their equipment a secret. Taiwan would have time to prepare a strong defense. A sneak attack is not possible.

There is a way China "maybe" able to take Taiwan by force. But I hate making this comparison. China would need to bomb/missile strike a large part of Taiwan untill it looks like the Gaza does today.
 
If there was a land mass China could use to invade Taiwan, no contest.

However, conducting an amphibious and parachute attack against a fortified area is the most difficult and dangerous mission for a large army to complete.

Add to this all of the satellites and electronic surveillance equipment monitoring China. China could not keep the moving and loading of so many troops and their equipment a secret. Taiwan would have time to prepare a strong defense. A sneak attack is not possible.

There is a way China "maybe" able to take Taiwan by force. But I hate making this comparison. China would need to bomb/missile strike a large part of Taiwan untill it looks like the Gaza does today.

I think they are capable and willing to do exactly that.

barfo
 
If there was a land mass China could use to invade Taiwan, no contest.

However, conducting an amphibious and parachute attack against a fortified area is the most difficult and dangerous mission for a large army to complete.

Add to this all of the satellites and electronic surveillance equipment monitoring China. China could not keep the moving and loading of so many troops and their equipment a secret. Taiwan would have time to prepare a strong defense. A sneak attack is not possible.

There is a way China "maybe" able to take Taiwan by force. But I hate making this comparison. China would need to bomb/missile strike a large part of Taiwan untill it looks like the Gaza does today.
Agreed. China stands to lose a lot more by invading Taiwan than they stand to gain.

The attack alone will likely cost them 1 million soldiers. They'll have to destroy most of the industry and fabs they'd want to control. Then they'll have a million fewer soldiers to deal with the riots when sanctions hit and their whole country is starving.

However, Xi calls all the shots. And he's disposed of everyone who was willing to disagree with him or give him bad news.

If he needs a distraction or gets a bug up his butt...
 
Agreed. China stands to lose a lot more by invading Taiwan than they stand to gain.

That's absolutely true, yet I don't think that's the calculus they are doing.

The attack alone will likely cost them 1 million soldiers. Then they'll have a million fewer to deal with the riots when sanctions hit and their whole country is starving.

That too, I doubt is a big concern for them.

barfo
 
Just watched a discussion by x-military US strategy planners. They ran 25 different simulated war games of China trying to take Taiwan.

The games exposed the main tactic China would use. A complete in depth blockade of Taiwan. With so many ships, aircraft and missiles, China could surround Taiwan making it imposible to get anything in, or out.

All games ended with China losing, if the US used every weapon, short of nuclear, to break the blockade. But at a very high cost of lost personel, aircraft and ships, to all sides, including the US.

To reduce US loses, we would need many times more very long range anti-ship and anti- aircraft missiles than we now have.
 
Just watched a discussion by x-military US strategy planners. They ran 25 different simulated war games of China trying to take Taiwan.

The games exposed the main tactic China would use. A complete in depth blockade of Taiwan. With so many ships, aircraft and missiles, China could surround Taiwan making it imposible to get anything in, or out.

All games ended with China losing, if the US used every weapon, short of nuclear, to break the blockade. But at a very high cost of lost personel, aircraft and ships, to all sides, including the US.

To reduce US loses, we would need many times more very long range anti-ship and anti- aircraft missiles than we now have.

We should blockade Taiwan first!
 
Just watched a discussion by x-military US strategy planners. They ran 25 different simulated war games of China trying to take Taiwan.

The games exposed the main tactic China would use. A complete in depth blockade of Taiwan. With so many ships, aircraft and missiles, China could surround Taiwan making it imposible to get anything in, or out.

All games ended with China losing, if the US used every weapon, short of nuclear, to break the blockade. But at a very high cost of lost personel, aircraft and ships, to all sides, including the US.

To reduce US loses, we would need many times more very long range anti-ship and anti- aircraft missiles than we now have.
Taiwan has run several of these and the last one I read about said Taiwan would protect itself but in doing so the Chinese Navy would be completely destroyed as would the American Pacific Rim Naval air force....we'd be wiped out of fighter, jets and bombers in the region. The other reason China won't attack Taiwan militarily is that Taiwan has neighbors who do not want to see Chinese military expansion....from S Korea and Japan to the Phillipines, Viet Nam and Australia...Taiwan has allies given the circumstances. Japan is already gearing up for war games with the allies in the region. They are in naval excercises with S Korea and the US already given the threats from N Korea and China over protected waters.
 
Just watched a discussion by x-military US strategy planners. They ran 25 different simulated war games of China trying to take Taiwan.

The games exposed the main tactic China would use. A complete in depth blockade of Taiwan. With so many ships, aircraft and missiles, China could surround Taiwan making it imposible to get anything in, or out.

All games ended with China losing, if the US used every weapon, short of nuclear, to break the blockade. But at a very high cost of lost personel, aircraft and ships, to all sides, including the US.

To reduce US loses, we would need many times more very long range anti-ship and anti- aircraft missiles than we now have.
But we can ramp up and rebuild that. In fact, we should probably be ramping up for that now anyway. I figured we probably are.
 
But we can ramp up and rebuild that. In fact, we should probably be ramping up for that now anyway. I figured we probably are.

I am curious because I really don’t know, but in order to ramp up, do you mean ramp up war games or ramp up military arsenal? If you mean arsenal, wouldn’t that mean more military spending than we have now? And if so, how could that happen if you are in favor of less military spending to help fund domestic issues? I’ve heard you say many domestic issues could easily be solved if we spend more and you have said the funds are there if we reduce our military spending? I could be wrong in this, as these are recalls over the last handful of years from previous discussions, so please correct if I am wrong.

How are we to ramp up military spending if we are diverting military funds to help with domestic issues?
 
I am curious because I really don’t know, but in order to ramp up, do you mean ramp up war games or ramp up military arsenal? If you mean arsenal, wouldn’t that mean more military spending than we have now? And if so, how could that happen if you are in favor of less military spending to help fund domestic issues? I’ve heard you say many domestic issues could easily be solved if we spend more and you have said the funds are there if we reduce our military spending? I could be wrong in this, as these are recalls over the last handful of years from previous discussions, so please correct if I am wrong.

How are we to ramp up military spending if we are diverting military funds to help with domestic issues?
Arsenal. I've not been one who harps on military spending. Typically I point out services and solutions that save money by spending on them.

Housing people costs less than allowing them to be homeless, and improves society exponentially.

Universal healthcare costs less than our current system, and improves society exponentially.

Negative income tax costs less and improves society exponentially.

Spending on a Finnish style education system would cost less and improve society exponentially.

Changing our law enforcement and judicial systems to focus more on education and rehabilitation (ie. German, Nordic, and Scandinavian model) rather than punishment and restitution would be less expensive and exponentially improve society.

Preventing Russian imperialism will cost far less than allowing it, and it will be far better for society.
 
Arsenal. I've not been one who harps on military spending. Typically I point out services and solutions that save money by spending on them.

Housing people costs less than allowing them to be homeless, and improves society exponentially.

Universal healthcare costs less than our current system, and improves society exponentially.

Negative income tax costs less and improves society exponentially.

Spending on a Finnish style education system would cost less and improve society exponentially.

Changing our law enforcement and judicial systems to focus more on education and rehabilitation (ie. German, Nordic, and Scandinavian model) rather than punishment and restitution would be less expensive and exponentially improve society.

Preventing Russian imperialism will cost far less than allowing it, and it will be far better for society.

understood. Thanks for the reply
 
My post here is pure theory and speculation.

It is believed by many US strategy planners, China's and Russia's long range plan to defeat the USA is to get us spread out and involved in 3 or more conflics at one time.

Ukraine and Gaza make two. Is Taiwan and Korea 3 and 4? What about Iran?
 
My post here is pure theory and speculation.

It is believed by many US strategy planners, China's and Russia's long range plan to defeat the USA is to get us spread out and involved in 3 or more conflics at one time.

Ukraine and Gaza make two. Is Taiwan and Korea 3 and 4? What about Iran?
I hope not. That would probably turn into WW3
 
I think @riverman you lived in Taiwan, right? I travelled there as a student and loved it.

But that said, while I get that it's a 'western ally', I don't follow the logic of the U.S. going to war over it. It's like Cuba here. If we tried to invade (yes, I know we have), Russia would like now stay out. Monroe Doctrine and all that. Isn't Taiwan really in China's sphere of influence and not our concern? That's how I see it.

Then again, I'm a peacenik, so no war ever makes sense to me.
 
I think @riverman you lived in Taiwan, right? I travelled there as a student and loved it.

But that said, while I get that it's a 'western ally', I don't follow the logic of the U.S. going to war over it. It's like Cuba here. If we tried to invade (yes, I know we have), Russia would like now stay out. Monroe Doctrine and all that. Isn't Taiwan really in China's sphere of influence and not our concern? That's how I see it.

Then again, I'm a peacenik, so no war ever makes sense to me.


If China attacked, or just blockaded, Taiwan, the result would be a global economic crisis.

Taiwan manufactures 70% of the worlds microchips. And 90% of the most advanced chips. Without chips, the world would shut down.

Cuba's main attraction would be tourism.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top