• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

China Places Country Dangerously Close To US Warship

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
"Now, I know what you’re thinking: what is a Chinese navy vessel doing in the Taiwan Strait, right where US and Canadian warships are peacefully conducting routine navigation exercises?"


https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2023/06/05/china-places-country-dangerously-close-to-us-warship/


How far do you think China is willing to go with this aggression?

Couldn't they say the same thing about us placing warships dangerously close.to China and Taiwan? How far are we willing to go with our "peaceful" demonstration?
 

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
During the Vietnam war my father was on an Aircraft Carrier recovering jets, in the Taiwan straights and the Chinese scrambled fighters and did fly a by...... this is not really anything new...... My guess here is the Chinese will do nothing but intimidate.... and try and get the US to make the first move...so they are then justified
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
Going by the history of military activity in the last 50-60 years, I think China is quite unlikely to start a war with the US. I can't say that the reverse is true, however. The US has been recklessly hawkish far too often for me to trust it to be level-headed in this situation, although I also worry that Xi Jinping's ego and desire to annex Taiwan might lead him to start a world war in order to try to have his way.

I think the best-case scenario is that China and the US deter each other from starting any military action whether against each other or against Taiwan (in China's case). History shows that global powers are quite prone to being thuggish and bellicose if not reined in by peer powers.

In this specific incident, China was being too hostile and reckless, so I'm glad the US is balancing out China's presence near Taiwan with its own presence.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Going by the history of military activity in the last 50-60 years, I think China is quite unlikely to start a war with the US. I can't say that the reverse is true, however. The US has been recklessly hawkish far too often for me to trust it to be level-headed in this situation.
This doesn't acknowledge the vast change in
relative strength over the "last 50-60" years.
China is in a good & improving position to
attack Taiwan, & fight a war with USA in their
territory & environs. Our nuclear superiority
would be irrelevant in such a conflict because
China wouldn't likely pose an existential threat
that would justify such a response.

You mis-judge USA leadership propensity to
start a war with a powerful country (IMO).
The MAD strategy used with USSR might appear
to you to have indicated desire to go to war, but
it was the opposite of that.
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
This doesn't acknowledge the vast change in
relative strength over the "last 50-60" years.
China is in a good & improving position to
attack Taiwan, & fight a war with USA in their
territory & environs. Our nuclear superiority
would be irrelevant in such a conflict because
China wouldn't likely pose an existential threat
that would justify such a response.
And you mis-judge USA leadership propensity
to start a war with a powerful country (IMO).

I did say that I think both powers are balancing each other out at the moment. I don't think most Chinese leaders are rash enough to destroy their economy and risk a third world war over an attempt to annex Taiwan, but I worry that Xi might just be bellicose and egotistical enough to do that.

If I had to bet on whether Biden or Xi Jinping was more likely to start a war in the next several years, my bet would be on the latter.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I did say that I think both powers are balancing each other out at the moment.
I think it's possible that China has the advantage in
a non-nuclear war local to China's corner of the world.
If they don't yet, it appears that they soon will.
For the immediate future, USA has the advantage if
the 2 attacked each other in all out war.
This is asymmetry, not balance.
I don't think most Chinese leaders are rash enough to destroy their economy and risk a third world war over an attempt to annex Taiwan, but I worry that Xi might just be bellicose and egotistical enough to do that.
That's the biggest stabilizing factor I see.
And China knows that it can get away with
"attack lite", eg, crashing our surveillance
planes flying in international waters.
If I had to bet on whether Biden or Xi Jinping was more likely to start a war in the next several years, my bet would be on the latter.
I agree.
 

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
This could all be moot depending on which party wins the 2024 Taiwan presidential elections
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
How far do you think China is willing to go with this aggression?

It's hard to say. I don't know if they're just playing chicken or if they're really in the mood for an escalation. It just goes to show that no loose end can ever really be ignored indefinitely.

Some of it may be the result of confusion over U.S. policy. From the outset, the U.S. supported Taiwan unequivocally, recognizing their government as the official Chinese government, while the mainland PRC was not recognized. This changed in the 1970s, when the US reversed that policy, opting to recognize the PRC, while ceasing its recognition of Taiwan (though that has been complicated). It's been a cluster of compromises ever since, but no one had any reason to upset the status quo, so it's remained in place. But I guess they're just trying to send the message that "someday, this issue will have to be settled."
 

lukethethird

unknown member
What changed the One China Policy? namely from the US perspective? such as:

the United States "acknowledges that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China" and "does not challenge that position."

Why is the US challenging that position now? Hawks in the White House?
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
What changed the One China Policy? namely from the US perspective? such as:

the United States "acknowledges that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China" and "does not challenge that position."

Why is the US challenging that position now? Hawks in the White House?
Taiwan Relations Act
 

lukethethird

unknown member
It's hard to say. I don't know if they're just playing chicken or if they're really in the mood for an escalation. It just goes to show that no loose end can ever really be ignored indefinitely.

Some of it may be the result of confusion over U.S. policy. From the outset, the U.S. supported Taiwan unequivocally, recognizing their government as the official Chinese government, while the mainland PRC was not recognized. This changed in the 1970s, when the US reversed that policy, opting to recognize the PRC, while ceasing its recognition of Taiwan (though that has been complicated). It's been a cluster of compromises ever since, but no one had any reason to upset the status quo, so it's remained in place. But I guess they're just trying to send the message that "someday, this issue will have to be settled."
That article and my question is sarcasm. US navy ships are over there, just think for a moment of the reverse, if China's navy ships were within a hundred miles off the US coast because China decided they were going to defend a breakaway state. Puting the shoe on the other foot should be a means of viewing what is going on. What is the US doing meddling in other countries affairs and repeating that it is China that is the aggressor? If China's ships were off the coast of the US I would say that they are the aggressors, but their ships are in there own waters, how is that aggressive? Who is provoking who?
 

Wu Wei

ursus senum severiorum and ex-Bisy Backson
That article and my question is sarcasm. US navy ships are over there, just think for a moment of the reverse, if China's navy ships were within a hundred miles off the US coast because China decided they were going to defend a breakaway state. Puting the shoe on the other foot should be a means of viewing what is going on. What is the US doing meddling in other countries affairs and repeating that it is China that is the aggressor? If China's ships were off the coast of the US I would say that they are the aggressors, but their ships are in there own waters, how is that aggressive? Who is provoking who?
Point taken and you are right as it applies to Chinese warships near our coast, the US would not be happy, but they would more likely monitor with planes and ships and not play Chicken with them.

Also China has no allies which they are militarily responsible to protect by agreement in or near US waters. US is in agreement with Taiwan, Japan, etc.

Want to know how things would probably go it Chinese warships showed up near US waters...look at the Cuban Missile Crisis

But then the Chinese prefer floating spy balloons over the USA, its cheaper, easier and much more deniable.....not that we don't fly spy satellites over them, we do, it is just less obvious.

And, technically, Chinese Territorial waters do not include the waters around Taiwan and this is the view of most countries on the planet. China cannot arbitrarily start claiming territorial waters, which it is currently doing, and expect everyone else on the planet to agree.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
That article and my question is sarcasm. US navy ships are over there, just think for a moment of the reverse, if China's navy ships were within a hundred miles off the US coast because China decided they were going to defend a breakaway state. Puting the shoe on the other foot should be a means of viewing what is going on. What is the US doing meddling in other countries affairs and repeating that it is China that is the aggressor? If China's ships were off the coast of the US I would say that they are the aggressors, but their ships are in there own waters, how is that aggressive? Who is provoking who?
The analogy suffers one big problem....
Taiwan isn't a "breakaway state". It's long been
a separate country resulting from revolution
that approaches a century in age.
Moreover, China itself would be the "breakaway
state" because it was the one who revolted against
the government that is now in Taiwan.
This is naught but conquest by China, much like
Russia invading Ukraine.
 
Top