No reason not to include other AAMs like IRIS T, ASRAAM, Python 5, A darter, AAM-5, PL-10.

Ah but with all chinese military transactions, and especially something as potentially “sensitive” and rumour hounded as J-10, news from the chinese side would be the ultimate say.

We’ve heard too many times from pakistan sources that a J-10 deal was happening, but still nothing has eventuated.

J-10 still isn’t cleared for export and I’m not sure if they need typhoons top end capabilities.
JF-17 would be a good fit though. Still the Iraqi F-16 deal doesn’t look like it will derail, so this is all academic anyway

again you undermine history. China’s history is full of Han Chinese willing to kill Han Chinese. it happened in the last century, it happened in the last millennium. You also undermine that the Chinese at many periods of time, show strong regionalism tendencies which is one of the factors in the frequent Chinese “civil” wars.

(Again? When did I first undermine history?)
Whether those “regionalistic” examples can be applied today as a cause for high mutual hate is doubtful, and I never claimed there hasn’t been “intra Han chinese killing”. My claim was time and culture specific, that because of (relatively) common cultural/ethnic heritage, among other factors (greater informationization, globalization, cross strait links), a mainland-taiwan conflict probably won’t see the kind of mass killings or ethnic cleansing that we’ve seen in some other conflicts in recent years, namely the Balkans which was brought up.

I.e.: there will obviously be killing, but probably less ethnic hate motivated murders, relative to XYZ. Then again, we can’t predict what each nation may do, and may foment rumours and hate so as to enforce greater discipline, will to fight, etc in their soldiers, which if left unchecked could result in the same effect.

We can quibble endlessly as to how big each factor played a role in the FD-2000 coming out on top, and I agree co production, tot, cost (and possibly geopolitical motive) probably propelled FD-2000 on top.

But the fact that FD-2000 was even a competitor in this tender, never mind coming out on top, means it must have similar performance, and yes in your previous example hen clearly the Swiss saw gripen as equal in their important parameters.
I suppose going by your logic, china could have offered HQ-12 with the same offers they had for FD-2000, and associated lower cost, and the Turks would have accepted it too, irregardless of the fact it only has a slant range if 50km or something.

yes and no.
PRC is not one ethnicity, its a country of 56 ethnic groups and dozens of unrecognized ones, although some nationalists like to believe its only Han Chinese
ROC is by sheer majority not just Han Chinese, but specifically Minnanese who’ve long settled in Taiwan. Following them are recent migrants from various parts of China and indigenous Taiwanese who were there long before any Chinese speaking group.

then you have to consider what is an ethnic group.. do you think Singapore should be a part of China because its dominant ethnic group is Chinese or Australia part of the UK? An ethnic group in the end is what people identify themselves no more or no less, and not what you think they should be.

A good point, in regards to the liquid nature of ethnic identity, and who knows, maybe in many decades to come current Taiwanese people will experience a collective “Taiwanese” ethnicity (that is to say, not the indigenous Taiwanese of today, but an amalgamation of the nationalists, indigenous, and new migrants).

Whether that comes to pass, depends on degree of cross strait cultural, historical and economic exchange, I think.

And I don’t think Latenlazy ever said ethnicity was a justification for Taiwanese reunification, so the singapore analogy is inaccurate. Rather, he used the Chinese-taiwanese “ethnic” example to point out a (relatively) lower experiencing of inter-race/group hatred between what the Serbs and Croats experienced.

when so many other countries that dont have Bation like coastal defence system have upgraded there Scuds and you make assumption Vietnamese are not doing it.

http://defense-studies.blogspot.com/2009/04/vietnam-stocking-up-scuds.html

… I didn’t know there was a connection between having onyx AShMs and the ability of a country to upgrade scuds.

But okay, let’s say some of vietnam’s scuds are upgraded.

I am saying US has Kuwait to provide reliable supply of fuel for invasion. you just cant do invasion on empty tanks. suppose Vietnam hits sole oil refinery near to borders.

With what, their mighty 60-96 scud TELs that may or may not have extended range and some form of guidance? Or their so vastly potent air force strike power that includes 24 MKVs and 150 Su-22s?

ok so you want to fire missiles from so far away.

Agreement! Progress! 😀
But yes, precision guided IRBMs like DF-21C and long range LACMs like CJ-10 can be fired from very far away (1500km to 2500km away, but it would be a waste to use DF-21C in this situation, unless it’s for very deep and important targets)

shorter range SRBMs like 600km DF-15 and 500km DF-11A will need to move a little bit to hit locations deeper into vietnam’s territory though.

you still dont get. You still need transport planes to assemble supplies from central locations to border quickly. China simply not rich that stores supplies on all its borders.

Logistics is always a challenge during conflicts. But let’s make an estimate for how many “wartime” assets PLA will have to redeploy in a hypothetical invasion of vietnam on top of what they already have in field?

For instance, there are some five combat aircraft divisions PLAAF/NAF have in theatre near vietnam, (each fighter division is some 72-84 aircraft depending on the type, and I’m not familiar with the orbat, unfortunately, so I can’t say how many have the reach to strike into vietnam, how many are BVR or PGM capable, etc. But point is you have a total of 360-420 aircraft in theater that do not need to rely on the extra logistics of redeployment)

For the lulz, this is the distribution of VPAF regiments, with about four immediately available in theater, and half of them being purely Mig-21s.

if you involve volunteer force in long term wars. your likely lose them if they dont have long term incentives that are in addition to peace time.

You’re still avoiding my question, is there any policy for militaries on earth where soldiers are paid more for deployed service as opposed to peacetime service? I’m honestly curious. And if there is, the question is whether PLA can afford it.

China is more used to consumption than Vietnam. It is likely to suffer more. Due to high consumption China is extremely risk averse.

Again, this is irrelevant depending on how committed china is to a vietnam invasion.

China’s economy will suffer in a taiwan contingency too, but are willing to sacrifice a good deal if they declare independence. If (for some obscure reason) they decide that they’re willing to sacrifice a similar amount to attack vietnam (again, like, why?)

—

But humouring this scenario has eaten enough of my time, good day to all.