|
Author
|
Topic: War over Tiawan?
|
Smokey
Pilot
|
posted 04-28- 01:06 PM
  
Though I don't think it was the wizest move
in the world I think Bush pretty much stated
the obvious when he said an attack by China
on Tiawan would mean war with China. I believe
this has been US policy for a long time even
though it wasn't directly stated.My question is why? If you think about it
Tiawan could sink in the ocean and the US
wouldn't miss a heartbeat. The only reasons
I can think of are: 1. American businessmen have a lot of money
invested in Tiawan and wouldn't want to see
those assets come under Chinese control. 2. Ego, we have always implied we would defend
Tiawan. If we don't we look like chickens. Of
course this motivation has been made stronger
in lite of Bush's recent statements. As far as any threat to the US or even strategic
interests I can see none. There probably would
be some economic impact but nothing we couldn't
handle. I gather from the ages of a lot of people on
this board that you may have sons and daughters
either at or approching military age. Do you
think it is worth them laying their lives on
the line to defend Tiawan? I would be interested
in your opinions. If you care to I would be
interested if you have children close to
military age. In other words do you want to
see your child as a US Army grunt carrying a
mortar or m-60 fighting the Chinese in defense
of Tiawan? I have a son in the reserves and a grandson
who will be draftable in a few years and my
opinion is it's not worth either of their
lifes to defend Tiawan.
[This message has been edited by Smokey (edited 04-28-2001).] IP: Logged |
Jerry
Pilot
|
posted 04-28- 02:11 PM
There are very few individual countries in the world which would seriously harm the US if they were invaded and taken over by an unfriendly power. That's not the point. Defending Tiawan is necessary because:1) We would be defending Freedom, not just an island. Why else did we get involved in Europe in WWII or Korea? Democratic countries must defend one another against totalitarian countries, regardless of the "immediate" benefit. 2) Free countries must draw a line in the sand and serve notice to agressors...cross this line and deal with us. 3) There is an economic impact. Tiawan is our number one source of memory chips in the world (I believe). 4) The computer industry in Tiawan is quite advanced. You don't want China getting it. 5) At least for now, we can take the war to China but they can not, in any substantial way, take it to us. This is not a MAD situation. IP: Logged |
Pachy
Pilot
|
posted 04-28- 05:29 PM
Please spell correctly "Taiwan". Thanks.IP: Logged |
Nat
JAG
|
posted 04-28- 07:18 PM
Alot of us served in some arm of the forces here, myself I was in the Royal Artillery (no, not a Gun Bunny, I was a forward rebroadcast station), and here's my personal thoughts...Regardless of the REAL reasons for going into Kuwait (oil.. cough..) I was glad to be there, my reason was quiet simply that it was the right thing to do. I'm proud of the ex British soldiers that went to Yugoslavia and fought for the Cosovans etc, they put their lives on the line for a principle (no, they didn't get loads of money for fighting with them) IMO the line is a simple one to draw.. There's simple no need today to be invading other countries. Conflicts will come and go over some dispute or other and soldiers will be killed, the the whole slae invasion of another country simply to take that country for your own should these days never happen, and regardless of where in the world this happens we should stop it by all means necessary, even if that means we must invade THEM, they do it for some kind of gain, we do it because peace needs to be kept. We're soldierd (or were), our job is basicaly to fight and die so that civilians don't have to. Should any member of my family be killed an any war I would grieve like any other, but he/she knew what it meant to be in the armed forces and so I would not be against them joining, but make sure they are aware of what they are undertaking. I have a feeling I haven't been very clear, myself I'm bound by principles, taking Taiwan/China as an example, every effort should be taken to defeat the Chinese should they chose to attack Taiwan, simply because it's wrong. Regardless of the arms that Taiwan buy, they will never be a threat to China and I reckon would never have any thoughts of anything other than defending themselves, so why should it be wrong to arm them, why would China get so uptight about it, Tiawan wont attack them.. well, because they still lookin at invading and don't want to get their asses kicked by the defenders, we should support any country ever under this threat from who whichever enemy.. Checkynia (sp?) included IMO Show that aggression will not be tolerated, use extreme force where needed, but above all, the UN/NATO needs to stand together on this and show every nation of the world what will happen if they undertake the cause of expansionisim, not just ask them to lease stop it and then 10 years later actualy do something about it. IP: Logged |
Jerry
Pilot
|
posted 04-28- 07:19 PM
Thanks Pachy. I took my lead from Smokey and I'm too lazy to check.  IP: Logged |
Vahnatai
Pilot
|
posted 04-28- 09:03 PM
i can kinda see why china would see this arming of a "renegade province" by us....
its like...say...New York ceding from the union or wales breakin away from the UK and china arming themIP: Logged |
Jerry
Pilot
|
posted 04-28- 09:27 PM
Not really Vahnatai. Taiwan became a separate political entity when Chiang Kai-shek and his government were overthrown by Mao and the Commies. His Nationalists government and its loyal followers escaped to Taiwan. The Taiwanese didn't "break away" from the Communist mainland because they were never a part of the Communist controlled mainland. They are the losers of a civil war trying to survive on an island rather than surrender. It's somewhat like the European governments in exile which existed in England during WWII after Hitler drove them out, except the Taiwan government in exile doesn't occupy a third country.[This message has been edited by Jerry (edited 04-28-2001).] IP: Logged |
wil
Pilot
|
posted 04-29- 12:08 AM
IMO:
I would hate to see it. But if mainland pushes the issue...then its Taiwan (did I spell it correct?). I in no way support Bush, and whether it was a mistake or whatever that came out of his mouth, part of me wants to think finally america has some balls and will stand up for something and not be bought out. That dictatorship on the mainland is just that. At least Taiwan which was also quite repressive has advanced in great leaps in the area of freedom. If there can be only a one china policy, then the entire world should pick Taiwan. IP: Logged |
Johannes
Pilot
|
posted 04-29- 05:13 AM
Sometimes people help people for freedom.
But most people help people for his own Interest.
if we get an conflict, i hate to say , i donīt wanna fight for taiwan, sorry , but its true.The WW 1 was a waste of life.
The WW 2 was a war for Freedom, but not all country got it,
hope we get not an WW 3. Johannes ------------------
 IP: Logged |
Johannes
Pilot
|
posted 04-29- 05:14 AM
sorry for the picture.IP: Logged |
Smokey
Pilot
|
posted 04-29- 08:13 AM
Thanks Pachy.Sorry for misleading Jerry. I don't buy the chip or technology reasons. We are perfectly capable
of making our own chips as good as or better than anyone in the world.
Might even give some poor smuck a job who is trying to support their
family here in America. I believe China probably knows as much about computers as we do. With
the spying stunts they've pulled off in the US I don't think there is
too much going on in Taiwan that they don't know about. Fighting for freedom. Now there's a reason that is worthwhile and hard
to argue against. I believe we only fought in Europe in WWII because
Germany declared war on us after we declared war on Japan. We, of
course, had to declare war on Japan after Pearl Harbor. I'm not so sure
we, as a country, cared too much about Europe's freedom. Korea, here's
where you have to start being careful. Was Korea fought for freedom?
Maybe somewhat true but I think a large part of it was American
business interests. A plant owned by the company I worked for closed
in the 1970's, threw about 1000 workers out of work and moved to Seoul
South Korea. Korean war vetrans with 20+ years were among those laid
off. Jerry, I notice you didn't mention Viet Nam. We gave up on fighting
for freedom there. I guess it wasn't important enough. I think fighting
for freedom is a lot of times used pretty loosley to give an excuse
for fighting for American business interests. What is Taiwan's status? Aren't they now considered under China but
allowed to keep their democratic government? IP: Logged |
Werner Molders
JAG
|
posted 04-29- 01:02 PM
A question for the Americans here, especially those who would fight to defend Taiwan. Are you familiar with the Quebec issue up here? Not the Quebec summit nonsense a little while ago, but the fact that for several decades now Quebec has been prattling on about how its a "distinct society" and that in order to preserve their French heritage they must cede from Canada. Now the debate is long and complicated, but one interesting part is that while, according to separatist Quebec Premiers (equiv. to Governor of a state), while Canada is divisible, Quebec is not. This has some serious ramifications, because there are several notable regions where anglophones very much dominate. Two of these are Montreal and the native reserves of the north. While the aboriginals aren't necessarily anglophones, they have publicly aligned themselves with the Federalists because know they'll be better off in Canada than an independent Quebec. Now to the point of my question... A couple years ago there was a referendum on independence in the province. The difference between the 'yes' side and the 'no' side was less than one percent!. Since then, Quebec's electorate has kept sending the Parti Quebecois back into power, and the leaders (Bouchard until recently, now a guy named Bernard Landry, pronounced Laundry) promise another referendum whenever they feel they have the best chance of winning. Should they get 50%+1, they have promised a unilateral declaration of independence. Since Qc is not divisible (according to the Qc government), they will resist, with force, any attempts of regions to return to Canada. Canada will then either a) Use diplomacy which will take years (basically involving taking the Qc government to an International Court) or b) Respond with force. Should Quebec do anything that could be construed as 'oppressing' and understandably militant anglophone minority in the province, if the current Canadian government (at that time) wouldn't immediately respond with force, you know it would be an election issue in the next federal election. Are you seeing the parallel with China's situation here? The US Government's official position aside, what do you think the US' reaction should be? Support Quebec? Support Canada? Recognize Quebec's unilateral declaration of independence? This is an interesting question because should Taiwan declare independence and then China invade to "secure a rogue province", and the US defends Taiwan... What about in your own backyard? Lotta potential for hypocrisy there. Sorry for the long post but I doubt the Quebec Sovereignty issue gets any press in the states so I figured a crash course primer was necessary. Werner  ------------------
Visit Abbeville Field Today!
 IP: Logged |
Mirthain
Pilot
|
posted 04-29- 04:14 PM
In the Taiwan issue, We have quite a bit of industry that produce low cost items for at least the US, and probably most of the world. It would have a broad economic impact on the US in particular. We can not produce at the same cost levels as Taiwan does, and because of smokeys unions we would all be paying 3 times as much as we are now for what are now inexpensive items.
As for Quebec and Ireland (surprised people missed that one)..... Each side needs to provide a good rationale to secede. If they can prove themselves viable, then by all means they should try. But bear in mind, having a rouge state that close to the US would make the US very nervous.... especially if Quebec echo'ed the french tendency for socialism.
Taiwan was basically in the same state as Hong Kong was.... but the Chinese are consolidating thier country, and they want Taiwan back in the fold. Perhaps the repatriation of Hong Kong has given them some fuel for this. I think that the defense of Taiwan is important. Many of Chinese descent in the US and Canada are from or related to families in Taiwan. I do not see repatriation as a good thing for anyone involved.
------------------
Mirthain=FC=
 IP: Logged |
Jerry
Pilot
|
posted 04-29- 04:34 PM
I don't see the parallel between Taiwan and Quebec, Werner. The Taiwan Nationalist government has never been under the rule of the Communists. How can they break away from something they have never been part of? Quebec and it's government have been and are under the Canadian national government.Another difference is that the Quebec separation movement is, from what I can tell, "culturally" motivated by differences in heritage and language. The Taiwan Chinese are culturally the same as the Mainland Chinese...their diffences are political and economic. If the French separatists are truely willing to go to war to become separate then the rest of Canada must be willing to go to war to keep the country intact. This could conceivably happen in the US. Population trends in California predict a Hispanic majority in the next 50 years. Whites are already a minority in California. We already have states in the South that are majority black. Either one of the these groups could demand an independent state. IMO the Federal Government would deal with it very harshly. I don't think it will happen because state and local governments are very strong in the U.S. and so local/regional issues can many times be settled locally. Our Electoral College is a good example of "States Rights". Most foreigners laugh at it but it's things like that that keep our diverse society together, by pushing the power base down. However, if the liberals get their way and more and more power is concentrated in Washington then all bets are off....you could have an uprising at the state level if a state's population felt that they had lost control over their lives to the Federal Government. Maybe Canada needs to learn from us about local control and power...I don't know. [This message has been edited by Jerry (edited 04-29-2001).] IP: Logged |
Pachy
Pilot
|
posted 04-29- 04:56 PM
quote:
French separatists
I understand this is a shorter expression for "French-speaking separatists", but the difference is significant. I've had the pleasure to meet, and work with a few Quebequians, they were friendly standard North-Americans to me. The only thing is, sometimes it would be easier to understand them if they would speak English, rather than that strange language that evolved from 17th century French I don't know much about the Quebec separatists, but their situation seems more comparable to the French-speaking people in Belgium's to me. [This message has been edited by Pachy (edited 04-29-2001).] IP: Logged |
Werner Molders
JAG
|
posted 04-29- 05:08 PM
Ok guys, thanks for the comments, interesting stuff. I don't want to derail the talk about Taiwan, the Qc thing was just a related aside. Back to you... WM ------------------
Visit Abbeville Field Today!
IP: Logged |
Stark
Pilot
|
posted 04-30- 07:56 PM
Much of the world already recognizes Taiwan as a seperate nation and it seems that we are mere steps from doing so. In my view this is in the long term interests of the United States and indeed the world in general. Taiwan is the single largest producer of integrated circuits in the world with some 80% of the market share. These circuits include everything from motherboard chipsets and memory to the computers that regulate microwaves and even vehicle engines. If China suddenly found itself in a position with that kind of economic power (you could bring nations to their knees, including the US, by cutting off these supplies) it would spell very bad things for much of the west (that includes Europe and the UK). China has a record of using any and every advantage they can get agianst the west in general and the US in particular. If Taiwan fell the US could be brought to it's knees very quickly - and while we could shift back to a manufacturing base within the US to make up for what was lost from Taiwan it would take severla years and we could proabbly never approach the cost/quality levels of Taiwan. The long term result would be a significant drop in the economic (and thus military) power of the US. That reason alone is sufficient to prompt the US to war - freedom and all other issues aside it would be in the best interest of every American to prevent the fall of Taiwan on economic issues alone (if the companies fail so too do the employees). You add the long time policy of the US to defend democracy anywhere in the world and it becomes an irrefutable imperative that we do everything we can, including war, to prevent Taiwan from falling.As for the Quebec issue.. well, assuming that Quebec did not commit any human rights violations, did not attempt to setup a socialist or communist govt on the US border and seceeded(sp?) from Canada by the ways allowable in Canadian law (if there even are any) then yes, the US would probably recognize them as a legitimate country. If they failed to do even one of the above though - well, the Canadian govt would have a legitimate reason and probably US backing to use force to take Quebec. Hell, if they tried to institute a communist govt' we'd probably invade them and then hand it over to the Canadian govt when we were done... -Stark IP: Logged |
Mirthain
Pilot
|
posted 04-30- 09:21 PM
I don't know.... 51 states has a nice ring to it... LOL------------------
Mirthain=FC=
IP: Logged |
Jerry
Pilot
|
posted 04-30- 10:46 PM
No thanks Mirth. I had a run-in with a French cabbie in Montreal once. He was put-out because I couldn't explain in French where I wanted to go so he threw me and my wife out of the cab. We would have to keep an occupation army there until they all learned English. The Canuck's can have'em.  IP: Logged |
Jeeves
JAG
|
posted 04-30- 10:56 PM
Growing up and living 15 minutes from the border of Quebec makes one aware of such things Montreal was my high school stomping grounds....we would stomp across the border in a beat-up Chevy Nova, buy a keg for $80, bring it back to NY and charge $3 a head for a party and have a good-sized profit to show for it I have met many Canadians in the jobs I haveheld and in my travels. The nicest yet are those from Nova Scotia, but Ontarions (is that the correct spelling?) were pretty cool to. I only know those from Alberta from this board....but any and every time I have met or dealt with a Quebecois, it has been a strained encounter at best. Of course-- they love to shop in the US...and who can blame them considering the cost of things up there. But I worked security at a beach in Plattsburgh and had about 3-5 fights a week to break up-- all drunken Quebecois. It got bad enough that the city paid for all of us to have self-defense training The best part about it was when I'd break up a fight and they would try the old "Ne parle pas anglais" trick....they'd laugh and call me a f'ing a-hole....and I'd laugh and say "I speak French too- you idiots!" That always got them ------------------
Brought to you by the campaign for a better Dauntless! Jeeves =FC= [This message has been edited by Jeeves (edited 04-30-2001).] IP: Logged | |
FSIC Messageboard
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
