Sorry but there is no chance in hell that China is going to attack Taiwan. Quit fantasizing guys and move on. The Chinese government is not the same one that Mao started. They are much more calculating and care much more about the economy rather than taking back Taiwan since Taiwan has not declared independence. If Taiwan declares independence then we might have a crisis of sorts.
Bama...I am not anti-American anti-Iraq war or anti-Bush. I was all for those things, however you are dead wrong with the moral high ground bullcrap. We have done some things that were amazing and wonderful but we have also done some pretty horrible disgusting things. How do you think today's world would look upon our attempted genocide of the Indians? Seriously, that's what it was. We wanted land and we had to kill the people who were on it so we could have it. That's what it boils down to. We broke every treaty and did everything we could to get control of more land. The Chinese are in the early stages of their nationhood and their landgrab is at least a lot more humane than ours was. They haven't tried to kill off every Tibetian like we tried to do with every Indian tribe. Though it hasn't been peaceful or utopian. I'm sorry but our moral history when America first started is pretty piss poor. You can possibly make an argument that slavery and racism were not as bad oversights as they would be in today's moral terms because the whole world accepted them. That doesn't make them any more moral, but at least it's somewhat understandable if you want to make that excuse for America's use of slavery and racism, even though we were the last Western nation to outlaw slavery. But our treatment of the Native Americans is just disgusting when you get down to it. It's pretty sad when you think about the great things America did during WWII, Korean, today in Iraq, and how it has truly been the leader in civil rights in the 20th century (I know some may not agree with me, but I believe that because of our diversity and how we changed from being an oppressor to a nation extremely sensitive to other cultures) to think back and realize how horrid our actions to the Indians were. You can't use moral relativism to justify it either or even treat it as if it were accepted or understandable moral behavior at that time in history. You know I do agree that America is the moral leader in the world, however us running around preaching to China about their moral failures when we fail to acknowledge that we only overcame our moral failures a few decades ago after nearly a couple HUNDRED years of statehood is pretty shortsighted and hypocritical (sp?). The era of massive civil rights abuses has passed in China. That was the era of Mao. The Chinese government of today is not that same government. It is much more free and concentrates on economic empowerment of the Chinese more than anything else. Still today it's not safe to speak out against the Chinese government, but at the same time the Chinese have not executed political prisoners either. They are not a free society and we cannot make them one. They have want it and quite frankly that drive to have a liberal democracy does not exist in China like it does in America. I don't mean to sound overly stereotypical, but Asian cultures in general are much more conformist oriented rather than individualist oriented like Western societies generally are and no amount of our pushing for a democracy in China is going to change that. There have not been any significant democratic movements in China since Tiananmen. The economy is roaring in China and that's pretty much all they care about now...making money. Ok I have completely lost what the hell I am talking about so I will shut up now, but take what you will from this post.
No!!!! no!! I think it´s the same to think you are the good guy and therefore you can go attacking people. When attacking people makes you the bad guy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I don´t care who you attack. Military means is not the way!!!!! The Bush doctrine. Saying you can attack anyone who poses a threat to you is not logical. Abiding by that same doctrine Iraq should have had the right to attack you, since you openly declared you could attack! The US is with its actions telling the world that it doesn´t have to follow international law, will not be part of international treaties for peace, and so on.. It´s like saying: I´m right, ´cause I´m stronger than you.
Not in this case. As many have said before and I will reiterate, this is old news, big time. China occasionally just likes to remind the Taiwanese that they still know that they are there. This has seriously been going on for 5 decades. I studied this and other East Asian political topics as my emphasis in college. My grandparents were missionaries in Taiwan for 40 years. Reading this report is like reading that the sun is gonna come up tomorrow.
Not really in this situation, although I know you were being facetious. Ou relationship with Taiwan goes way back. We've always guaranteed thier security, even as we reapproached with the PRC. We still will do so. They are democratic and we'll not let the PRC take them down by force. PRC's modernization is driven by the ass whuppin' put on Saddam. The PLA realized that their doctrine of overwhelming manpower would get crushed by a modern technically advanced opponent (US). Now they are playing catchup, but buying Soviet-era technology (MiGs, Subs) isn't going to cut it. Remember our military trained to no end against those very systems, and in anticipation of conflict with forces in a far more advanced state of readiness. I think its much more likely that as the PRC liberalizes we'll just see this potential conflict evaporate as relations between Taiwan and the PRC warm, eventually either leading to Taiwan's independence or peaceful reunification. Until then the PRC will have no choice but to back down from US intervention ala '95 when Clinton put the 7th Fleet in the Taiwan Strait after PRC's saber-rattling. As for US aggression etc etc, Taiwan being democratic would certainly put the PRC on the low moral ground if they try to forcefully reunify. US intervention to stop the PRC would put us squarely on the high ground.
9/11 has nothing to do with this. This was going on before 9/11 and was quite frankly much more pronounced before Bush came into office. Bush has done a hell of a lot to get China in line and stop its aggressive actions and this is overlooked. Bush's overall China policy has been much better than Clinton's. Clinton was weak and let China dictate the terms of the Sino-American relationship and Bush has simply turned the tables on them as he should because we should have the upper hand. The Chinese will take as much as you give them and there is no reason why we should let them. Clinton put us in a position of weakness by allowing China to do what it wanted in order to ensure that they were happy with us. Bush has stopped that policy of appeasing China and it has not hurt the relationship at all. I wrote a damn research paper on this crap and 9/11 only made our relations with China stronger.
That is not the "Bush Doctrine". Every country ever threatened has used that doctrine. We have not attacked anyone who threatens us either. Quit being dramatic and realize what is going on.
Why does attacking first make us lose the moral high ground? So if we had attacked Nazi Germany and Japan before the attack on Pearl Harbor, then I guess we would have lost all morality, even if the Germans and Japans slaughtered millions of people.
The chineese in the early stages?? The US did great thing during WWII? Yes they bombed japaneese cities with nukes. Killing hudreds of thousands. No one does great things in a war. Today the US is truly the leader in human rights. Enprisoning people without a trial, using torture... This is from Amnesty international:
That's funny. I thought Saddam Hussein's Iraq was a direct threat to us. At least that's what our pResident told us. Was he not telling the truth???? Oh dear!!!!
Germans slaughtering, Japaneese slaughtering, Americans slaughtering, Chineese slaughtering. They´re all the same to me. All very very bad.
Then you are blind and missing the point. Maybe the Americans should have taken the high ground and not involved themselves in the war, not killed anybody. And then what would we have? Europe under totalitarian regimes? Do you want to have these types of regimes spread and gain power until America is overwhelmed and even our freedom is destroyed?
No, he has not. If the Chinese could have taken Taiwan by now, they would have. The Chinese can use Bush- style rhetoric but that doesn't change a darn thing on the ground. The realites about the balance of powers do not change.
Here is a scenario. If the PRC planted a bomb in highly populate area and set it off, they could claim that radicals with Taiwanese "connections" were responsible (which would be no bigger lie that Bush saying that Saddam and OBL were plotting against US with nukes). The PRC could then claim that their national security was threatened now and in the future by Taiwan. They would really have no other choice but to invade Taiwan pre-emptively. (Finding specific fault with this analogy does not invalidate the general thesis.) Their 50 odd year history of animosity toward Taiwan is of little matter, just as the US 12 year, post Gulf War I history was of little matter to the US. 9/11 does change everything. The bar has been greatly lowered.
Uhh... so what? They already claim that Taiwan is part of China. They can claim whatever the hell they want, that won't change the fact that the US military is protecting Taiwan and deterring China. It doesn't change a darn thing in China. There is only "bar" that nations have needed to get over was the balance of power. 9/11 changed one thing. The US isn't going to wait until a Middle Eastern terrorist murders another 3,000 people before doing what needs to be done.
