4 ms·

what was the reason for China to get nukes ? Because at one time, they wanted to take over TW and got threated by nukes by the USA. Now both countries have nuke

by dzonga 5y ago

what was the reason for China to get nukes ? Because at one time, they wanted to take over TW and got threated by nukes by the USA. Now both countries have nukes and large armies. With China having geographic advantage. So yeah, US would likely not come to the defence of TW. It's a fantasy to think the US would defend TW because they're both democracies. US can easily change it's position and say it's an internal matter when shit hits the fan.

ericmay 5y ago
Yet here we are. The U.S. has fleets, airbases, a defense pact with Taiwan, and regularly sells Taiwan weapons. But the U.S. won’t defend Taiwan because China has nukes? Ok how about China won’t attack Taiwan because the U.S. has nukes? And you’re severely oversimplifying the entire interaction. China has geographic advantage to do what exactly? Fly planes to Taiwan? Not with U.S. forces nearby. Land troops? Good luck with that. Bombard the island with ships? Well that’s why the U.S. fleet is there. Fortunately all of this is saber rattling. Nobody not China, Taiwan, or the U.S. cares to change the status quo. The U.S. gets to maintain Taiwan as is. The CCP has a boogeyman they can use. And Taiwan gets to do business with everyone.
- MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago
  The US won't defend Taiwan because it has absolutely no benefit to them. All the talk of defending is purely for show. When it hits the fan, the US will stay out of the way. More likely during a Democrat administration as well. The US is done with interfering in Asian conflicts over communism. China knows it too and they're gonna make a move while the whole of the US's industry is there still. The US solely supplies Taiwan to keep them technologically up to date so that they can mount a reasonable defense. But with almost all 1st world nations universally not acknowledging Taiwan's sovereignty, you'll be hard pressed to see any bureaucrat NOT turning a blind eye but sending out a measly sanction and move some manufacturing home.
  - ericmay 5y ago
    The U.S. isn't the E.U. . It's demonstrated time and time again willingness and ability to engage in conflicts to preserve its own interests. A Chinese invasion of Taiwan (which again, isn't going to happen b/c everybody is fine with the status quo) would without a doubt be met with U.S. forces in the air and sea. China's only hope here is somehow to win a quick and violent war in which the U.S. just says "this isn't worth it" by destroying lots of U.S. assets. What's scary to think is that even if this happens, the U.S. might say ok fine and commit entirely into a war with China. This could drag Japan, South Korea, North Korea, Australia, the Philippines, India, and other countries into a literal non-nuclear World War. America is a very, very stubborn country. We spent like a trillion dollars and killed hundreds of thousands of people b/c of Osama Bin Laden over the course of a 20-year war and absolutely brutal insurgency. But I'm expected to believe that the United States wouldn't have the appetite for a conventional war? The one that all of its military might is built for? That the U.S. would not defend an ally and undue all trust in all alliances on the global stage? NATO is gone, in this scenario. The E.U. starts building up military forces b/c they can't trust that the U.S. will defend against Russian aggression. Etc. There are a lot of cascading effects that are very bad for the U.S. and global stability compared to just buying stuff from other countries temporarily and checking Chinese aggression here. On the other hand, the U.S. has a high potential for smashing Chinese forces in a quick and intense war. It's a gamble I think U.S. leadership is willing to take. I don't see either side backing down. And China loses out in longer-term wars. So why bother when you can just keep things as they are and rattle sabers instead while trading with each other?
    - dzonga 5y ago
      wow!!! in roy jones jnr's voice - ya'll must've forgot the us lost the vietnam war. it was supposed to be quick and easy right. same as iraq war ? nothing in war is ever quick and easy. and in war, who wins is not who has the biggest guns but who has nothing to lose. you think the us can afford to send more young men, to TW whilst the TW ain't willing to do that themselves.
      - ericmay 5y ago

by dzonga 5y ago

ericmay 5y ago

Yet here we are. The U.S. has fleets, airbases, a defense pact with Taiwan, and regularly sells Taiwan weapons. But the U.S. won’t defend Taiwan because China has nukes? Ok how about China won’t attack Taiwan because the U.S. has nukes? And you’re severely oversimplifying the entire interaction. China has geographic advantage to do what exactly? Fly planes to Taiwan? Not with U.S. forces nearby. Land troops? Good luck with that. Bombard the island with ships? Well that’s why the U.S. fleet is there. Fortunately all of this is saber rattling. Nobody not China, Taiwan, or the U.S. cares to change the status quo. The U.S. gets to maintain Taiwan as is. The CCP has a boogeyman they can use. And Taiwan gets to do business with everyone.

MeinBlutIstBlau 5y ago
The US won't defend Taiwan because it has absolutely no benefit to them. All the talk of defending is purely for show. When it hits the fan, the US will stay out of the way. More likely during a Democrat administration as well. The US is done with interfering in Asian conflicts over communism. China knows it too and they're gonna make a move while the whole of the US's industry is there still. The US solely supplies Taiwan to keep them technologically up to date so that they can mount a reasonable defense. But with almost all 1st world nations universally not acknowledging Taiwan's sovereignty, you'll be hard pressed to see any bureaucrat NOT turning a blind eye but sending out a measly sanction and move some manufacturing home.
- ericmay 5y ago
  The U.S. isn't the E.U. . It's demonstrated time and time again willingness and ability to engage in conflicts to preserve its own interests. A Chinese invasion of Taiwan (which again, isn't going to happen b/c everybody is fine with the status quo) would without a doubt be met with U.S. forces in the air and sea. China's only hope here is somehow to win a quick and violent war in which the U.S. just says "this isn't worth it" by destroying lots of U.S. assets. What's scary to think is that even if this happens, the U.S. might say ok fine and commit entirely into a war with China. This could drag Japan, South Korea, North Korea, Australia, the Philippines, India, and other countries into a literal non-nuclear World War. America is a very, very stubborn country. We spent like a trillion dollars and killed hundreds of thousands of people b/c of Osama Bin Laden over the course of a 20-year war and absolutely brutal insurgency. But I'm expected to believe that the United States wouldn't have the appetite for a conventional war? The one that all of its military might is built for? That the U.S. would not defend an ally and undue all trust in all alliances on the global stage? NATO is gone, in this scenario. The E.U. starts building up military forces b/c they can't trust that the U.S. will defend against Russian aggression. Etc. There are a lot of cascading effects that are very bad for the U.S. and global stability compared to just buying stuff from other countries temporarily and checking Chinese aggression here. On the other hand, the U.S. has a high potential for smashing Chinese forces in a quick and intense war. It's a gamble I think U.S. leadership is willing to take. I don't see either side backing down. And China loses out in longer-term wars. So why bother when you can just keep things as they are and rattle sabers instead while trading with each other?
  - dzonga 5y ago
    wow!!! in roy jones jnr's voice - ya'll must've forgot the us lost the vietnam war. it was supposed to be quick and easy right. same as iraq war ? nothing in war is ever quick and easy. and in war, who wins is not who has the biggest guns but who has nothing to lose. you think the us can afford to send more young men, to TW whilst the TW ain't willing to do that themselves.
    - ericmay 5y ago