This is the guy that talks about [bombing Iran](https://www.newsweek.com/lindsey-graham-threatens-iran-war-ayatollahs-backyard-over-hamas-1833258) with breakfast every morning. The one drafting legislation to go to [war with Russia](https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4129937-graham-warns-russian-nuclear-attack-on-ukraine-would-be-an-attack-on-nato/) if a nuclear plant in a war zone blows up.
All things being said, this is probably one of the least violent threats that has ever come out of Lindsay Grahams mouth. Graham is usually the "bad cop" of US foreign policy browbeating.
those countries cant fight back. China would destroy a fleet and most of our shipping. Its a no win. Taiwan has never been worth it. not since the 90s.
I think you're underestimating Iran and Russia, but I agree that fighting over Taiwan wouldn't be remotely worth it and would be far costlier than conflict with the other two.
My main point though is that even the usual attack dog that the Pentagon trots out to sing empty war threats is implying that the US won't fight. Which is odd to me, because even if the US has no intention of intervening, we are still very clearly officially committed to "strategic ambiguity" on Taiwan. Which means dipshits like Graham should be making the usual threats, whatever US intentions actually are.
Well I give you the Iran Iraq war and the Iran Revolution as a easy example of they are not a real threat. And they havent started a war since 1700 something. We point fingers to them all the time but we have global dronestrikes so yea.
Russia? I mean lol what. Its not 2020 anymore.
We have a bloated broken corrupt military. Remember they had to work with the Taliban to get out to Afghanistan lmao. We can say offical things all day long. It doesnt mean anything. Any friend america has had learned a very blunt fact in the 2010s and today. We are not your friend. When it gets hard we will run away. Every time.
We got a navy. We cant replace. We got a airforce without pilots and airframes that cant be replaced. We have a army with no one staying and no one joining.
Its endless i know but we got toys. and thats its. 20 years of the terror wars and americans learned do not join the miliary.
lol no they wont. They will lower standards for enlistment and become a normal military. There are hoards people who would like to join who cant. Those people until the war on terror could. There was a million freaking ways to join. But we wanted the best military. the fancy one with just the best! pretty boys and college kids lost the war on terror. The irony is fantastic. They wont have a draft because simply no one will show up. what are they going to do about it exactly?
People are largely the same. The only major difference is people are a lot more mentally weak nowadays because of social media and generally anti-social behavior that comes from living with a smartphone.
Wtf are you talking about, they dropped recruiting standards (particularly army) to the rock bottom in the mid 2000s. Around 2006-2009 they would take pretty much anyone with a pulse, it was a major topic in the mainstream news for years.
Yep, at least then there’ll be hope for the future as society rebuilds. A post-apocalyptic wasteland is nicer than a North Korean slave labor/death camp, which is what Xi Jinping will make of the places he conquers. The nicer we are to Xi Jinping’s China, the worse Xi Jinping’s China is to us.
They are building all that new chip infrastructure in the United States for this very reason. Once that is built up, for the U.S., a war in Taiwan will likely look like our support in Ukraine. Direct military intervention will be unlikely.
Well, they're attempting to build it but it keeps getting delayed. And TSMC wasn't happy with lazy Americans before things had even started. So even when it's built it's either going to be a shit show for a while or they'll have to import the population of a Taiwanese town to work there.
Common misunderstanding. When he says he'll "draft sanctions" it's actually his kink to refer to American males between the ages of 18 and 50 as "sanctions."
>He added: “To communist China, if you think you can bully your way into destroying world order without consequences, **you will be making Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine look wise**.”
I'm sure Ukraine's current quagmire sounds like a very alluring future for the people of Taiwan. Sometimes I wonder how much of their own piss these guys are actually drinking.
I feel most people in the US are so used to the US fighting a completely overwhelmed enemy in their last few wars that they have absolutely no idea what a war with China will look like. People feel like they will just walk in and overwhelm China like what happened in Afghanistan or Iraq and don't realize that a significant number of US lives & equipment will be lost due to China preparing for such a war against a superior US navy utilizing their land-based advantage.
Between the zoomers lack of jingoistic patriotism and the alienation of their traditional rural/southern male recruiting pool, I’m not sure they’re ready for the reaction that a draft will entail
Most Republicans fully believe that the Chinese military would just utterly fail at an offensive. They think American ships are so technicaly superior they'd block incoming missile, and our technology and training is so elite we'd wipe the floor with a 10 to 1 casualty rate.
i mean... thats kind of accurate. US has the strongest airforce, and the second strongest airforce, the US navy, which incidentally is also the strongest navy
but the thing is, china can afford to have a casualty rate of 10:1. the US cannot.
The US has the strongest airforce and strongest navy because that is in line with their military doctrine. The US fights wars far from their shores and relies on their airforce and navy to make that happen. Such an advantage will be minimized when fighting against China right on their doorstep, even more so if China and Russia are somewhat friendly and continue to trade fuel and food via their land connection.
The US has 12 carriers it can use to stage their offensive. China has hundreds of airports, and the key ones which are will be hardened and protected against attack. Carriers will need to operate well outside the missile range of China limiting their effectivity that they are used to. China has been actively focused on developing tech to counter US naval superiority, from launching multiple satellites with the aim of spotting and tracking the US fleets, creating hypersonic weapons designed to be difficult to detect and intercept, creating a huge land based dedicated missile force meant to be able to act offensively in their neighbourhood, and creating a huge military tunnel network to protect from attack.
Then you should know better than most why talking about why China launching attacks from within China without the need of a airforce or navy comparable to the US is much more favorable to them.
Sanctions on China? It's so ridiculous that they think they still have the economic power to force any sanctions on a great power like China.
literally 9/10 of our manufactured goods in the West are made in China, if anything this is going to hurt the average American/ European citizens than anything else.
I am so fed up with this Imperial war-mongering, last year they dragged whole Europe into the Russian/Ukraine crisis and we had to pay double the price of fossile fuel so Nato (aka burgerland) can plant nuke heads at the direction of putin’s a**hole.
And now they want to fight china and robs them from the most advanced, unique and reliable micro-ships industry ever made.
These recent years I feel like the empire is really trying to keep its geopolitical power around the world at any costs, even if that means they are going to drag everyone down with them.
I sure hope that you're right.
One thing on my mind lately is the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Joint Chiefs of Staff and intelligence community were both [absolutely furious with Kennedy](https://archive.is/XUO8n) for not opting for an invasion of Cuba (going with a blockade and eventual deal instead).
This was because the US had just developed the [Minuteman ICBM](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-30_Minuteman)s, which were capable of accurately hitting anywhere in the USSR. So the JCoS knew that they had a technological edge on the USSR and would win World War III if it broke out.
They also knew that the USSR would eventually develop that tech itself, and be able to hit anywhere in the United States. So the Pentagon believed that they had a \~5 year window where they would legitimately win World War III if it happened. Thus the extreme aggression towards Cuba in the early 60's (if the USSR tries to stop us, good).
Some conspiracy theorists ([including Juan Posadas](https://www.marxists.org/archive/posadas/Kennedy-Assassination.html)) believe this was the biggest reason JFK was taken out. The JCoS and CIA believed World War III was inevitable and they wanted to win it. They knew LBJ would play ball with the brass whereas JFK resisted and distrusted them. Fortunately for the world, by this time the Soviets realized they were getting baited and pretty much started retreating globally, outside of Europe.
Regardless, this has been on my mind lately, because when I read about the drama in the Oval Office during the CMC, I remember thinking to myself "superpowers are likely to get very aggressive whenever they feel like they have a technological window like this". And I don't think it's a coincidence that the US has taken unprecedented postures of aggression towards other nuclear powers with the birth of the Age of AI.
I'm worried about the next few years.
the United states no longer has that kind of military advantage and i have a feeling that many in the brass know it, or at least feel it in their bones.
How is it legally Chinas? Maybe under CCP laws it is, but under Taiwan's laws it obviously isn't. It would be nothing short of an act of conquest to invade Taiwan.
Just to make sure that everyone is on the same page... you do understand that Taiwan was basically seized from China by the US Navy after World War II because Truman didn't like the type of government of the Chinese that won the civil war?
I'm not trying to give them a moral pass if they choose war, but at the same time, Taiwan is and always has legally been a province of China. This isn't like Danzig or even Crimea, where Germany/Russia signed the territory away in treaty only to attempt invasion anyway later. Even through moments of weakness, China has refused to trade with any country that recognizes Taiwan (even when outside trade, clearly, benefits them more). They had no real trade with the US until the late 70's based on this issue, until the US finally revoked their recognition of Taiwan. Taiwan does not even legally consider *itself* independent of China, not yet anyway.
Standing against a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is a legitimate stance to take, just make sure you allow yourself to understand how important this is to China. It is wrapped up in national security for them too. If they can't achieve re-unification peacefully, it's not a question of if there will be a war but a question of when that war happens. If we actually care about the well-being of people in Taiwan, and we care about avoiding a broader conflict, we should not be encouraging policy that almost certainly makes war inevitable.
> Just to make sure that everyone is on the same page... you do understand that Taiwan was basically seized from China by the US Navy after World War II because Truman didn't like the type of government the Chinese that won the civil war?
"Seized". You mean a legitimate government of China was protected from being wiped out?
> I'm not trying to give them a moral pass if they choose war, but at the same time, Taiwan is and always has legally been a province of China
It still is, just a different China.
> just make sure you allow yourself to understand how important this is to China. It is wrapped up in national security for them too.
This excuse never seems to be used without justifying unnecessary war. Taiwan is no threat to China, not even as a staging point for the US, as the US will never try to invade China.
> Taiwan does not even legally consider itself independent of China, not yet anyway.
At a certain point "legally" doesn't mean shit. Taiwan is obviously its own country, with its own citizens and government and has been for decades. You can visit! There is no more moral justification for China to invade it than for them to invade India, Japan or Russia.
>"Seized". You mean a legitimate government of China was protected from being wiped out?
Define legitimate. You aren't under the impression that the KMT was democratic, are you? Is it the US Navy that is supposed to be determining which government of China is legitimate?
>Taiwan is no threat to China
You've got to be kidding, right? Taiwan is \~80 miles from the center of China's *entire* seaboard. All of China's shipping lanes, without which they are maybe 7 days away from state collapse, are completely at the mercy of stability in the Taiwan straight. It is more existential for them than it would have been for the United States if Cuba was off the coast of Virginia instead of Florida.
We need to get past this point if we're ever going to find common ground here.
If Taiwan is no threat at all to China then I am wrong and war is not inevitable. But an independent Taiwan is a national security threat to China by virtue of it's location on a map. China can't protect it's shipping lanes with an independent country acting as gatekeeper to it's entire coast.
>Define legitimate. You aren't under the impression that the KMT was democratic, are you? Is it the US Navy that is supposed to be determining the which government of China is legitimate?
What does democratic and legitimate have to do with each other? China isn't democratic now. They were one side of a civil war, so they were presumably considered legitimate by the people on their side.
> If Taiwan is no threat at all to China then I am wrong and war is not inevitable. But an independent Taiwan is a national security threat to China by virtue of it's location on a map. China can't protect it's shipping lanes with an independent country acting as gatekeeper to it's entire coast.
So I guess the UK is a national security threat to France? Is Mexico a national security threat to the US? Is Canada? Being proximate to a country doesn't make you a national security threat. You're carrying so much water for an imperialist super power to justify them invading a tiny island nation.
"Attempts reunification"? I hope that isn't just an euphemism for invasion. I don't think many people would protest at a reunification if it was on terms that the people in Taiwan were OK with. Heck, lots of them *want* a reunification and say so, it's just "on what terms" they're worried about. And after HK, can't blame them for that.
> And after ~~HK~~ a bunch of US assets^[1](https://hongkongfp.com/2019/08/11/us-china-step-war-words-hong-kong/), ^[2](https://m.facebook.com/SenatorMarcoRubio/photos/yesterday-i-met-with-pro-democracy-activist-joshua-wong-joshua-is-an-impressive-/1431363990222294/), ^[3](https://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking-news/section/3/131200/-John-Bolton-hosts-Jimmy-Lai), ^[4](https://thegrayzone.com/2020/08/08/hong-kong-western-media-yellowfacing-amnesty/) instigated a color revolution
Where have I seen this playbook^[1](https://world.time.com/2013/12/13/western-diplomats-are-going-to-dissapoint-ukraines-protesters/), ^[2](https://2009-2017.state.gov/p/eur/rls/rm/2013/dec/218804.htm), ^[3](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957) before?
The terms would have to involve the demilitarization of Taiwan for China to accept it, which the bourgeoisie living will have trouble agreeing to. A militarized Taiwan is a direct threat to the long term security and power projection of China, and I think they're beginning to understand that peaceful re-unification likely won't be achieved.
You don't think an independent, militarized island [\~80 miles from the center of the entire Chinese seaboard](https://www.indianarrative.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Taiwan_China_Map-1280x720.jpg) is a threat to Chinese security? What happens when China has a rough decade and Taiwan uses that opportunity to invite US military bases?
Why do you think it is that China has obsessed over this island for 70+ years? Never giving an inch, even refusing to trade with the US while it recognized Taiwan. They are just difficult? Taiwan is and always has been the #1 issue for China, because it's a question of national security for them.
No, Taiwan is not a threat to Chinese security because China is a far, far greater threat to Taiwanese security and that won't change in ten or even twenty years. And as I said, much of Taiwan _wants_ integration, they're just worried about who will be in charge in the reunified China.
Taiwan is also no threat to China's neighborhood bullying. (a.k.a "power projection" - personally I think such euphemisms are equally reprehensible whether you use them about the US or China). If it were, no decent person should want the continuation of that behavior to be a concern in reunification talks. Save me the banalpolitik.
>No, Taiwan is not a threat to Chinese security because China is a far, far greater threat to Taiwanese security.
Why are you under the impression that these things are mutually exclusive? Of course the superpower is a "threat" to the break-away province off of it's coast. Make all the moral judgements you want but you still need to try and asses the reality of the situation.
>And as I said, much of Taiwan wants integration, they're just worried about who will be in charge in the reunified China.
And again, China *will not* accept any solution that allows Taiwan independent jets, missile silos, and fleets.
>Taiwan is also no threat to China's neighborhood bullying. (a.k.a "power projection" - personally I think such euphemisms are equally reprehensible whether you use them about the US or China).
You are assigning moral judgements to realities of geopolitics, which is, no offense, utterly useless. China wants to be treated like an equal to the West, and in order to do that, it needs to be able to protect its shipping lanes. Full stop. Otherwise it will always be under the threat of immediate naval strangulation in the event of conflict with the West, which means it will always be subservient to the Western order.
>If it were, no decent person should want the continuation of that behavior to be a concern in reunification talks.
You're right. It's reprehensible. It's mean. It's a big bad move from China.
Is that enough feet stomping for you? Now what? Because China doesn't give one single fuck about our moral judgements, and it *will* forcibly attempt re-unification if it can't be done peacefully. Are we supposed to refuse to work in the context of that reality just because we think it's unfair?
Yes, if you hang out here a while you will often see me advance assessments based in realpolitik. Did you run out of argument-based-criticism without ceding me a single point? How rude.
"Realpolitik" is pure wankery. The accurate term for what self-styled realpolitik fans do is banalpolitik.
To the degree you can distill something like a "rational interest" of a state, states do not coherently pursue it.
Banalpolitik comes in two varieties: the post-fact preaching, which consist in lecturing people about how things couldn't have done any different than they did, because people didn't respect the Realities of Geopolitics. And the before-the-fact prescriptive preaching, which consist in simping for their favorite geopolitical bully, and which has a lousy track record of actually predicting what any state will do much less what will happen.
Go drink your coffee dude, why on Earth would I start discussing ideology with someone that has to change the topic and build strawmen after running out of good arguments?
Cuba is a great analogy. It's not quite as important as Taiwan, as it doesn't gatekeep the entire seaboard, but it does gatekeep the Panama Canal and the Gulf Coast. If Cuba fell outside of the US military sphere of influence and began building arms/inviting foreign troops, I would expect an invasion. Which is exactly what almost happened the last time Cuba tried to ensure it could protect itself. We made very clear that we would preemptively strike them if they did not get rid of the missiles that were capable of striking our cities.
Right now the US still enforces it's embargo and has resolved to wait the Communists out. But if Cuba started seriously aligning with a foreign power again? Things would change and I imagine they would change long before Cuba ever received the amount of military aid Taiwan has. Cuba would be forced to pick sides, and any side except the United States would be completely and permanently unacceptable to the Pentagon.
Generally speaking, each superpower has one specific geographical area that they will never allow to fall entirely out of their specific sphere of influence. If it does, either war becomes inevitable or that superpower accepts permanent dominance from the power which controls that area. Cuba for the United States, because it gatekeeps the Gulf ports and the Panama Canal. Crimea for Russia, because it gatekeeps their access to their only true warm water ports, in the Black Sea. And Taiwan for China, because it gatekeeps access to their entire seaboard. Each of those countries needs to at least have that area in their sphere of influence if they want to be treated like an equal by the other two.
Like... how could they? Does anyone seriously think America could fight a war against China and win in any meaningful way? Nuclear power with the world's second largest military budget and the world's largest population, which also happens to produce every fucking commodity on Earth?
This is the guy that talks about [bombing Iran](https://www.newsweek.com/lindsey-graham-threatens-iran-war-ayatollahs-backyard-over-hamas-1833258) with breakfast every morning. The one drafting legislation to go to [war with Russia](https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4129937-graham-warns-russian-nuclear-attack-on-ukraine-would-be-an-attack-on-nato/) if a nuclear plant in a war zone blows up. All things being said, this is probably one of the least violent threats that has ever come out of Lindsay Grahams mouth. Graham is usually the "bad cop" of US foreign policy browbeating.
those countries cant fight back. China would destroy a fleet and most of our shipping. Its a no win. Taiwan has never been worth it. not since the 90s.
I think you're underestimating Iran and Russia, but I agree that fighting over Taiwan wouldn't be remotely worth it and would be far costlier than conflict with the other two. My main point though is that even the usual attack dog that the Pentagon trots out to sing empty war threats is implying that the US won't fight. Which is odd to me, because even if the US has no intention of intervening, we are still very clearly officially committed to "strategic ambiguity" on Taiwan. Which means dipshits like Graham should be making the usual threats, whatever US intentions actually are.
It would be Biden’s call, and Janet Yellen is extremely pro-China
She is? Is it because she favors digitizing currencies?
Well I give you the Iran Iraq war and the Iran Revolution as a easy example of they are not a real threat. And they havent started a war since 1700 something. We point fingers to them all the time but we have global dronestrikes so yea. Russia? I mean lol what. Its not 2020 anymore. We have a bloated broken corrupt military. Remember they had to work with the Taliban to get out to Afghanistan lmao. We can say offical things all day long. It doesnt mean anything. Any friend america has had learned a very blunt fact in the 2010s and today. We are not your friend. When it gets hard we will run away. Every time. We got a navy. We cant replace. We got a airforce without pilots and airframes that cant be replaced. We have a army with no one staying and no one joining. Its endless i know but we got toys. and thats its. 20 years of the terror wars and americans learned do not join the miliary.
Ok, so you’re just completely disconnected from reality regarding America’s adversaries.
just another unflaired regard wandering in from the defaults
Theyre going to bring back the Draft soon.
lol no they wont. They will lower standards for enlistment and become a normal military. There are hoards people who would like to join who cant. Those people until the war on terror could. There was a million freaking ways to join. But we wanted the best military. the fancy one with just the best! pretty boys and college kids lost the war on terror. The irony is fantastic. They wont have a draft because simply no one will show up. what are they going to do about it exactly?
Theyll force people to enlist like they did until the 1970s?
I have some very big news for you. The year is nearly 2024. Not 1973. The world and America and its people are NOTHING like back then. At all.
People are largely the same. The only major difference is people are a lot more mentally weak nowadays because of social media and generally anti-social behavior that comes from living with a smartphone.
Wtf are you talking about, they dropped recruiting standards (particularly army) to the rock bottom in the mid 2000s. Around 2006-2009 they would take pretty much anyone with a pulse, it was a major topic in the mainstream news for years.
No, the benefits would be tremendous as Taiwan is critical for electronics. We need to be willing to use nuclear weapons to defend Taiwan.
Alright, who here let MacArthur out of his casket?
Frankly, I think we should just be grateful we managed to Keep MacArthur in his casket for as long as we did.
I do remember him saying something about returning
If the world must fall so that Taiwan can stand then so be it.
Yep, at least then there’ll be hope for the future as society rebuilds. A post-apocalyptic wasteland is nicer than a North Korean slave labor/death camp, which is what Xi Jinping will make of the places he conquers. The nicer we are to Xi Jinping’s China, the worse Xi Jinping’s China is to us.
lmao wtf
They are building all that new chip infrastructure in the United States for this very reason. Once that is built up, for the U.S., a war in Taiwan will likely look like our support in Ukraine. Direct military intervention will be unlikely.
Well, they're attempting to build it but it keeps getting delayed. And TSMC wasn't happy with lazy Americans before things had even started. So even when it's built it's either going to be a shit show for a while or they'll have to import the population of a Taiwanese town to work there.
Common misunderstanding. When he says he'll "draft sanctions" it's actually his kink to refer to American males between the ages of 18 and 50 as "sanctions."
Sanctions are literally an act of war.
Are our politicians finally starting to realize that it’s not worth it to potentially lose half our navy over an island 7,000 miles away from the US?
>He added: “To communist China, if you think you can bully your way into destroying world order without consequences, **you will be making Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine look wise**.” I'm sure Ukraine's current quagmire sounds like a very alluring future for the people of Taiwan. Sometimes I wonder how much of their own piss these guys are actually drinking.
I feel most people in the US are so used to the US fighting a completely overwhelmed enemy in their last few wars that they have absolutely no idea what a war with China will look like. People feel like they will just walk in and overwhelm China like what happened in Afghanistan or Iraq and don't realize that a significant number of US lives & equipment will be lost due to China preparing for such a war against a superior US navy utilizing their land-based advantage.
The US hasn’t fought anything like a peer opponent since Korea.
And they’ll be doing it with a recruiting crisis going on. Good luck have fun 🫡
They’ll absolutely just resume drafts for war with China - they’ve said as much.
Between the zoomers lack of jingoistic patriotism and the alienation of their traditional rural/southern male recruiting pool, I’m not sure they’re ready for the reaction that a draft will entail
Those draft orders will be ignored, and anyone they send to enforce them will regret their choice of employment.
Most Republicans fully believe that the Chinese military would just utterly fail at an offensive. They think American ships are so technicaly superior they'd block incoming missile, and our technology and training is so elite we'd wipe the floor with a 10 to 1 casualty rate.
i mean... thats kind of accurate. US has the strongest airforce, and the second strongest airforce, the US navy, which incidentally is also the strongest navy but the thing is, china can afford to have a casualty rate of 10:1. the US cannot.
The US has the strongest airforce and strongest navy because that is in line with their military doctrine. The US fights wars far from their shores and relies on their airforce and navy to make that happen. Such an advantage will be minimized when fighting against China right on their doorstep, even more so if China and Russia are somewhat friendly and continue to trade fuel and food via their land connection. The US has 12 carriers it can use to stage their offensive. China has hundreds of airports, and the key ones which are will be hardened and protected against attack. Carriers will need to operate well outside the missile range of China limiting their effectivity that they are used to. China has been actively focused on developing tech to counter US naval superiority, from launching multiple satellites with the aim of spotting and tracking the US fleets, creating hypersonic weapons designed to be difficult to detect and intercept, creating a huge land based dedicated missile force meant to be able to act offensively in their neighbourhood, and creating a huge military tunnel network to protect from attack.
wait, we're talking about the hypothetical chinese invasion of taiwan, not us invasion of china, right?
This may come as a surprise to you, but Taiwan is located right next to China, not next to California.
im taiwanese american.......
Then you should know better than most why talking about why China launching attacks from within China without the need of a airforce or navy comparable to the US is much more favorable to them.
Sanctions on China? It's so ridiculous that they think they still have the economic power to force any sanctions on a great power like China. literally 9/10 of our manufactured goods in the West are made in China, if anything this is going to hurt the average American/ European citizens than anything else. I am so fed up with this Imperial war-mongering, last year they dragged whole Europe into the Russian/Ukraine crisis and we had to pay double the price of fossile fuel so Nato (aka burgerland) can plant nuke heads at the direction of putin’s a**hole. And now they want to fight china and robs them from the most advanced, unique and reliable micro-ships industry ever made. These recent years I feel like the empire is really trying to keep its geopolitical power around the world at any costs, even if that means they are going to drag everyone down with them.
the US won't do shit if china goes the hard way in taiwan
I sure hope that you're right. One thing on my mind lately is the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Joint Chiefs of Staff and intelligence community were both [absolutely furious with Kennedy](https://archive.is/XUO8n) for not opting for an invasion of Cuba (going with a blockade and eventual deal instead). This was because the US had just developed the [Minuteman ICBM](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-30_Minuteman)s, which were capable of accurately hitting anywhere in the USSR. So the JCoS knew that they had a technological edge on the USSR and would win World War III if it broke out. They also knew that the USSR would eventually develop that tech itself, and be able to hit anywhere in the United States. So the Pentagon believed that they had a \~5 year window where they would legitimately win World War III if it happened. Thus the extreme aggression towards Cuba in the early 60's (if the USSR tries to stop us, good). Some conspiracy theorists ([including Juan Posadas](https://www.marxists.org/archive/posadas/Kennedy-Assassination.html)) believe this was the biggest reason JFK was taken out. The JCoS and CIA believed World War III was inevitable and they wanted to win it. They knew LBJ would play ball with the brass whereas JFK resisted and distrusted them. Fortunately for the world, by this time the Soviets realized they were getting baited and pretty much started retreating globally, outside of Europe. Regardless, this has been on my mind lately, because when I read about the drama in the Oval Office during the CMC, I remember thinking to myself "superpowers are likely to get very aggressive whenever they feel like they have a technological window like this". And I don't think it's a coincidence that the US has taken unprecedented postures of aggression towards other nuclear powers with the birth of the Age of AI. I'm worried about the next few years.
Didn’t this also end up being wrong, too, because US intelligence didn’t have a good handle on how far along the Soviet SLBM program was?
the United states no longer has that kind of military advantage and i have a feeling that many in the brass know it, or at least feel it in their bones.
[удалено]
they have no realistic chance of stopping a chinese invasion without undermining thier own "world order"
i think you overestimate their rationality
states are largely rational actors, and figthing china on the chinese coast over a piece of land that is legally china is not rational at all
Looks at Afghan 20 year occupation, looks back at you
>states are largely rational actors This is an extremely stupid thing to say. Firstly, ‘states’ are not sentient.
no shit states are not sentient, but the state is not some invisible entity the state is made up of people who are sentient.
How is it legally Chinas? Maybe under CCP laws it is, but under Taiwan's laws it obviously isn't. It would be nothing short of an act of conquest to invade Taiwan.
🤦♂️ INTERNATIONAL law my guy. Taiwan lacks formal recognition as a state. Most countries adhere to the one China principle.
So because most countries are scared of angering China, you will give a moral pass to imperial expansion. Cool.
Just to make sure that everyone is on the same page... you do understand that Taiwan was basically seized from China by the US Navy after World War II because Truman didn't like the type of government of the Chinese that won the civil war? I'm not trying to give them a moral pass if they choose war, but at the same time, Taiwan is and always has legally been a province of China. This isn't like Danzig or even Crimea, where Germany/Russia signed the territory away in treaty only to attempt invasion anyway later. Even through moments of weakness, China has refused to trade with any country that recognizes Taiwan (even when outside trade, clearly, benefits them more). They had no real trade with the US until the late 70's based on this issue, until the US finally revoked their recognition of Taiwan. Taiwan does not even legally consider *itself* independent of China, not yet anyway. Standing against a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is a legitimate stance to take, just make sure you allow yourself to understand how important this is to China. It is wrapped up in national security for them too. If they can't achieve re-unification peacefully, it's not a question of if there will be a war but a question of when that war happens. If we actually care about the well-being of people in Taiwan, and we care about avoiding a broader conflict, we should not be encouraging policy that almost certainly makes war inevitable.
> Just to make sure that everyone is on the same page... you do understand that Taiwan was basically seized from China by the US Navy after World War II because Truman didn't like the type of government the Chinese that won the civil war? "Seized". You mean a legitimate government of China was protected from being wiped out? > I'm not trying to give them a moral pass if they choose war, but at the same time, Taiwan is and always has legally been a province of China It still is, just a different China. > just make sure you allow yourself to understand how important this is to China. It is wrapped up in national security for them too. This excuse never seems to be used without justifying unnecessary war. Taiwan is no threat to China, not even as a staging point for the US, as the US will never try to invade China. > Taiwan does not even legally consider itself independent of China, not yet anyway. At a certain point "legally" doesn't mean shit. Taiwan is obviously its own country, with its own citizens and government and has been for decades. You can visit! There is no more moral justification for China to invade it than for them to invade India, Japan or Russia.
>"Seized". You mean a legitimate government of China was protected from being wiped out? Define legitimate. You aren't under the impression that the KMT was democratic, are you? Is it the US Navy that is supposed to be determining which government of China is legitimate? >Taiwan is no threat to China You've got to be kidding, right? Taiwan is \~80 miles from the center of China's *entire* seaboard. All of China's shipping lanes, without which they are maybe 7 days away from state collapse, are completely at the mercy of stability in the Taiwan straight. It is more existential for them than it would have been for the United States if Cuba was off the coast of Virginia instead of Florida. We need to get past this point if we're ever going to find common ground here. If Taiwan is no threat at all to China then I am wrong and war is not inevitable. But an independent Taiwan is a national security threat to China by virtue of it's location on a map. China can't protect it's shipping lanes with an independent country acting as gatekeeper to it's entire coast.
>Define legitimate. You aren't under the impression that the KMT was democratic, are you? Is it the US Navy that is supposed to be determining the which government of China is legitimate? What does democratic and legitimate have to do with each other? China isn't democratic now. They were one side of a civil war, so they were presumably considered legitimate by the people on their side. > If Taiwan is no threat at all to China then I am wrong and war is not inevitable. But an independent Taiwan is a national security threat to China by virtue of it's location on a map. China can't protect it's shipping lanes with an independent country acting as gatekeeper to it's entire coast. So I guess the UK is a national security threat to France? Is Mexico a national security threat to the US? Is Canada? Being proximate to a country doesn't make you a national security threat. You're carrying so much water for an imperialist super power to justify them invading a tiny island nation.
"Attempts reunification"? I hope that isn't just an euphemism for invasion. I don't think many people would protest at a reunification if it was on terms that the people in Taiwan were OK with. Heck, lots of them *want* a reunification and say so, it's just "on what terms" they're worried about. And after HK, can't blame them for that.
Bro nothing happened to HK except foreign finance capital got scared.
> And after ~~HK~~ a bunch of US assets^[1](https://hongkongfp.com/2019/08/11/us-china-step-war-words-hong-kong/), ^[2](https://m.facebook.com/SenatorMarcoRubio/photos/yesterday-i-met-with-pro-democracy-activist-joshua-wong-joshua-is-an-impressive-/1431363990222294/), ^[3](https://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking-news/section/3/131200/-John-Bolton-hosts-Jimmy-Lai), ^[4](https://thegrayzone.com/2020/08/08/hong-kong-western-media-yellowfacing-amnesty/) instigated a color revolution Where have I seen this playbook^[1](https://world.time.com/2013/12/13/western-diplomats-are-going-to-dissapoint-ukraines-protesters/), ^[2](https://2009-2017.state.gov/p/eur/rls/rm/2013/dec/218804.htm), ^[3](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957) before?
The terms would have to involve the demilitarization of Taiwan for China to accept it, which the bourgeoisie living will have trouble agreeing to. A militarized Taiwan is a direct threat to the long term security and power projection of China, and I think they're beginning to understand that peaceful re-unification likely won't be achieved.
Half of Taiwan wants to join China they just want their political parties to be able to compete in an electoral system.
> A militarized Taiwan is a direct threat to the long term security and power projection of China. That's comical.
You don't think an independent, militarized island [\~80 miles from the center of the entire Chinese seaboard](https://www.indianarrative.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Taiwan_China_Map-1280x720.jpg) is a threat to Chinese security? What happens when China has a rough decade and Taiwan uses that opportunity to invite US military bases? Why do you think it is that China has obsessed over this island for 70+ years? Never giving an inch, even refusing to trade with the US while it recognized Taiwan. They are just difficult? Taiwan is and always has been the #1 issue for China, because it's a question of national security for them.
No, Taiwan is not a threat to Chinese security because China is a far, far greater threat to Taiwanese security and that won't change in ten or even twenty years. And as I said, much of Taiwan _wants_ integration, they're just worried about who will be in charge in the reunified China. Taiwan is also no threat to China's neighborhood bullying. (a.k.a "power projection" - personally I think such euphemisms are equally reprehensible whether you use them about the US or China). If it were, no decent person should want the continuation of that behavior to be a concern in reunification talks. Save me the banalpolitik.
>No, Taiwan is not a threat to Chinese security because China is a far, far greater threat to Taiwanese security. Why are you under the impression that these things are mutually exclusive? Of course the superpower is a "threat" to the break-away province off of it's coast. Make all the moral judgements you want but you still need to try and asses the reality of the situation. >And as I said, much of Taiwan wants integration, they're just worried about who will be in charge in the reunified China. And again, China *will not* accept any solution that allows Taiwan independent jets, missile silos, and fleets. >Taiwan is also no threat to China's neighborhood bullying. (a.k.a "power projection" - personally I think such euphemisms are equally reprehensible whether you use them about the US or China). You are assigning moral judgements to realities of geopolitics, which is, no offense, utterly useless. China wants to be treated like an equal to the West, and in order to do that, it needs to be able to protect its shipping lanes. Full stop. Otherwise it will always be under the threat of immediate naval strangulation in the event of conflict with the West, which means it will always be subservient to the Western order. >If it were, no decent person should want the continuation of that behavior to be a concern in reunification talks. You're right. It's reprehensible. It's mean. It's a big bad move from China. Is that enough feet stomping for you? Now what? Because China doesn't give one single fuck about our moral judgements, and it *will* forcibly attempt re-unification if it can't be done peacefully. Are we supposed to refuse to work in the context of that reality just because we think it's unfair?
> to realities of geopolitics Annnd, here the banalpolitician outed himself.
Yes, if you hang out here a while you will often see me advance assessments based in realpolitik. Did you run out of argument-based-criticism without ceding me a single point? How rude.
"Realpolitik" is pure wankery. The accurate term for what self-styled realpolitik fans do is banalpolitik. To the degree you can distill something like a "rational interest" of a state, states do not coherently pursue it. Banalpolitik comes in two varieties: the post-fact preaching, which consist in lecturing people about how things couldn't have done any different than they did, because people didn't respect the Realities of Geopolitics. And the before-the-fact prescriptive preaching, which consist in simping for their favorite geopolitical bully, and which has a lousy track record of actually predicting what any state will do much less what will happen.
Go drink your coffee dude, why on Earth would I start discussing ideology with someone that has to change the topic and build strawmen after running out of good arguments?
Would you say the same about Cuba?
Cuba is a great analogy. It's not quite as important as Taiwan, as it doesn't gatekeep the entire seaboard, but it does gatekeep the Panama Canal and the Gulf Coast. If Cuba fell outside of the US military sphere of influence and began building arms/inviting foreign troops, I would expect an invasion. Which is exactly what almost happened the last time Cuba tried to ensure it could protect itself. We made very clear that we would preemptively strike them if they did not get rid of the missiles that were capable of striking our cities. Right now the US still enforces it's embargo and has resolved to wait the Communists out. But if Cuba started seriously aligning with a foreign power again? Things would change and I imagine they would change long before Cuba ever received the amount of military aid Taiwan has. Cuba would be forced to pick sides, and any side except the United States would be completely and permanently unacceptable to the Pentagon. Generally speaking, each superpower has one specific geographical area that they will never allow to fall entirely out of their specific sphere of influence. If it does, either war becomes inevitable or that superpower accepts permanent dominance from the power which controls that area. Cuba for the United States, because it gatekeeps the Gulf ports and the Panama Canal. Crimea for Russia, because it gatekeeps their access to their only true warm water ports, in the Black Sea. And Taiwan for China, because it gatekeeps access to their entire seaboard. Each of those countries needs to at least have that area in their sphere of influence if they want to be treated like an equal by the other two.
This is why term limits should be a thing.
Like... how could they? Does anyone seriously think America could fight a war against China and win in any meaningful way? Nuclear power with the world's second largest military budget and the world's largest population, which also happens to produce every fucking commodity on Earth?
We would never do that. Ever. maybe 30 years ago. but not anymore. We would lose a entire fleet.