Maybe Communist China ought to realize who's actually playing with fire.

[Twilight Hue]

This would be different, because the citizens of Taiwan would need to be citizens somewhere new. Allies would have to adopt them whole hardheartedly. I suggest a new kind of fast track citizenship, possibly a multi-national citizenship. They'd also need help to get started and thrive, so it is an expensive strategy in more ways than one. Still it is better than world war.

I'm certainly hoping it won't come to that.

 

[Twilight Hue]

This would be different, because the citizens of Taiwan would need to be citizens somewhere new. Allies would have to adopt them whole hardheartedly. I suggest a new kind of fast track citizenship, possibly a multi-national citizenship. They'd also need help to get started and thrive, so it is an expensive strategy in more ways than one. Still it is better than world war.

In general a fast trac system is worth considering.

 

[Suave]

Please let us agree to a diplomatic solution in order to resolve the ROC-PRC conflict whereby Taiwan is ceded to mainland China in 2049, this being the 100th year anniversary of the People's Republic of China's proclamation.

 

[Stevicus]

Nobody would surrender, and what we tend to underestimate is how cold and contrived that government is. It will create the pretext for a war if it will help establish its legitimacy to its people. Taiwan and the S China Sea are pretexts for a war. What it seeks, like all aggressors, is a swift victory followed by negotiations. It doesn't seek a protracted war, but it will spill blood to legitimize itself.

Offer to evacuate Taiwan, now, even if we don't go to war. Work it out with allies, finding places for the refugees to live. This Mainland will not like and will be an embarrassment to the authority of their government...to its legitimacy.

We could offer to evacuate them, but would they really want to leave their own land? Taiwan could turn itself into an island fortress. They may not be able to prevail against the forces of the PRC, but they could certainly give them a bloody nose or two. They could make them pay for every square foot of land they get.

The U.S. would also have potential allies in the region, such as South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines. It's also clear that there's no love lost between China and Vietnam. China and India have also tangled recently, so that might also widen the playing field.

Russia could conceivably join China's side, but if they did, the combined forces of all the NATO countries in Europe could give them a hard time.

Another possibility: We could trade Taiwan for North Korea.

 

[Suave]

We could offer to evacuate them, but would they really want to leave their own land? Taiwan could turn itself into an island fortress. They may not be able to prevail against the forces of the PRC, but they could certainly give them a bloody nose or two. They could make them pay for every square foot of land they get.

The U.S. would also have potential allies in the region, such as South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines. It's also clear that there's no love lost between China and Vietnam. China and India have also tangled recently, so that might also widen the playing field.

Russia could conceivably join China's side, but if they did, the combined forces of all the NATO countries in Europe could give them a hard time.

Another possibility: We could trade Taiwan for North Korea.

I'd like there to be an agreement between the U. S., Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, Australia, Singapore, Indonesia, Bangladesh, New Zealand, and other Pacific rim nations to accept Taiwanese refugees fleeing the ceding of Taiwan to mainland China.

 

[sun rise]

Let them have Taiwan. It is not worth a war and China is going to own that part of the world anyway, we just need to get used to it.

Where would you draw the line remembering WWII and other attempts to rule the world?

 

[sun rise]

Which is why the troop pull out is a very bad move.

If the Afghan people can't stand on their own two feet after 20 years, it's too bad. Taiwan is a different matter with people willing to fight and die for their freedom.

 

[Twilight Hue]

If the Afghan people can't stand on their own two feet after 20 years, it's too bad. Taiwan is a different matter with people willing to fight and die for their freedom.

I agree in light the Afghanistan population are not nationalist and more in line with tribalism. The concern should be obvious in wake of Isis , for which you don't want an organized element developed to commit global acts of terrorism.

 

[Brickjectivity]

We could offer to evacuate them, but would they really want to leave their own land?

Some will leave and become irritants and activists. The mainland government will not like it, particularly if the people reestablish a remote Chinese government somewhere else. After all that's why mainland wants to take over Taiwan, because it has the old culture and the old enemy. First rule of war is to offer the enemy an empty victory.

Taiwan could turn itself into an island fortress. They may not be able to prevail against the forces of the PRC, but they could certainly give them a bloody nose or two. They could make them pay for every square foot of land they get.

Exactly what mainland desires? I don't think its a good strategy.

The U.S. would also have potential allies in the region, such as South Korea, Japan, and the Philippines. It's also clear that there's no love lost between China and Vietnam. China and India have also tangled recently, so that might also widen the playing field.

Yes, and they should be at the table when decisions are made about what is to be done. Perhaps they wish to unify. I think that would (militarily) be smart. As mere allies they are not terribly strong, but if they were to form a union they would be another world power, and I think they could do so.

Russia could conceivably join China's side, but if they did, the combined forces of all the NATO countries in Europe could give them a hard time.

Russia and US may spat but are brothers. I would suppose Russia might try to use it to gain advantage of some kind but is not interested in destroying us outright. Another thing is Russia may do some distraction or try to gain diplomatic gains in trade with China, so that is another thing to consider. We actually had an entire cold war with the USSR and didn't destroy each other. That is brotherhood.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I'm certainly hoping it won't come to that.

Its already there in my opinion. Invasion has been announced. Ships and troops have been sent.

 

[We Never Know]

And your wallet, too? Wars are expensive.

Wars keep our economy going. Its why we are almost always at war with someone.
A time we weren't at war the great depression hit, and ended with.....yep WWll.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Wars keep our economy going. Its why we are almost always at war with someone.
A time we weren't at war the great depression hit, and ended with.....yep WWll.

Any government spending can accomplish the same thing. Theoretically.

 

[We Never Know]

Any government spending can accomplish the same thing. Theoretically.

Wars keep our economy going. If we aren't building things for ourselves, we build them to sell to other countries..... Then give that money to another country lol

The United States supplies arms to at least 98 nations, and it is the largest supplier to 20 of the 40 largest arms importers in the world. These arms include ammunition such as missiles, various aircraft, submarines, surface ships, anti-submarine weaponry, tanks, armoured vehicles, as well as electronics such as radar, sonar, and guiding systems.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Wars keep our economy going. If we aren't building things for ourselves, we build them to sell to other countries..... Then give that money to another country lol

The United States supplies arms to at least 98 nations, and it is the largest supplier to 20 of the 40 largest arms importers in the world. These arms include ammunition such as missiles, various aircraft, submarines, surface ships, anti-submarine weaponry, tanks, armoured vehicles, as well as electronics such as radar, sonar, and guiding systems.

We compete with other countries that do the same, other 'Super powers'. Either we supply or they do, so there is a political aspect.

All I'm saying is if its about stimulating the economy, that can be done with work on infrastructure. There are other ways for a government to spend money.

 

[Suave]

Wars keep our economy going. If we aren't building things for ourselves, we build them to sell to other countries..... Then give that money to another country lol

The United States supplies arms to at least 98 nations, and it is the largest supplier to 20 of the 40 largest arms importers in the world. These arms include ammunition such as missiles, various aircraft, submarines, surface ships, anti-submarine weaponry, tanks, armoured vehicles, as well as electronics such as radar, sonar, and guiding systems.

I don't want U. S. Military technology falling into the hands of the People's Republic of China by way of mainland China taking control of Taiwan. Hence, we should agree the U. S. must not be selling military technology to the Taiwanese who would be overwhelmingly outnumbered by an invasion force from mainland China.

 

[Regiomontanus]

Where would you draw the line remembering WWII and other attempts to rule the world?

Attempts by us to rule the world? Not sure what you mean. In this case we are talking about their neighbor and we have no business getting involved militarily there, in my opinion.

 

[Regiomontanus]

...

The United States supplies arms to at least 98 nations, and it is the largest supplier to 20 of the 40 largest arms importers in the world. These arms include ammunition such as missiles, various aircraft, submarines, surface ships, anti-submarine weaponry, tanks, armoured vehicles, as well as electronics such as radar, sonar, and guiding systems.

That is all to our great shame.

 

[esmith]

Just my $.02 cents.
We have a treaty with Tawian. This treaty is the Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty (see Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty - Wikipedia). Basically what it says is:
The treaty consists of ten main articles. The content of the treaty included the provision that if one country came under attack, the other would aid and provide military support.

The treaty was limited in application to the defense of the island of Taiwan and the Pescadores only. Kinmen and Matsu were not protected by this treaty. Therefore, the US stood aside during the Second Taiwan Strait Crisis. The treaty also discouraged the Republic of China from initiating any military action against mainland China, since only Taiwan and Pescadores were included and unilateral military actions not supported.

Now the only problem with the idea that some of you have is the idea that the U.S. should not come to the aid of Taiwan is in that we have other mutual defense treaties with other countries. If Taiwan came under attack and the U.S. stood down what signal would this send to the other countries we have treaties with? Very simple...you can not trust the U.S. to live up to their commitments.

As a military veteran I abhor war, but I value my countries freedom more than I abhor war. Therefor we must standup to Chinese aggression because once the Chinese Communist party sees that we will give up anything to avoid a armed conflict with China and or Russia either one or both of them will continue to test the U.S.

I wouldn't want to see it, but I don't know what the future would hold if we didn't live up to our commitments.

 

[Regiomontanus]

Just my $.02 cents.
We have a treaty with Tawian. This treaty is the Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty (see Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty - Wikipedia). Basically what it says is:
The treaty consists of ten main articles. The content of the treaty included the provision that if one country came under attack, the other would aid and provide military support.

The treaty was limited in application to the defense of the island of Taiwan and the Pescadores only. Kinmen and Matsu were not protected by this treaty. Therefore, the US stood aside during the Second Taiwan Strait Crisis. The treaty also discouraged the Republic of China from initiating any military action against mainland China, since only Taiwan and Pescadores were included and unilateral military actions not supported.

Now the only problem with the idea that some of you have is the idea that the U.S. should not come to the aid of Taiwan is in that we have other mutual defense treaties with other countries. If Taiwan came under attack and the U.S. stood down what signal would this send to the other countries we have treaties with? Very simple...you can not trust the U.S. to live up to their commitments.

As a military veteran I abhor war, but I value my countries freedom more than I abhor war. Therefor we must standup to Chinese aggression because once the Chinese Communist party sees that we will give up anything to avoid a armed conflict with China and or Russia either one or both of them will continue to test the U.S.

I wouldn't want to see it, but I don't know what the future would hold if we didn't live up to our commitments.

I...must...not...succumb to whatsboutism and mention Trump's disregard for treaties...

Darn it

Seriously, the message it would send is clear. Times have changed and we are scaling back our empire. We are not going to start a war over Taiwan.



.

 

[Suave]

Just my $.02 cents.
We have a treaty with Tawian. This treaty is the Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty (see Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty - Wikipedia). Basically what it says is:
The treaty consists of ten main articles. The content of the treaty included the provision that if one country came under attack, the other would aid and provide military support.

The treaty was limited in application to the defense of the island of Taiwan and the Pescadores only. Kinmen and Matsu were not protected by this treaty. Therefore, the US stood aside during the Second Taiwan Strait Crisis. The treaty also discouraged the Republic of China from initiating any military action against mainland China, since only Taiwan and Pescadores were included and unilateral military actions not supported.

Now the only problem with the idea that some of you have is the idea that the U.S. should not come to the aid of Taiwan is in that we have other mutual defense treaties with other countries. If Taiwan came under attack and the U.S. stood down what signal would this send to the other countries we have treaties with? Very simple...you can not trust the U.S. to live up to their commitments.

As a military veteran I abhor war, but I value my countries freedom more than I abhor war. Therefor we must standup to Chinese aggression because once the Chinese Communist party sees that we will give up anything to avoid a armed conflict with China and or Russia either one or both of them will continue to test the U.S.

I wouldn't want to see it, but I don't know what the future would hold if we didn't live up to our commitments.

The Sino-American Mutual Defense Treaty was effectively terminated over 40 years ago when the U. S. established diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China.