From: roten@cuba.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Roten)
Subject: Re: Rumor: U.S. Selling Nuke Sub to Taiwan?
Organization: /cuba_b/dirbe/roten/.organization
X-Newsreader: GNU Emacs 18.59.1, GNUS 3.13, NNTP 3.10
	<6JAN199313401440@elroy.uh.edu> <1ig3ihINNe0u@zygote.hsc.usc.edu>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 18:05:11 GMT

The topic that won't die returns to SCC !  :-)  

In article <1ig3ihINNe0u@zygote.hsc.usc.edu> jamesou@zygote.hsc.usc.edu 
(James Ou) writes:

>In <6JAN199313401440@elroy.uh.edu>, math1pu@elroy.uh.edu (Luo, Youngping)
>writes:

>>Why is Tiawan after all these weapons for?  A naval blockade would do
>>the job.

>To prevent a possible naval blockade. :-)

>>I myself though is against any military means to resolve the
>>situation.

>Me too.

Me three.  :-)  

>>However, I think Taiwan is becoming too heavily armed today.

>Oh, I don't think so. Until recently, Taiwanese were using the
>out-of-date F104 fighter jets. That jet was nicknamed "widow-
>producer" (Gua3 fu4 zhi4 zao4 ji1) because it was so bad and had
>such a high accident rate. It is good that there will likely be
>fewer widows in Taiwan in the future.

Hmm .. the F-104 was one of Kelly Johnston's brainchildren, and a decade 
ahead of it's time.  But those airframes are _OLD_, and an aged airframe 
is an accident just waiting to happen.  

>>I wonder what makes them think the mainland will attack in the first place.

>Tanks on TAM square on 6.4.89.

Plus diplomatic saber-rattling which is counterproductive to the PRC's own 
interests.  Maybe Xiaowen Li's (lix@thames.bu.edu) SOS China Education 
Fund should send the PRC policymakers a few hundred copies of 
Machiavelli's 'The Prince', translated into Mandarin ???  :-) 

>>Secondly, if the red China did attack, which would be a stupid move, how
>>could Taiwan escape from being beaten regardless how many F-16's Mirage-
>>2000's they've got?

>Taiwan unlikely will survive the attack, but people in Taiwan
>want to make sure that PRC will pay a heavy price which they hope
>will discourage PRC from launching such an attack.

I hate to disagree with a learned gentleman such as James Ou, but I must.  

The odds of a successful cross-Strait invasion by the PLA are slim-to-zero.  

I have described the problems of the PLAAF with aircraft quality and 
training before.  And the PLAAF is the _KEY_ here.  Granted, the present 
immaturity of the PLA in combined-arms operational methods would be a 
crippling handicap even given a mature PLAAF, but without that, the 
invasion barges would not even make it across the Strait.  

I have read, in this and other forums, of the strategy of a naval 
blockade.  But in a time when one fighter jock with a smart bomb and an 
attitude can convert a blockading vessel into scrap metal on the _bottom_ 
of the Strait, don't you think the PLAAF had better have _control_ of the 
skies above the Strait first ???  

I have also read about the new Kuznetsov-class carrier, the Varyag, that 
the PRC will be getting, from the Ukraine, I believe.  Plus enough 
navalized SU-27s for her flight deck.  But one carrier does not a modern 
navy make.  There are two additional hurdles to be surmounted before the 
PRC has a _REAL_ carrier it can _USE_.  First, the carrier must have a 
crew _well_ trained in carrier deck operations.  And that is one of the 
most complex missions a naval crew can face.  It is going to take as 
much as a decade before the bugs are worked out.  Second, any modern 
carrier needs a battle group to protect it from missile boats and hostile 
aircraft.  The PRC bought just the carrier, and not a small fleet.  And 
they won't even be taking delivery for another 4 years, from what I've 
read.  

Folks, when considering the cross-Strait military balance, remember the 
balance across the English Channel in July of 1940.  The Lufwaffe had 
2800 aircraft to the British 700.  The quality of both Lufwaffe planes 
and Lufwaffe pilots fully measured up to what the British had .. _NOT_ 
the case across the Taiwan Strait.  The British army was in a shambles 
after Dunkirk .. they were drilling farmers with shotguns for lack of 
men and equipment !  The Wehrmacht, however was at the peak of its power 
and proficiency, and had just overrun most of Euorope with new 
operational methods the British were not to fully master even by war's 
end.  

We all remember what happened.  The Germans failed to gain control of the 
airspace above England, and the Sealion invasion plan was called off.  

>>Why can people just live peacefully and be nice to each
>>other?

>Can't agree more.

>>So stop fight each other, stop building
>>up military forces for the purely imaginary "attack" from nowhere.
>>Take it easy and relax!

>No, "Wang4 Zhan4 Bi4 Wei2" (a country will be in danger if she
>forgets what war is). Sunzi in his "Arts of Wars" (Sun1 Zi3 Bing1
>Fa3) told us that people should "Xian1 wei2 bu4 ke3 sheng4, yi3
>dai4 di2 zhi1 ke3 sheng4" (if you want to win the war, you'd
>better make sure that you will not be conquered first). Millitary
>build-up for Taiwan is like "Xian1 wei2 bu4 ke3 sheng4" (be
>prepared so that one will not be conquered)

Yeah, I agree .. but it is sad that so much work and treasure must be 
poured into instruments that create _nothing_.  Sigh.  :-(  

>****Ren2 wei2 dao1 cu2, wo3 wei2 yu2 rou4.     -Fan2 kui4, Han dynasty.
>(People are the knives and I am the meat.)

--
Charles Roten | Hughes-STX, Incorporated | 
  roten@cuba.gsfc.nasa.gov               | 'Use the Source, Luke!'
  7601 Ora-Glen Dr., Greenbelt, MD 20706 | 
  301-513-7805 (w),  301-317-0872 (h)    |            Obi-Wan Stallman