台灣備戰需要雙重加速: 爭取短期內購入軍備與強化軍員實戰能力.
"U.S. officials, former Taiwanese military leaders and security experts say they believe that means Taiwan needs to do more to ensure it can inflict enough damage to discourage an invading force or hold it off until the arrival of help—possibly from the U.S. After years of increases in military spending, China now has around 100 times as many ground force personnel as Taiwan and a military budget 25 times as large, according to Pentagon data."
中國武裝攻擊前，致力打擊台灣自衛信心的動機: PLA逾卌年無實戰經驗，且有印太鄰國的包圍壓力。
"Launching a full-scale amphibious incursion 130 kilometers from the mainland would be a daunting exercise, and the PLA has not had major combat experience since 1979. Beijing would risk major resistance from Taipei as well as a devastating military response from Washington. In addition, it would do grave, if not, irreparable damage to its ties with the United States and the European Union, not to mention the four militarily and economically formidable democracies it counts as neighbors: Australia, India, Japan, and South Korea. Indeed, it is hard to think of an action that would do more to jeopardize China’s long-term strategic prospects. It would be far less risky for Beijing to continue its present lines of efforts: increasing its bilateral military advantage across the Taiwan Strait, working to undermine Taipei’s self-confidence, and persuading Taiwan that it will eventually have to acquiesce to resolving cross-strait tensions on China’s terms."
https://thediplomat.com/2021/05/taiwan-at-the-nexus-of-technology-and-geopolitics/
“美國有線電新聞網（CNN）等美國媒體報導，在聯邦參院軍事委員會10日的聽證會上，台灣問題受到熱烈討論。密蘇里州共和黨籍參議員霍利（Josh Hawley）詢問參謀首長聯席會議主席、陸軍上將密利，假設中國人民解放軍發動犯台並控制台灣島，而台灣無法獨力抵抗時，美軍是否有能力捍衛台灣？
密利回覆道，共軍派出大規模軍隊越過台灣海峽奪取台灣，是極度複雜且困難的行動，即使面臨的是一個不抵抗的軍隊，行動也仍十分困難，「我可以向你保證，只要美國根據『台灣關係法』等法律做出相應的政治決定，我們就有能力捍衛台灣。」”
" 戰略上，阿富汗對美國目前對抗俄羅斯與中國的大國競爭中，已經失去地緣戰略價值，反而消耗了太多資源，因此抽出資源，轉用到其他方向，例如台海方面。
所以不用認為美國放棄在阿富汗的駐軍，是拋棄盟友的行為，對台灣會依樣畫葫蘆，這其實都是個案。在美國已經成為朝野共識之大國對抗的戰略中，台灣身處中美對抗的最前線，美國從阿富汗抽回的資源，勢必會有部分投向台灣，加強防務，才符合美國現階段的戰略利益。
相對的，假設哪一天美國的戰略利益轉變，例如改為「孤立主義」，退守美洲大陸時，美國對台灣的支援也可能迅速消退，所以觀察出美國的戰略風向轉變，超前部屬做出因應，才是台灣最重要的戰略規畫。"
坐等看阿拜政權的遲鈍反應會出什麼招對盟友信任度亡羊補牢。
"包士可認為，中國和北韓都可能會利用機會測試拜登政府，來試探美國對盟友的保證是否可信，但拜登應該會發出明確訊息，告訴美國的敵人不要利用此困境來挑戰美國。而阿富汗情勢或許能提供機會讓美國改變對台灣的戰略模糊策略，對台灣做出更加清晰的安全保證。"
這篇評論把阿富汗陷落比作拜登的張伯倫時刻真是太入木三分了～
【After 9/11 our allies invoked Article 5 of the NATO mutual defense treaty to come to the aid of the U.S. They deserved some real input into the decision and the planning of any end to the war and are right to resent the arrogant incompetence that presented them with a disastrous fait accompli. In the future, Mr. Biden must expect even less European deference and respect than he has so far received.】
被這篇的內容嚇到: 美軍為了達成阿拜下令盡快撤軍跟保護大使館就好的要求, 七月就放棄有兩條跑道可用的空軍基地, 只留喀布爾機場當退路, 真的是腦袋壞掉欸....
【Gen. Milley was also pressed on why the military had abandoned nearby Bagram Air Base in July. Bagram has two runways, while HKIA has one. The general said he didn’t have the troops to protect Bagram and the U.S. Embassy given the rapid troop drawdown order from President Biden. Gen. Milley said his orders were to protect the Embassy as a priority, and the military did.
Mark this down as one of the biggest mistakes of the Biden withdrawal plan, if you can call it a plan. Holding Bagram now would help speed up the evacuation and create more room for Afghans and others as they await departure. Gen. Milley ducked a question about whether retaking Bagram from the Taliban is an option. That means it’s Mr. Biden’s call, and the President wants this dreadful mess behind him pronto.】
亡羊補牢中~
【華爾街日報引述國防部官員的話報導，有六家航空業者被徵用民航機一到兩週，美國航空（American Airlines）、亞特拉斯航空（Atlas Air Worldwide）、達美航空（Delta Air Lines）與全能國際航空（Omni Air International）這四家航空公司將各徵用三架民航機。
此外，夏威夷航空（Hawaiian Airlines）被徵用兩架飛機，聯合航空（United Airlines）則被徵用四架，總計有十八架民航機協助將已離開阿富汗，正在德國、卡達與巴林美軍基地的撤離者送至他處。美國國務院表示，目前有十二個歐洲、中東和中亞國家允許美國人及其他從阿富汗撤離的人在境內中轉。】
