|
I guess the people of Taiwan don't deserve their representative democracy and homosexuals and indigenous peoples of Taiwan don't deserve rights, because the definitely not imperialist PRC gets whatever they want, for "reasons".
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 19:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 12:44 |
|
|
e: nah
ronya fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Jul 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 19:22
|
|
|
The whole concept that the PRC has a right to conquer and rule everywhere the Qing touched regardless of what the denizens think is absurd on the face of it and could be used to invalidate the sovereignty of 90% of the planet.unwantedplatypus posted:Even if I were to concede that this constitutes imperialism; and I don't think it does. This is an order of magnitude less severe than the Taiwan situation from the US perspective. China is not looking to economically subjugate the population of Taiwan. It's not going to relocate their industry, turn them into permanent debtors, etc. What do you think an autocratic dictatorship will do when it gets control over an area. unwantedplatypus posted:Also your link says nothing about them ignoring the popular opinion of the people. The PRC publicly murdered a few thousand people thirty years ago for daring to say that China should become a democracy, and to this day publicly mourning their deaths is considered a crime. They are not a democracy, abhor the concept of being a democracy, and everything they do is implicitly in ignorance of whatever popular opinion the public they have because there is zero mechanism to integrate the public opinion into the process of governance. On top of that, they sure didn't listen to the Tibetans when they invaded and overthrew their government, they didn't listen to Hong Kong when they changed the constitution to better enforce totalitarian rule, they continuously are not listening to the people of Xinjiang as they round them up into camps, and every time they talk about how they will retake Taiwan, they sure as hell aren't interested in what the people there think about being conquered.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 19:23
|
|
|
Nancy pelosi getting shot down would have two responses from the GOP that are comedic in themselves. She becomes a hero of the Republic or they favor china more because china killed a demoncrat. It's the most comedic option possible. I don't wish it'll happen. The hypothetical is just rediculous
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 19:32
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:The whole concept that the PRC has a right to conquer and rule everywhere the Qing touched regardless of what the denizens think is absurd on the face of it and could be used to invalidate the sovereignty of 90% of the planet. I'm well aware of the current western cultural zeitgeist on China. Quite frankly though, a lot of it seems to be untrue to one degree or another. That's why I'm pointing out that the link provided didn't support one of the claims being made. The source you gave was speculating on China's intentions, not describing something that has actually happened. In edition this speculation is coming from an Australian journal. I can't access anything but the abstract. From the wikipedia article "It started off as a peaceful protest against the government's decision to recognize China over Taiwan. However, it turned out violent as protesters attempted to storm Parliament to depose Prime Minister Sogavare. Businesses, mainly in Honiara's Chinatown district, were burnt and looted. A police station was set on fire. The government responded by deploying the police in which they used tear gas on the protesters. They also requested the Australian Government for support. As a result, Australia deployed the Australian Federal Police and Defence Force. Papua New Guinea and Fiji dispatched peacekeepers while New Zealand deployed police and troops. Prime Minister Sogavare resisted calls to resign, saying that the decision is upon the floor of parliament. A no confidence motion was signed by an opposition member; however, it was defeated in parliament on 6 December 2021 as lawmakers voted to keep the Prime Minister in power." So, we haven't had an actual demonstration of what this security agreement looks like. The president of the Solomons seems above board. It's a stretch to say that what china has done is economically or politically subjugate the solomon islands.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 19:37
|
|
|
Franks Happy Place posted:I guess the people of Taiwan don't deserve their representative democracy and homosexuals and indigenous peoples of Taiwan don't deserve rights, because the definitely not imperialist PRC gets whatever they want, for "reasons". In an ideal world Taiwan could declare independence and be a neutral capitalist alternative to the PRC, attracting any liberals the PRC wanted to get rid of We don't live in an ideal world though. Taiwan/ROC benefits first and foremost from the current status quo. the PRC is definitely not going to accept them being a US ally or being military base for the West. It would be for the best if the USA didn't keep getting involved in the conflict between the two sides.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 19:40
|
|
|
Not So Fast posted:It would be for the best if the USA didn't keep getting involved in the conflict between the two sides. Best for who? It doesn't seem that it would be best for the Taiwanese people, as they would be conquered and their democracy torn down.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 19:58
|
|
|
China has made it clear a good number of times that, ideally, they would prefer the status quo because sieging and then occupying a completely hostile population is a huge headache, and a moneysink, and TSMC is becoming less attractive a get. They've also made it clear that they won't tolerate the island becoming a US base, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 20:04
|
|
|
Taiwan has been Other Israel since the 1950s, receiving both top of the line weapons systems as well as frequent direct military intervention in their support via carrier groups. Acting like American military support for Taiwan is some new red line is... ahistorical. Longer term this is about Nine Dash and control of the Malacca route so they can throw their weight around regionally, and probably specifically right now about distracting people from the domestic banking crisis and Xi going for an unprecedented third term. America could move an entire carrier group from Okinawa to Taiwan and it wouldn't really change the balance of power that has existed since 1949, a fact that won't change until China can solidify the Nine Dash power play they can't
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 20:38
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:At its birth, Taiwan was run by a nationalist dictatorship propped by the US to act as a forward military base of operations against China. The fundamental nature of Taiwan's geopolitical purpose has not changed even as it has liberalized over time. In addition, China is operating within a national context of recovering its economy and territory after the century of humiliation. Therefore saying China is doing imperialism by preventing the US from treating Taiwan like a sovereign country rather than one side of a civil war is ridiculous. Any more than it was "imperialism" to take control of HK after the contract with UK expired. Why is China recovering from a "century of humiliation" relevant to Taiwan independence? Is there a specific interval at which a humiliation should or should not matter?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 21:04
|
|
|
Zachack posted:Why is China recovering from a "century of humiliation" relevant to Taiwan independence? Is there a specific interval at which a humiliation should or should not matter? one of said humiliations was that western powers kept putting puppet rulers in charge of the country who insisted themselves to be the rightful rulers of all China. the last attempted one of these fled across the strait to Taiwan, where he established a classic Cold War "Bastion of Democracy," which is to say that if you voted for the wrong party the Marines would shoot you and your family if the internal security forces didn't get you first. Taiwan's existence as a nation is owed to a failed attempt by western powers to subjugate China, and one of the few consistent through-lines of the last seventy years of American foreign policy is propping it up in the name of hopefully getting a do-over. the Chinese view the century of humiliation as a bad time, which should not be returned to. from the US perspective, it was a golden age, worth investing considerable resources to return to. and for the duration of Taiwan's existence, the American foreign policy establishment has been quite clear with our friends on the island that we support them in exchange for the hope that one day, we can use them to bring the mainland back under our heel. understandably, the Chinese view this as an outcome to be avoided.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 21:43
|
|
|
You think the US supports Taiwan because you think the US believes that Taiwan has a chance of conquering China some day (economically, or militarily, or otherwise)? Am I reading that correctly?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 21:56
|
|
|
For Capital, yes. They didn't say the US was smart to think it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 21:58
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:You think the US supports Taiwan because you think the US believes that Taiwan has a chance of conquering China some day (economically, or militarily, or otherwise)? Am I reading that correctly? Wait? You think the US would try regime change? In an imperial adversary? Its not about conquering china, its about having a legitimate seeming government to assume control in case the PRC ever becomes weak. Western news media practically salivates at the idea of a color revolution in China. unwantedplatypus fucked around with this message at 22:05 on Jul 30, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 22:02
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:You think the US supports Taiwan because you think the US believes that Taiwan has a chance of reconquering China some day? Am I reading that correctly? more accurately, that they can be used as a stepping stone to do a regime change. think along the same lines as the genius plan that went "first we take out Iraq, we stabilize it so we can use it as a staging area, and then we invade Iran." the last seventy years being the last seventy years, a lot of the names and faces involved overlap. is this a delusional belief, absolutely, it was wishful thinking in 1949 and it hasn't gotten any more plausible since then. there's a reason "unleashing Shang" was a Bush family dinner table joke about One Wierd Trick that will fix everything: the China Lobby was a real, powerful, and INCREDIBLY stupid thing in American foreign policy, notable for its continued insistence that if Chiang Kai-Shek took the gloves off he'd finally be able to retake the mainland. to put this in perspective, these people thought the failures of the man who had killed five hundred thousand people in the name of temporary military advantage could only be blamed on an insufficient willingness to be brutal. we backed Chiang in the hopes our puppet would reconquer China, we recognized his rump state in the name of hopefully one day reconquering China, we dumped money into it by the container ship with the goal of keeping our puppet from being absorbed by China, and we continue backing them to this day because we really, really want to have a staging area in the event it looks like we have a shot at making the dream of a puppet China return. this latest round is mostly unrelated to any of that, though; this is just a classic saber-rattling stunt from a politician looking at an ugly near-term political future who hopes to look tough.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 22:15
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:from the US perspective, it was a golden age, worth investing considerable resources to return to. and for the duration of Taiwan's existence, the American foreign policy establishment has been quite clear with our friends on the island that we support them in exchange for the hope that one day, we can use them to bring the mainland back under our heel. I feel like this is a pretty outlandish claim that needs some very heavy support. I don't think it's a serious position Taiwan will invade the mainland.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 22:22
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:Wait? You think the US would try regime change? In an imperial adversary? News media, sure, but the question is wrt US foreign policy not us media. I'm asking this because I follow american foreign policy decently closely and the idea that Taiwan is going to step in in mainland China in the event of the Chinese government failing or becoming week is nothing I've ever come across. It's comparable to suggesting the same about Cuba should the US government ever fail or get revolutioned. Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:more accurately, that they can be used as a stepping stone to do a regime change. think along the same lines as the genius plan that went "first we take out Iraq, we stabilize it so we can use it as a staging area, and then we invade Iran." the last seventy years being the last seventy years, a lot of the names and faces involved overlap. That reasoning makes more sense thanks for explaining. I think you're describing American foreign policy views from 30-40 years ago, though. I don't doubt that Bush Sr in particular fantasized about bringing down the Chinese government and given his pre-president career it was literally his job to imagine that. I'd agree that even in the 80s the idea that Taiwan would someday re-exert itself on the mainland was an almost total longshot, but the potential for that has gone from near zero to less than zero in the decades since. I perceive Taiwan's significance to US foreign policy these days is entirely its strategical significance in trade, tech, manufacturing and it's position as a friendly democracy. That it's a thorn in China's side is I think viewed as a positive, but I don't get the impression that that perspective has much behind it. I don't think any potential utility in a future regime change scenario for china even registers on the scale relative to the US's more tangible interests in Taiwan. I think the idea of a puppet China was a pipe-dream long shot before the GWoT as far as USFP is concerned and I've seen no sign of literally any resurgence of that in the post war on terror era. China's stability is accepted as a fait accompli from a foreign policy perspective as far as I can tell. And it has been for a while. If I'm missing some obvious stuff wrt us foreign policy by all means let me know.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 22:38
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:I feel like this is a pretty outlandish claim that needs some very heavy support. I don't think it's a serious position Taiwan will invade the mainland. as you may be familiar with from recent American history, large segments of our political leadership prefer descending into fantasy to engaging with reality in the wake of a massive loss. you know Joe McCarthy, of McCarthyism fame, yes? his rise is on the back of the first big round of recriminations over Who Lost China. unsurprisingly, his answer was that it was the drat liberals, who were probably communist agents, and as a result had kept Chiang from doing what had to be done to keep the country in line. to these people, Taiwan had to be held, in the name of one day correcting this terrible mistake. now, was it delusional fantasy, absolutely, but the people involved were deadly serious about it. and then as now, when the Republican Party makes a murderous delusion into an act of faith, the Democratic Party treats going along with it as a matter of pragmatic triangulation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 22:45
|
|
|
Ogmius815 posted:One fun fact about China is that they probably don’t have a second strike capacity after a full U.S. missile attack. I don’t think they’ll start a war with the United States over one official visit to Taiwan. There is so much wrong with this post. Beginning with the assumption that the PRC doesn't have at least a counter-value nuclear response if they absorb a theoretical first strike, the line of thinking that the US would somehow be willing to commit to a debilitating first strike strategy if something theoretical was to happen to Pelosi or her visit, and that the PRC will turn the dial 100% to a full-scale military conflict that would somehow necessitate the US looking at nuclear weapons as a remotely reasonable option. ronya posted:what I don't get: why not do a Gingrich and offer to visit Beijing just before visiting Taipei This isn't the late 90s when China was still a junior partner in the economic and diplomatic realm and you could effectively talk down to them and they would eat it with a grin. The point of a Pelosi visit isn't any real business other than to stick it to the PRC and piss them off. Visiting Beijing first wouldn't present the right image. Neurolimal posted:China has made it clear a good number of times that, ideally, they would prefer the status quo because sieging and then occupying a completely hostile population is a huge headache, and a moneysink, and TSMC is becoming less attractive a get. Do you mean the status quo of constantly eroding the Taiwanese balance of power both diplomatically and militarily until it has no choice but to submit to Beijing? Yes of course they would prefer that. But they have grown increasingly anxious and impatient in recent years. They correctly view that the Taiwan issue is no longer benign and cordoned off from the rest of the relationship between itself and the US and the international community. Both Washington and Beijing, along with every other regional player in South and East Asia, have come to grips with the fact that the US turn to the Pacific means the relationship has become adversarial and that Taiwan is one of the biggest chips in play economically, strategically, and militarily. From a prestige standpoint, Taiwan is something neither side can afford to budge on. The CCP cannot accept the loss of face both domestically and internationally should Taiwan be seen to move towards formal independence with international recognition. Such a move would strip the PRC of all credibility and invite challenges from smaller regional powers to oppose Beijing on all fronts. After all, if you were not willing to intervene over something that you have declared a core issue to you since the inception of modern China, then what will you intervene over (If we accept this, what won't we accept)? Similarly for Washington, a capitulation by Taipei on any other grounds other than a referendum in which the Taiwanese choose to rejoin the mainland would seriously undermine US credibility to its allies and partners in the region - relationships that the US has tried hard to cultivate over the past decade as it faces off against the PRC and seeks to contain its influence in order to retain its place as the preeminent global power. The tables have turned somewhat though. The proverbial can that Beijing was more than happy to keep kicking down the road has now turned into something that it cannot allow Washington to pick up. Whereas Beijing always viewed that time was on its side going back to the days of normalization, it is now the Americans who are happy with the status quo as preserving would maintain a troublesome thorn in Beijing's side as the US completes its strategic vision for how a cordon against China would work the rest of this century. So long as Taiwan and the first island chain remain intact, the US and its allies retain the edge on other issues beyond. In years past the Taiwan issue was one where there was a reasonably broad highway and Taipei had a lot of wiggle room. Now it appears that path increasingly resembles a narrow mountain ridge with cliffs on either side as Beijing grows ever more impatient.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 23:00
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:as you may be familiar with from recent American history, large segments of our political leadership prefer descending into fantasy to engaging with reality in the wake of a massive loss. you know Joe McCarthy, of McCarthyism fame, yes? his rise is on the back of the first big round of recriminations over Who Lost China. unsurprisingly, his answer was that it was the drat liberals, who were probably communist agents, and as a result had kept Chiang from doing what had to be done to keep the country in line. to these people, Taiwan had to be held, in the name of one day correcting this terrible mistake. You have somehow retreated even further back in time and also made zero argument for your original claim.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2022 23:00
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:You have somehow retreated even further back in time and also made zero argument for your original claim. On 2 separate occasions in the 50s, China fought a war with Taiwan and the United States backed the fascist RoC. This was not in defense of "democracy" because lol it was a military dictatorship. So there is a notable history of the United States using Taiwan to fight China as it has happened multiple times. Edit: oh poo poo, I thought this was usce. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) Cpt_Obvious fucked around with this message at 00:23 on Jul 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 00:16
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:one of said humiliations was that western powers kept putting puppet rulers in charge of the country who insisted themselves to be the rightful rulers of all China. To be clear the “country” you mean is Taiwan, not China, right? Because puppet rulers is the thing on the imperialism bingo card that the west never actually got to do in China. China had Manchu emperors followed by warlordism and CKS was their home grown Mussolini, who started off immensely popular precisely because he was a unifying nationalist figure who was kicking the rear end of the other warlords. He only starts looking like a US puppet after losing the civil war and being reduced to control of a single island, at which point the US steps in to prevent Mao from invading and the balance of power between him and the US irrevocably changes. Up until this point he has had support at different times from each of Hitler’s Germany, the Soviet Union and the US/UK because that’s what 1930s dictators playing the great powers off against each other did. Anyone in charge of a unified China isn’t going to be the puppet of another country because a unified China not being run by a Manchu military aristocracy that has lost its military strength is intrinsically very strong, as the USSR discovered. (Separately it’s hard to overstate just how bad the late Qing state was at governing, hoo boy.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 01:19
|
|
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:
Bigger issues come from The DPP has a pretty good shot of becoming the dominant party in the country if they win the 2024 presidential election. In comparison to several other east Asian democracies, Taiwan evolved into a two-party dominant system that has had several successful transitions of power between the KMT and DPP. However, especially after the HK protests of 2014, 2018-2019, younger people especially are voting DPP because they see their future if they were ever to rejoin the mainland. If they KMT had any chance of winning in 2024 maybe things would calm down, but with their own party stepping on a series of rakes, the DPP generally getting good marks on their own covid response (up to this year, so we see how that goes), it doesn't look good. The KMT itself has an image problem inside the country - it is very easy to smear the politicians here when it looks like they are getting "too close" to China.  And when the KMT thinks they are going to get more votes by dragging out great grandsons of Chiang and think that will get them the presidency? Dumb, dumb, dumb. If the KMT could somehow win, I think things will settle down, because that is who China wants in charge. But I don't think they will. After decades of stronger economic cooperation between China and Taiwan, including during the 00-08 A-Bian era, since 2020 there have been several high profile agricultural bans of Taiwanese products inside China, so much so that the US and Japan now take in more stuff. I don't think this going to end Foxconn: I've never seen news about manufacturing and factory ownership being an issue (it could be, if anyone has links). This is also why the death of Abe was big news here: he was directly involved in getting Japan to buy Taiwan agriculture, and helped get Taiwan RNA vaccines when the gov. bet it all on AZ. These are the issues Taiwanese voters care about. And it makes the mainland look bad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 02:02
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:as you may be familiar with from recent American history, large segments of our political leadership prefer descending into fantasy to engaging with reality in the wake of a massive loss. you know Joe McCarthy, of McCarthyism fame, yes? his rise is on the back of the first big round of recriminations over Who Lost China. unsurprisingly, his answer was that it was the drat liberals, who were probably communist agents, and as a result had kept Chiang from doing what had to be done to keep the country in line. to these people, Taiwan had to be held, in the name of one day correcting this terrible mistake. You say recent US history, and then cite as an example someone who died, in disgrace, in 1957. Maybe it wasn't a laughable idea then, but it has been for my entire lifetime. You are peddling a conspiracy theory as if it were supported fact. "and then as now, when the Republican Party makes a murderous delusion into an act of faith, the Democratic Party treats going along with it as a matter of pragmatic triangulation." implies that this is currently the case. I think this stretch is a way to try and defend the indefensible: PRC's saber rattling about invading its neighbor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 02:52
|
|
|
Taiwan is such a politically free, popular-will driven country you get to choose between the literal Kuomintang or the other guys. Yay democracy! (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) unwantedplatypus fucked around with this message at 03:04 on Jul 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 03:01
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:Taiwan is such a politically free, popular-will driven country you get to choose between the literal Kuomintang or the other guys. Yay democracy! Isn't that true for most two party systems nowadays tho? You tend to get bad vs horrible as an option.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 03:12
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:Taiwan is such a politically free, popular-will driven country you get to choose between the literal Kuomintang or the other guys. Yay democracy! If you are in favor of eventual unification, which by your posting I can assume you are, then you would be in favor of the KMT. The DPP and any smaller parties (NPP, TPP) are less inclined to want that to happen. I don't think you will ever see Tsai or Lai/Chen/whoever runs for the DPP in 24 is going to meet with Xi like Ma did in Singapore in 2015. If you wanna see Taiwan take over tbe mainland you're voting for Soong or another crackpot. GoutPatrol fucked around with this message at 03:22 on Jul 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 03:18
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:Isn't that true for most two party systems nowadays tho? You tend to get bad vs horrible as an option. Yes, liberal democracy is a failing system. It neither represents the will of the populace nor responds effectively to crises. GoutPatrol posted:If you are in favor of eventual unification, which by your posting I can assume you are, then you would be in favor of the KMT. The DPP and any smaller parties (NPP, TPP) are less inclined to want that to happen. I don't think you will ever see Tsai or Lai/Chen/whoever runs for the DPP in 24 is going to meet with Xi like Ma did in Singapore in 2015. I don't have a strong opinion on Taiwan other than the US is using the country to threaten China and should withdraw troops and funding. unwantedplatypus fucked around with this message at 03:59 on Jul 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 03:54
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:Yes, liberal democracy is a failing system. It neither represents the will of the populace nor responds effectively to crises. It certainly seems like you're not taking into account what the Taiwanese people want, which is some combination of the status quo + self autonomy. And everytime China does something that looks to bring about greater unification, the Taiwanese people are voting against the politicians who support that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 04:05
|
|
|
Taiwanese voters - and the US - back whoever is perceived to be defending the cross-straits status quo and reject whoever seems to be provoking trouble e.g., the US commitment to Taiwan is not a "without limits" endorsement of Taiwanese self-determination, to borrow a phrase, but rather is openly contingent on Taiwan not provoking the end of peace - a decade ago: quote:The Obama administration has warned that a victory by Tsai Ing-wen, the Taiwanese opposition leader, in the island’s January presidential election could raise tensions with China. This was essentially an open snub to the DPP's "Taiwan consensus"/anti-1992-consensus programme, and Tsai went on to lose the 2012 election Subsequently in 2015 Tsai pitched 'consistency, predictability, and sustainability' and then received a red-carpet visit to the White House, and won the next year; it would not be until 2019 (on the eve of the 2020 elections, and under siege within her tent from green radicals) that Tsai would renew the attack on the 1992 consensus in response to Xi's provocative speech early that year This also extends to Taiwanese voters at home, of course - Chen's earlier administration is read (fairly or not) as having provoked relationships to little gain, whereas Tsai is holding out an olive branch and restraining the deep greens. And not getting terribly rewarded for it by Beijing, sure, but that's not something Taiwanese voters seem to blame her for Conversely Xi is less interested in maintaining Taiwanese support for peaceful reunification, hence equivocating in 2019 between the "1992 consensus" (a negotiating framework for mutual recognition, supported by the CCP and KMT alike, and reasonably mainstream in Taiwan still, if retreating) and "one country, two systems" (which is not supported in Taiwan and has taken a further pasting from Hong Kong being a visible instance of what Beijing thinks that phrase means) - simply because it is the CCP's own position at home. This put the KMT itself in an awkward position and the KMT went on to take an unprecedented pasting in 2020, with Tsai gleefully using "the KMT backs one country, two systems" and "the KMT will make Taiwan unto Hong Kong" as attacks There's always been sabre rattling, that's not new, but it matters who audiences in Beijing or Taiwan blame for "trouble"; trouble arises if those interpretations diverge
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 04:12
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:It certainly seems like you're not taking into account what the Taiwanese people want, which is some combination of the status quo + self autonomy. And everytime China does something that looks to bring about greater unification, the Taiwanese people are voting against the politicians who support that. Seeing every geopolitical problem as a call to action for the US is exactly how you get Libya , Afghanistan, Iraq, and every other one of our imperial blunders and atrocities of the last century. In addition, US aid in Taiwan will have the same effect as US aid to Ukraine. It will turn a short war into a long one. And long wars can ruin a country and it's people. And lastly, frankly, I'd like to see the military budget cut to the bone and spent internally. That's much better bang for your buck when it comes to actually helping people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 04:20
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:You say recent US history, and then cite as an example someone who died, in disgrace, in 1957. Maybe it wasn't a laughable idea then, but it has been for my entire lifetime. you are intimately familiar with what it looks like when Americans descend into furious delusions rather than admit failure, but if you need me to spell it out for you, I will. there was a bunch of hollering about how Russians had stolen the election from Hillary in 2016, and a bunch of hollering about how something involving a server farm in Germany, the Venezuelans, and a grab bag of the Qanon extended universe were responsible for stealing the election from Trump in 2020. you can take some reassurance from the knowledge that these desperate refusals to acknowledge reality are not a new development, and in fact one of them served as the foundation of American policy regarding China since ~1949. the Republican Party made some real hay out of accusing anyone and everyone in the Roosevelt and Truman administrations of being soft on communism, and therefore responsible for losing China. this much is a thoroughly undisputed matter of historical record. and so, in the interests of trying to look tough on an issue, the democrats moved rightwards to agree with them. Taiwan was established by an American-backed military dictator, to serve as a base from which to recuperate, and (in the eyes of those who funded him) from which they might one day strike to reestablish a China that was puppet of Western powers. American foreign policy has been clear for seventy years that we support Taiwan because we consider it a viable threat to China; why be upset that China agrees with our assessment?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 05:33
|
|
|
In between who-lost-China and today was the entire Shanghai Communiqué period where the mainland was the American ally of choice in the Cold War, and suddenly the US State Department found it acceptable to ratchet up the pressure to democratize and liberalise on Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Singapore, etc. You can't really write that a partnership with the US is anathema in Beijing, because it very much enthusiastically embraced it whilst it was an option As US foreign policy goes, the US has actually been rather pragmatic on its support, and entirely willing to condition that support on accepting American democracy promotion amongst its erstwhile regional allies Singapore aside (which did not receive an invitation to Biden's democracy-themed soirée last year), American promotion of liberalisation the moment these countries were no longer immediately geopolitically critical has resulted in the formation of liberal democracies (which remain generally enthusiastic US allies at their newfound ballot boxes). Which really counts as a proud success as notional DC goals go? It says National Endowment for Democracy on the tin. ronya fucked around with this message at 06:09 on Jul 31, 2022 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 05:53
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:I don't have a strong opinion on Taiwan other than the US is using the country to threaten China and should withdraw troops and funding. Do you think the 39 US troops in Taiwan are really threatening the mainland? https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4355230
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 07:24
|
|
|
unwantedplatypus posted:In addition, US aid in Taiwan will have the same effect as US aid to Ukraine. It will cause China to undertake an incompetent, unprovoked invasion of Taiwan where the invaders carry out brutal crimes against the civilian population? quote:It will turn a short war into a long one. Oh, you mean it will allow Taiwan to defend themselves against an incompetent, unprovoked invasion by China where the invaders carry out brutal crimes against the civilian population. And you consider that to be a bad thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 08:15
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:It will cause China to undertake an incompetent, unprovoked invasion of Taiwan where the invaders carry out brutal crimes against the civilian population? Taiwan/ROC is not going to win in a war against the PRC, especially as time goes on and they get more powerful. With US aid they have a chance but then they also pose more of a threat and so are more likely to face an invasion. Even if you dislike the PRC, and I can appreciate most people in this thread do, they're not going away - working out a negotiated settlement now between Taiwan / ROC and the PRC would be better than an escalation to a bloody war.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 08:31
|
|
|
Horatius Bonar posted:Do you think the 39 US troops in Taiwan are really threatening the mainland? They are a violation of the agreements the US made with PRC in the 3 joint communiques. In that sense they are a bright red flag to China
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 08:34
|
|
|
With all due respect, I'm not sure how someone can observe the current war and come to the conclusion that a smaller island (in both geography and population) with no easy methods of resupply would see any success against a country with quadruple the defense budget and undecuple the manpower of its equivalent in the comparison. There's a reason that Taiwan, beyond the public grandstanding, is also in favor of the status quo.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 11:25
|
|
|
The status quo is actually a brilliant compromise. Basically all nations and the UN recognize Taiwan is a part of China. Which allows China to save face and hold out hope for peaceful reunification. On the other hand Taiwan enjoys de facto independence. It’s a win for everyone. Those trying to disrupt this status quo are foolish, playing with fire, and are more anti-China than they are pro-Taiwan
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 13:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 12:44 |
|
|
Red and Black posted:The status quo is actually a brilliant compromise. Basically all nations and the UN recognize Taiwan is a part of China. Which allows China to save face and hold out hope for peaceful reunification. On the other hand Taiwan enjoys de facto independence. It’s a win for everyone. This is a tricky position to maintain given that the status quo is being unilaterally undermined.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2022 13:58
|
|
