[Arkinsaw]

You don't need to take the mountains initially. Just get a beachheach, an airport, and threaten enough economic destruction with 500 cruise missiles to get the status quo fence riders to say "Why cant we just get along?".

That is a lot different than seizing Taiwan militarily. The PRC can pound Taiwan with missiles certainly and can threaten destruction but that is NOT the same as conducting a successful amphibious invasion.

As for conducting exercises...so what....Syria conducted exercises also and yet couldn't shoot down a single F-16 while losing their air force. Lots of people conduct exercises but that is NO evidence that they are capable of carrying out those missions when opposed by a defending force.

It did not take any more than a few homemade bombs to change the government of spain.

That is far different than conducting one of the largest amphibious operations ever when opposed by a defender with military technology proven to be better than yours. We are talking about amphibious invasion to seize Taiwan, not potential cowardly governments in Taipei.

While I don't agree with you about the cowardice of the Taiwanese, it is much more plausible a scenario than China successfully conquering the island in a stand up fight.

[Magnum44]

While I don't agree with you about the cowardice of the Taiwanese, it is much more plausible a scenario than China successfully conquering the island in a stand up fight.

I didn't say they were cowards. I said the 'status quo' are unpredictable in terms of how they will react to a military invasion of unknown scale.

And you better define what you mean by 'successful amphibious' operation. If you accomplish the mission/political objective without even landing a troop or firing a shot, that is successful in my book. The US often accomplishes its objetives by a mere show of force.