I don't disagree. Social order vs. individual freedoms is a constant balancing act. Starving people will work selflessly to provide the basic needs of life, but when people have full bellies they start thinking about a better way for their children. The Chinese people eventually will. Or, in the case of the US where people are hurting more than they have in two generations, they start to dial it back. But entropy is inevitable, all energy moves from concentration to diffusion, including the power of governments.
Taiwan is buying missiles to do exactly what you're claiming the Taiwan independence crowd will do. You've really convinced me there. In fact, the US is going to nuke Mecca because factions of the US anti-Muslim terrorism crowd is threatening to do it.
In response to PRC rhetoric of an imminent take over, I am sure. Do you want me to go back and find all the quotes attributed to PRC officials threatening Taiwan and its independence? When you threaten the other side with repercussions, it is called establishing a deterrent. Embrace it, dude, it is a basic concept in international relations. The second the PRC senses that Taiwan has let down its guard, or the second the USA loses interest in Taiwan, I guarantee you the PRC will pounce on Taiwan with all of its might (they will still lose, but that is a different story for a different day). It is in USA interests to maintain the peace between the two sides, even if it is a cold peace, and the only way to do that is to help Taiwan establish a clear deterrent against any possible PRC aggression (MAD or something similar in a balance of power scenario).
Maybe you should go back to review your one of your earlier posts in which you suggested it is unimaginable for Taiwan to attack Mainland?
My suggestion is that it wouldn't be rational for the government's decision makers who are in actual control. How are you feeling today?
Yeah. I didn't think this was correct. I looked it up. What happened is that the Defense Department suggested that in the event that the PRC attempted to invade Taiwan, the Taiwanese response should be to attack targets in the mainland in order to get the PRC to retreat. The DoD report suggested that Taiwan should acquire weapons that have the capability to do this, since they don't currently have the capability to perform such attacks. After this came out, the Taiwanese government said that even if China was invading Taiwan wouldn't attack targets on the mainland, despite the US DoD suggestion that it would be a good idea. Your claim of Taiwanese threats is smoke and mirrors.
Depends on who are in control. The relative political stability in PRC certainly can't contribute to a possible reversal of the on-going detente between the two sides since Ma was elected, no? Couldn't be better. Thanks for asking.
Democratic Underground? Probably not as good as looking up directly in the published DOD report. My claim stands.
A die-hard fan of the Blue Team? Between Mainland and Taiwan as it is going, the commercial, cultural and heritage ties are simply too strong for all-out military confrontations. No rational politician-in-charge on both sides of the Taiwan Strait wish to see Chinese blood spilled in an all-Chinese warfare. The current arms sale to Taiwan from the US doesn't change the overall imbalance of the military strengths. Your so-called deterrent hardly matters if PRC is determined to commit force to prevent Taiwan from secede in the unlikely event that a fanatic Pan-green faction declares independence. There sure will be heavy casualties on both sides, Dalai Lama forbid, but it doesn't take an Einstein to figure that Mainland is in a far superior position to prevail.
Taipai Times and CNA. Your claim doesn't stand, because you haven't provided even the slightest shred of evidence to back up your claims. Of course, facts have never stopped you before. And the claim that you read the secret DoD report made available to Congress is laughable. Are you now engaging in espionage?
Are you sometimes even amused by your own dorkiness? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Gorges_Dam#cite_note-87 Go read the publication and then come back.
Yeah... That is from three years after the actual statements, doesn't actually quote a single first hand statement, and original statements from 2004 show that this report has the situation backwards. In short, it is wrong, and by extension so are you. In any case, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Have they purchased any weapons that will allow them to launch this preemptive attack on Three Gorges that they've denied that they are planning?
Yea western ppl will never stop trying to convince rest of the world everything has to be done their way, using all means nessesary.
True and that has often been brought up by many on this board including ones who are critical of the PRC. In general yes I agree which is one reason why I will generally tend to refer to mainland China as the "PRC" and the government in Taiwan as the "ROC" than refer to either as China since the idea of China is something more encompassing. While what you say is true for many of the people currently living on Taiwan its not quite that simple as there is a signifigant portion of the population that is descended from the aboriginal non-Han residents of Taiwan along with others some who although Han have lived in Taiwan long before the KMT and don't have a desire to be part of China as a whole. The Taiwanese independence movement although weakened by the ineptness of Chen Sui Bian is still a political and cultural force and Taiwan so its not as though all of Taiwan considers themselves a separate state of China just apart because of politics. That said though I agree with your description overall about the difference between Chinese country and PRC government. That is one reason why I think it would be in the longterm interest of the PRC to decentralize power and grant greater autonomy to its various parts. I still believe that any reunification with Taiwan will be under some sort of federation and not as either PRC or ROC. That's a good point and has something due to the uniqueness of the creation of the US as a nation not conceived of based on a shared cultural or linguistic history or even of a territory but as a philosophical ideal. The idea of China is in many ways similar to the Irish Catholic idea of Ireland. That Ireland is one country of 32 counties even though 6 of those happen to be under British control.
As I said before I strongly doubt that will happen that the PRC is just waiting for US resolve to weaken on the ROC and then they invade. The trade connections between the two are too valuable to literally blow that up to risk a war and given the PRC's limited amphibious capabilities such an invasion will be very costly.
US has always been a badass in the neighberhood, and China has just built some muscles. One day US says "Hey dude, help me deal with this bad boy Iran." China says "You don't tell me what to do..." Then US goes "Da ***! I know you're having problems with your son, I'm gonna give him a gun, so you can't sleep at night!" China says "WOW you do that and you'll be sorry!" US goes "Bring it bltch!" China goes "Bring it blitch!"
Is that the USA or mother Russia? :grin: I hope so, and that is PRECISELY what USA support for Taiwan helps to accomplish, much to your chagrin I am sure. I am not speaking about intentions here, I am only concerned with the effect of strengthening Taiwanese defenses. I think a cold peace is possible and sustainable in the Taiwan Strait, but we differ in that I think it is ONLY possible as long as the USA stays involved in supporting Taiwan's ability to preserve its long-held autonomy. Otherwise, there is that saying comparing small nations to indecently clad women: they tempt the evil minded It is not about numbers or overall military prowess, it is about both sides convincing each other that they can do real damage if hostilities break out. Take the Iran example: the USA is the only military superpower of the world, yet it likely won't attack Iran any time soon because Iran (a much weaker state) has effectively established a deterrent to a USA attack by making it clear that it would impose unacceptable costs to any act of aggression on its territory. Can the USA bomb the heck out of Iran? Sure, but the cost might be the complete devastation of the oil-rich Gulf nations, a barrage of missiles hitting Israel, and more than likely the breakout of an all-our war in the region. Similarly, military aggression by the PRC against Taiwan would be very costly to China's geostrategic interests. Dont forget that other Asian countries would immediately take notice and mobilize themselves in anticipation of an aggressive and destabilizing China, and that would only serve USA interests in the long term since you know China's neighbors will be clamoring for increased USA presence in the region to 'check' Chinese ambitions. This is what I mean by creating a situation where the costs associated with a breakout in hostilities would simply be unacceptable. Even small nations can manipulate such circumstances to its favor.
