4 ms·

Another more depressing assessment: Google is placing a bet on annexation, as the PRC has repeatedly insisted it will do by any means necessary Unlikely. Taiwa

Another more depressing assessment: Google is placing a bet on annexation, as the PRC has repeatedly insisted it will do by any means necessary Unlikely. Taiwan is really no closer to annexation now than it was in 1972. The situation with Taiwan has always been left intentionally vague. The CCP doesn't have to suffer the humiliation of acknowledging their own impotence and illegitimacy in bringing a 'rogue province' to heel, and the US doesn't have to maintain troops in Taiwan. No one is happy, but no one has to go to war either.

ilamont 8y ago
Some differences between 1972 and 2019 include the U.S. no longer has a military presence in Taiwan, and the PRC has engaged in a vast modernization of the PLA, including its air force and navy (https://thediplomat.com/2018/09/less-visible-aspects-of-chinese-military-modernization/ https://thediplomat.com/2018/09/less-visible-aspects-of-chin...). Is it enough to carry out a successful amphibious assault on and occupation of Taiwan? Maybe not (see https://www.ft.com/content/44586804-195c-11e9-9e64-d150b3105d21 https://www.ft.com/content/44586804-195c-11e9-9e64-d150b3105...), but Beijing is very adept at pulling other strategic levers to undermine Taiwan's economy, society, and democratic institutions.
- jorblumesea 8y ago
  I doubt China will actively invade Taiwan. It goes against the soft power mentality they usually prefer. More than likely, Taiwan will be compromised by Chinese companies, power and influence and its democracy corrupted from within. There's also a strong pro-China and pro-unification movement.
- CountSessine 8y ago
  Yes, of course. But I think I was responding more to the linked article and what seemed to be the original claim that China hasn't ruled out using force to take Taiwan. My point regarding that is, 1. Xi's sabre-rattling is nothing new. He's not the first scoundrel in Beijing to level these threats. And, 2. I doubt Google is basing their decision on any of this. I think sometimes Westerners are shocked by how belligerent the Chinese government has become. Actually, the CCP has always been belligerent and their demands of and threats against our treaty allies have always been truculent and unreasonable. It's just that now we've made these scoundrels very powerful by trading with them. I hope its become clear to everyone that this was a civilization-level strategic blunder - that knee-capping western industrial labour unions probably wasn't worth empowering a new 21st century fascism in Asia.
  - nostrademons 8y ago
    Particularly in Google's case, I doubt they see it as empowering 21st century fascism in Asia. There's no love lost between Google's executive leadership and the Chinese government. China has attempted to directly hack Google and steal its source code and data on multiple occasions, and there have been previous pull-outs over diplomatic relations between the two of them. Rather, I think Google views its China expansion as a way to get an information beachhead on China's 800 million citizens. Once they become an ingrained habit for China's populace, they become very difficult to get rid of (the same way Uber and AirBnB have become virtually impossible to get rid of, despite breaking numerous municipal laws), and can leverage that foothold to expand their influence.
- nostrademons 8y ago
  Amphibious assaults are really difficult, particularly of a large populated landmass. Iwo Jima cost the U.S. 30,000 casualties, Okinawa almost 70,000, to capture a tiny island with a garrison of about 100,000 with a huge (> 6:1) numerical superiority. Japan's military was a joke at the time. The U.S. didn't even try to capture Formosa (Taiwan), and atom-bombed Japan rather than risk an invasion of the home islands. The force advantage required for an amphibious assault scales super-linearly, and beyond a certain population may not be possible at all, because of the inability to get more than a certain number of landing craft on the beach in a given time period.
- bobthepanda 8y ago
  Taiwan is - small, dense, and urban, which means that everything of value is close together, and urban warfare is extremely difficult and costly. - forested and mountainous, which would present problems with guerillas after a main invasion is over - across a sea, so they will probably lose people just trying to get to Taiwan in the first place If China were to militarily invade Taiwan they would probably bleed quite a lot and be the king of ashes in the end.
  - komali2 8y ago
    >king of ashes in the end At the very most, king of at least 2 generations of extremely politically active, very pissed off people. These are the people that took over their government buildings back in 2014 because of a suggested trade deal with China. As the young people did so, local businesses donated food, water, blankets, pillows etc in droves, demonstrated a cross-generational political activism that would be an absolute fucking nightmare to deal with as a brute-force conqueror. Oops, the water lines to your PRC bases all clogged at the same time, weird! Oops suddenly the internet doesn't work for PRC government offices, huh, strange!

ilamont 8y ago

Some differences between 1972 and 2019 include the U.S. no longer has a military presence in Taiwan, and the PRC has engaged in a vast modernization of the PLA, including its air force and navy (https://thediplomat.com/2018/09/less-visible-aspects-of-chinese-military-modernization/ https://thediplomat.com/2018/09/less-visible-aspects-of-chin...). Is it enough to carry out a successful amphibious assault on and occupation of Taiwan? Maybe not (see https://www.ft.com/content/44586804-195c-11e9-9e64-d150b3105d21 https://www.ft.com/content/44586804-195c-11e9-9e64-d150b3105...), but Beijing is very adept at pulling other strategic levers to undermine Taiwan's economy, society, and democratic institutions.

jorblumesea 8y ago
I doubt China will actively invade Taiwan. It goes against the soft power mentality they usually prefer. More than likely, Taiwan will be compromised by Chinese companies, power and influence and its democracy corrupted from within. There's also a strong pro-China and pro-unification movement.
CountSessine 8y ago
Yes, of course. But I think I was responding more to the linked article and what seemed to be the original claim that China hasn't ruled out using force to take Taiwan. My point regarding that is, 1. Xi's sabre-rattling is nothing new. He's not the first scoundrel in Beijing to level these threats. And, 2. I doubt Google is basing their decision on any of this. I think sometimes Westerners are shocked by how belligerent the Chinese government has become. Actually, the CCP has always been belligerent and their demands of and threats against our treaty allies have always been truculent and unreasonable. It's just that now we've made these scoundrels very powerful by trading with them. I hope its become clear to everyone that this was a civilization-level strategic blunder - that knee-capping western industrial labour unions probably wasn't worth empowering a new 21st century fascism in Asia.
- nostrademons 8y ago
  Particularly in Google's case, I doubt they see it as empowering 21st century fascism in Asia. There's no love lost between Google's executive leadership and the Chinese government. China has attempted to directly hack Google and steal its source code and data on multiple occasions, and there have been previous pull-outs over diplomatic relations between the two of them. Rather, I think Google views its China expansion as a way to get an information beachhead on China's 800 million citizens. Once they become an ingrained habit for China's populace, they become very difficult to get rid of (the same way Uber and AirBnB have become virtually impossible to get rid of, despite breaking numerous municipal laws), and can leverage that foothold to expand their influence.
nostrademons 8y ago
Amphibious assaults are really difficult, particularly of a large populated landmass. Iwo Jima cost the U.S. 30,000 casualties, Okinawa almost 70,000, to capture a tiny island with a garrison of about 100,000 with a huge (> 6:1) numerical superiority. Japan's military was a joke at the time. The U.S. didn't even try to capture Formosa (Taiwan), and atom-bombed Japan rather than risk an invasion of the home islands. The force advantage required for an amphibious assault scales super-linearly, and beyond a certain population may not be possible at all, because of the inability to get more than a certain number of landing craft on the beach in a given time period.
bobthepanda 8y ago
Taiwan is - small, dense, and urban, which means that everything of value is close together, and urban warfare is extremely difficult and costly. - forested and mountainous, which would present problems with guerillas after a main invasion is over - across a sea, so they will probably lose people just trying to get to Taiwan in the first place If China were to militarily invade Taiwan they would probably bleed quite a lot and be the king of ashes in the end.
- komali2 8y ago
  >king of ashes in the end At the very most, king of at least 2 generations of extremely politically active, very pissed off people. These are the people that took over their government buildings back in 2014 because of a suggested trade deal with China. As the young people did so, local businesses donated food, water, blankets, pillows etc in droves, demonstrated a cross-generational political activism that would be an absolute fucking nightmare to deal with as a brute-force conqueror. Oops, the water lines to your PRC bases all clogged at the same time, weird! Oops suddenly the internet doesn't work for PRC government offices, huh, strange!