china/taiwan news


Status
Not open for further replies.

OppositeDay

Junior Member
Registered Member
This is wrong analogy. If the USSR advanced into European countries, it would be naked invasion against other sovereign countries and the invaded countries would fight them with all they had. The USSR did not have the will to launch such offensive. On the other hand, when Nazi Germany invaded the USSR, the Russian people made huge sacrifices to fight against the Nazi. I'm pretty sure you're very familiar with that part of the history.

The notion that the US's "credibility" would be on the line and would be "kicked out of Western Pacific" is ludicrous and is argued to deter China's inevitable unification of Taiwan. Weighting someone's credibility, even that of the almighty U.S.A., against Chinese territory and sovereignty is way out of proportion. That once China unifies Taiwan, the US would have to get out of Western Pacific (what does that even mean?) is weird logic. We're not talking about China invading Japan here, which is totally different from China recovering Taiwan.

So you're confusing Taiwan, a legitimate territory of China, with Europe or Japan, both of which are independent sovereign countries of their own.
Yes a better analogy would be the ongoing Armenian–Azerbaijani conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. Russia very wisely doesn't think a refusal to defend Armenian control over Nagorno-Karabakh means the collapse of CSTO and end of Russian influence in Caucasus. It's only American hubris that tricks them into thinking a final resolution to the Chinese civil war in Beijing's favor means the end of American influence in Asia-Pacific. It's especially laughable when none of America's allies in the region wants to get militarily involved in a conflict over Taiwan.
 

tamsen_ikard

Junior Member
Registered Member
And your source for this claim is?


The US risked far more in protecting Europe and Japan against the USSR. The imbalance of forces in Europe was such that even if the Soviets launched a conventional offensive, NATO could only stop them with nuclear weapons. A similar imbalance is now developing with Taiwan.

US cannot match China’s industrial might. It can only hope to strangle it with a naval blockade, but that would not save Taiwan.

Therefore, to effectively deter China they need to raise the stakes in the direction where they hold a clear advantage. Either that, or fold out of the Western Pacific.

I think you have a wrong idea about when a nuke threat can be applied. A nuke attack against another great power with 100s of nukes in ICBM is essentially similar to a suicide bombing. People do not commit suicide bombing unless their situation so desperate that not using suicide bombing is as good as dying. Would a rational person kill themselves just cause they have vital interest in saving another friend? Absolutely not. They might say they will, to try to cause the attacker to feel fear. But when push comes to shove. No one will commit a suicide attack if they are completely safe.

Now US might say that they will attack Soviet Union with Nukes if Sovet Union attacked Europe. But will they really? They might say they want to commit suicide to save Europeans but will they really? I don't think so for one minute. The Europeans might commit a suicide attack by attacking the Soviet Union since not doing so means getting taken over by Soviet Union and losing control over your fate. But even that is not guaranteed.

When faced with a hopeless situation of defeat, most soldiers do not become suicidal and try to take out the enemy. They mostly surrender. Why? Because if they surrender there is a strong chance the other party will allow them to live. So, why commit suicide if there is a chance of survival.

That's why Nukes are paper tigers. They are only good as deterrent against another person using nukes on you. But it is very hard to justify a nuke attack first just to save your ally when you are guaranteed to get nuked and get totally destroyed in return.

If nukes were an absolute guarantee then US and nato would not have created a massive conventional army to field it in Europe.

Let's give another analogy. Suppose China has absolute vital interest in kicking US out of Japan. It threatens US to take all its forces out of Japan or China will attack US with a massive Nuke barrage in its cities. Would US believe that China would do such an attack that is essentially suicidal? Would US take its forces out since its absolutely of vital interest to China compared to US?


Nuke threats are essentially bluffs. You can make them, but anyone can see how likely it is to execute such a bluff that will cause self-destruction for the supposed threat maker.

That's why I said, US so called nuclear umbrella is a myth. Non existent. Its a bluff. When push comes to shove. No US leader will be able to justify why America needs to commit mass suicide to save Japan or Australia or Europe from Nuke attacks. Why would you commit mass suicide when you are secure behind two oceans? I don't think so.
 

gelgoog

Senior Member
Registered Member
The US would only use nukes against a country which can't retaliate. It's as simple as that.
Now that China has the DF-31AG and DF-41 missiles the entire US can be targeted. Even if you assume China only has 200 warheads it would be enough to wipe 90% of the population of the US out of the map. I doubt China only has 200 warheads.
 

hullopilllw

Junior Member
Registered Member
Not sure what is with all the arguments. A conflict against China at her coastal border means a land-based power against navy+air force of the opposing side. No matter how advance the radar or missiles the non-land side has, they are add a total disadvantage due to sheer difference in quantity of ammunitions, how much damage do you think US navy can sustain against the entire DongFeng arsenal ? That is why US is desperate enough to withdraw from the land-based missile system agreement with Russia, with the aim of installing some in possibly Japan. I can only think of Japan, it will be out of question for S.Korea. Even for Japan, they have to consider the risk of tying their fate to US policy of aggression against China at China's border. What if US lost and abandoned the the conflict in taiwan straits ? Japan will be left alone to face the full-blown retaliation of not ONLY CHINA, but also her historic nemesis inclusing Russia and both Koreas.
 

weig2000

Junior Member
Cutting through the clutters and rhetoric of the long report: moving away from the "presence" and China to be safe.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


HONOLULU — The days of U.S. troops concentrated in hubs like South Korea and Japan are about to be on the wane, as the Defense Department’s Indo-Pacific Command review takes a hard look at where it needs to be in order to counter China’s growing military might in that massive swath of the world.

The post-World War II order has focused on northeast Asia, with roughly 50,000 troops based in Japan and another 30,000 or so in South Korea. But that is likely to start shifting.

“I don’t think we’re looking to have fixed bases in fixed places, right?” an INDOPACOM official told reporters in Hawaii in early September.

......
 
Technically, on paper it isn't. It's just one of a dozen of irredentist claims across the globe.
What paper? Chinese law says it is. That's the only paper that controls the Chinese military.
Except, this one threatens to embroil the world in a major war.
Well, you know, what's right and what's convenient and nice aren't the same thing; that's why they're different words.
We also had a lot of that in Europe in the last century. Didn't end very well. That's why I feel sad to see that each nation somehow inevitably has to go through its own purgatory regardless of historical lessons
Worry about your Europe and we will worry about our China.
But thanks for sharing your thoughts and feelings.
Your welcome for the education.

Honour is cultural, it is acquired and is not innate.
I guess a gorilla that rips your arms off and beats you to death with them for making faces and pounding your chest at him is also indoctrinated with CCP culture and propaganda then LOL.

You know what stands out the most here? You think you're asking a challenging, thought provoking question in why Chinese people feel strongly about going to war over Taiwan but it's one of the stupidest questions there are. Why does any country go to war to protect its territory? Why do people want to right wrongs and take revenge when what's done is already done? Your question is that level of stupid.

To be honest, I think we had no more than 2 pages on China in all my classes combined. For the average person, it's just a distant and mysterious land. I was fortunate to meet quite a few Chinese through my studies and work, and I've learned that yes, they can be quite touchy on certain topics :D I only got interested into China in a more meaningful way after visiting Taiwan and hearing the rather negative view the Taiwanese I met there had of China. To be honest, up till then I had a very positive view of China. Now it's a wash.
So instead of being brainwashed by MSM, you were brainwashed by the Taiwanese? LOLOL No firsthand experience but oh so sure of yourself just from hearing about a man from his enemy. Is that supposed to make me think that you are more capable of independent thought than being brainwashed by your surroundings? LOL

Only the weak covet your opinion. China achieves our goals on our own power whether or not people like you agree.
I never payed much attention to MSM, which I have to admit is universally and unfairly negative towards China. Having said that, I like to study Chinese history when I have the time, to understand better the land, the culture and the people.
Don't run before you can walk. You need to study common sense before you study foreign culture and history. You don't even know why generally people defend national territory; what can you learn without such a basic foundation in human psyche?
The most illuminating book so far was Arthur Smith's Chinese Characteristics.
Oh the most illuminating book on Chinese people was written by a white guy? LOLOL You do really enjoy regurgitated and fed information (by familiar sources nonetheless) over primary sources that require self-interpretation, don't you?

If the US considers Taiwan critical to its interests and is willing to forego the cash its companies are making in China, then the logical move for them is to end strategic ambiguity over Taiwan. That means full decoupling and drawing a MAD line over Taiwan.

That would put the PRC in a pretty tight spot. The ball is in their court. 300 warheads against 5000 and the world’s most formidable ABMD shield against them. Taiwan starting to move towards independence. What do they do?
You simply need to read. China's generals have already said we will go to nuclear war with the United States over Taiwan if needed. Death before dishonor. However, the US doesn't quite agree and isn't in step with your imagination. They maintain strategic ambiguity, AKA "only if we think it's easy/convenient at the time."
 

hullopilllw

Junior Member
Registered Member
If the US considers Taiwan critical to its interests and is willing to forego the cash its companies are making in China, then the logical move for them is to end strategic ambiguity over Taiwan. That means full decoupling and drawing a MAD line over Taiwan.

That would put the PRC in a pretty tight spot. The ball is in their court. 300 warheads against 5000 and the world’s most formidable ABMD shield against them. Taiwan starting to move towards independence. What do they do?
TW island is critical to US' interest, if you define the interest as being the hegemon power of Eastern Pacific. But what about the core interest ? Does the average Americans care enough about TW island, does the status of TW island affect US mainland security ?

Now to the Mainland China side. Taiwan's reunification is the CORE Chinese interest. Which is why China only have official relation with nations that adhere by the One China Policy. Anymore doubt to clarify ?
 

Gatekeeper

Major
Registered Member
TW island is critical to US' interest, if you define the interest as being the hegemon power of Eastern Pacific. But what about the core interest ? Does the average Americans care enough about TW island, does the status of TW island affect US mainland security ?

Now to the Mainland China side. Taiwan's reunification is the CORE Chinese interest. Which is why China only have official relation with nations that adhere by the One China Policy. Anymore doubt to clarify ?
I'm glad you caught up with discussion. This is what the discussion is all about. Our friend here thinks he knows China and Taiwan and Chinese people better than anyone else, through having worked in Taiwan and have few friends that are Chinese.

Despite, all his knowledge of all things chinese, he fails to realise what you posted above. And decided to show all his ignorance, prejudice and bigotry for all to see.
 

Max Demian

Junior Member
Registered Member
I guess a gorilla that rips your arms off and beats you to death with them for making faces and pounding your chest at him is also indoctrinated with CCP culture and propaganda then LOL.
You are smart enough to understand this is a poor analogy. Nationalism is not innate. It’s an idea, and a relatively new one at that. Compared to Europe, it appeared quite late in China. There was no shortage of Chinese people who were more than happy to work for the British as guides and transport workers during the Opium wars and even as late as the Boxer uprising.

You know what stands out the most here? You think you're asking a challenging, thought provoking question in why Chinese people feel strongly about going to war over Taiwan but it's one of the stupidest questions there are. Why does any country go to war to protect its territory? Why do people want to right wrongs and take revenge when what's done is already done? Your question is that level of stupid.
You clamor about your wokeness, but you’re just asleep at wheel. I grew up in a country at war. I can assure you there is nothing glorious about war. It’s an ugly affair, with confused people on both sides, often acting out as animals. People like you disgust me.

So instead of being brainwashed by MSM, you were brainwashed by the Taiwanese? LOLOL No firsthand experience but oh so sure of yourself just from hearing about a man from his enemy. Is that supposed to make me think that you are more capable of independent thought than being brainwashed by your surroundings? LOL
I listened to both sides. I studied the matter from three sides (PRC, ROC, US), and continue to do so.

Only the weak covet your opinion. China achieves our goals on our own power whether or not people like you agree.
But you see, that’s the thing. I am conditioned to look at the world from an individual’s perspective. You take the collective approach, seeking strength in group identity, never once letting slip the opportunity to reinforce your position as that shared by 1.4bn Chinese. That’s why I cannot take you nor your wokeness seriously. You just come across as a drone and an emotionally immature person.

Don't run before you can walk. You need to study common sense before you study foreign culture and history. You don't even know why generally people defend national territory; what can you learn without such a basic foundation in human psyche?
My country won its independence through war. I know more about it than you can imagine.

Oh the most illuminating book on Chinese people was written by a white guy? LOLOL You do really enjoy regurgitated and fed information (by familiar sources nonetheless) over primary sources that require self-interpretation, don't you?
If you weren’t blinded by racism you would’ve at least bothered to read a few pages of the book and then marvel at the stupidity of what you just wrote.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top