8 ms·

I think that we should be helping Taiwan now and doing whatever it take so that it doesn’t get to that. Defending Taiwan with troops is world war three even if

I think that we should be helping Taiwan now and doing whatever it take so that it doesn’t get to that. Defending Taiwan with troops is world war three even if it is the right thing to do.

JumpCrisscross 5y ago
> we should be helping Taiwan now and doing whatever it take so that it doesn’t get to that If you look at the questions asked, the most support is for these measures. Signing a free-trade agreement, recognizing Taiwan and supporting its international recognition, et cetera. At the point we get to even selling arms to Taiwan, the split become even, mirroring the support for sending troops. (In defence of that divergence, sending troops would presumably be in response to a Chinese offensive. Sending arms is a provocation in itself.)
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- thesuperbigfrog 5y ago
  >> At the point we get to even selling arms to Taiwan, the split become even, mirroring the support for sending troops. (In defence of that divergence, sending troops would presumably be in response to a Chinese offensive. Sending arms is a provocation in itself.) The US has been selling arms to Taiwan for decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_arms_sales_to_Taiwan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_arms_sales_to_Taiwa...
  - JumpCrisscross 5y ago
    > The US has been selling arms to Taiwan for decades Sorry, I meant strategic weaponry. Long-range weapons that would let Taiwan legitimately threaten e.g. Beijing.
    - thesuperbigfrog 5y ago
      >> Sorry, I meant strategic weaponry. Long-range weapons that would let Taiwan legitimately threaten e.g. Beijing. The US has naval vessels and aircraft that can do that from the strait of Taiwan or elsewhere. Why would the US sell such weapons to Taiwan when the US could employ them directly if needed? In theory the US could position ground-based strategic weapons in Taiwan (Cuban missile crisis-style), but that would be too aggressive and could provoke an attack. Besides, a submarine, ship, or aircraft could employ similar weapons without being a fixed target.
wesleywt 5y ago
It would be WWIII whether the US defends it or not. Because it gives China free reign to invade other areas, such as the disputed South China Sea. This will lead to conflict with Vietnam and the Phillipines. The dominoes will continue to fall until the US intervenes eventually to protect de facto NATO countries Australia and New Zealand.
- yhoneycomb 5y ago
  ie white countries
  - lostlogin 5y ago
    How would the North Atlantic avoid that charge?
    - yhoneycomb 5y ago
      Why is the North Atlantic even aligned in the first place?
      - CRConrad 5y ago
        So as not to slop over its brims. It has been found that having the body of water exactly aligned with its containing basin at all times is the optimal solution, especially for residents of coastal areas.
  - handrous 5y ago
    More that their Commonwealth status means Britain would intervene, which means the US probably would too, and at that point it's about 90% of the way to being a NATO action even if no-one else joins.
    - kingofpandora 5y ago
      Commonwealth doesn't mean anything. It's a very loose association of counties with shared history not a defence pact.
alkonaut 5y ago
So is helping Estonia after a Russian invasion. And that’s already part of NATO Article V. “Whatever it takes so it doesn’t happen” is a long laundry list of things, but number one is always to convince the attacker that the invasion would cost more than could be gained. Saying that Taiwan will definitely be defended and hesitating after the fact is much better than hesitating in policy.
- jacquesm 5y ago
  Lithuania would get invaded long before Estonia, after all, once Lithuania is 'done' the rest of the Baltics will be cut off from Western Europe by land. Note that it is only a very tiny strip of land that separates the Russian enclave at the Baltic sea from Belarus, a country very much friendly to Russia. I'd happily bet that there are many different plans on how to occupy that strip in a hurry should it come to that and just as many plans on how to deal with those attempts. https://www.google.com/maps/@54.2105194,22.8701257,10.42z https://www.google.com/maps/@54.2105194,22.8701257,10.42z All it would take is to take out two highways, one major, one minor and it's done.
- ajay-b 5y ago
  I think there are two mindsets here. Russia is a gangster, brutal and clumsy, yet rational. However Russia is also barely hanging on to first world status, they are not a global balance of power threat. China is a threat to shifting the balance of power decisively towards China and away from America and the West. They mean it when they say this will be the China century.
  - type0 5y ago
    "China, a sleeping giant. Let her sleep, for when she awakes it will shake the world." - Napoleon Bonaparte
- btilly 5y ago
  The problem is that your opponent also knows this. And therefore will discount the fact that you said it and make their own judgment about whether you actually would respond. Large wars happen when antagonists misjudge how protagonists will react. Therefore it is extremely important to only say that you will do things that you absolutely know that you will do, to take the guessing out of it for your opponents. Because if they credibly think you might have bluffed, at some point they will call with drastic results. (And every time you're caught in a bluff, your credibility goes down for the next conflict. See the German invasion of Austria.)
robbedpeter 5y ago
China initiating military invasion of Taiwan would start WWIII, the US has no choice but to defend. The world is likely more than a decade away from any sort of reliable chip infrastructure with parity to the current south Asian concentration. China is driving the world to nuclear conflict, especially with the first strike noises they've been making in recent months.
- bee_rider 5y ago
  From a development point of view, I suspect taking step back to the previous semiconductor node would be preferable to a nuclear WWIII. However, humanitarian concerns and international obligations seem to be a better framework for analyzing this sort of decision, and thankfully that's all over my head. Hopefully it doesn't come up.
- dillondoyle 5y ago
  Do you have anything I can read about their first strike posturing? I haven't read anything about that. I have read about this war of super super sonic weapons which is scary to me.
  - ChemSpider 5y ago
    https://news.sky.com/story/china-not-ruling-out-military-force-as-it-seeks-inevitable-reunification-with-taiwan-11596648 https://news.sky.com/story/china-not-ruling-out-military-for...
    - dillondoyle 5y ago
      Wow thanks. That's some pretty scary rhetoric.
- m0zg 5y ago
  Defend _how_ though? How do you defend against an adversary with ICBMs, fleet, and air force who, on top of that, can draft an army that exceeds the entire population of the US? "Nuclear conflict" only works as a deterrent when the situation is one-sided. That is very much not the case here.

I think that we should be helping Taiwan now and doing whatever it take so that it doesn’t get to that. Defending Taiwan with troops is world war three even if it is the right thing to do.

JumpCrisscross 5y ago

> we should be helping Taiwan now and doing whatever it take so that it doesn’t get to that If you look at the questions asked, the most support is for these measures. Signing a free-trade agreement, recognizing Taiwan and supporting its international recognition, et cetera. At the point we get to even selling arms to Taiwan, the split become even, mirroring the support for sending troops. (In defence of that divergence, sending troops would presumably be in response to a Chinese offensive. Sending arms is a provocation in itself.)

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
thesuperbigfrog 5y ago
>> At the point we get to even selling arms to Taiwan, the split become even, mirroring the support for sending troops. (In defence of that divergence, sending troops would presumably be in response to a Chinese offensive. Sending arms is a provocation in itself.) The US has been selling arms to Taiwan for decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_arms_sales_to_Taiwan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_US_arms_sales_to_Taiwa...
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago
  > The US has been selling arms to Taiwan for decades Sorry, I meant strategic weaponry. Long-range weapons that would let Taiwan legitimately threaten e.g. Beijing.
  - thesuperbigfrog 5y ago
    >> Sorry, I meant strategic weaponry. Long-range weapons that would let Taiwan legitimately threaten e.g. Beijing. The US has naval vessels and aircraft that can do that from the strait of Taiwan or elsewhere. Why would the US sell such weapons to Taiwan when the US could employ them directly if needed? In theory the US could position ground-based strategic weapons in Taiwan (Cuban missile crisis-style), but that would be too aggressive and could provoke an attack. Besides, a submarine, ship, or aircraft could employ similar weapons without being a fixed target.

wesleywt 5y ago

It would be WWIII whether the US defends it or not. Because it gives China free reign to invade other areas, such as the disputed South China Sea. This will lead to conflict with Vietnam and the Phillipines. The dominoes will continue to fall until the US intervenes eventually to protect de facto NATO countries Australia and New Zealand.

yhoneycomb 5y ago
ie white countries
- lostlogin 5y ago
  How would the North Atlantic avoid that charge?
  - yhoneycomb 5y ago
    Why is the North Atlantic even aligned in the first place?
    - CRConrad 5y ago
      So as not to slop over its brims. It has been found that having the body of water exactly aligned with its containing basin at all times is the optimal solution, especially for residents of coastal areas.
- handrous 5y ago
  More that their Commonwealth status means Britain would intervene, which means the US probably would too, and at that point it's about 90% of the way to being a NATO action even if no-one else joins.
  - kingofpandora 5y ago
    Commonwealth doesn't mean anything. It's a very loose association of counties with shared history not a defence pact.

alkonaut 5y ago

So is helping Estonia after a Russian invasion. And that’s already part of NATO Article V. “Whatever it takes so it doesn’t happen” is a long laundry list of things, but number one is always to convince the attacker that the invasion would cost more than could be gained. Saying that Taiwan will definitely be defended and hesitating after the fact is much better than hesitating in policy.

jacquesm 5y ago
Lithuania would get invaded long before Estonia, after all, once Lithuania is 'done' the rest of the Baltics will be cut off from Western Europe by land. Note that it is only a very tiny strip of land that separates the Russian enclave at the Baltic sea from Belarus, a country very much friendly to Russia. I'd happily bet that there are many different plans on how to occupy that strip in a hurry should it come to that and just as many plans on how to deal with those attempts. https://www.google.com/maps/@54.2105194,22.8701257,10.42z https://www.google.com/maps/@54.2105194,22.8701257,10.42z All it would take is to take out two highways, one major, one minor and it's done.
ajay-b 5y ago
I think there are two mindsets here. Russia is a gangster, brutal and clumsy, yet rational. However Russia is also barely hanging on to first world status, they are not a global balance of power threat. China is a threat to shifting the balance of power decisively towards China and away from America and the West. They mean it when they say this will be the China century.
- type0 5y ago
  "China, a sleeping giant. Let her sleep, for when she awakes it will shake the world." - Napoleon Bonaparte
btilly 5y ago
The problem is that your opponent also knows this. And therefore will discount the fact that you said it and make their own judgment about whether you actually would respond. Large wars happen when antagonists misjudge how protagonists will react. Therefore it is extremely important to only say that you will do things that you absolutely know that you will do, to take the guessing out of it for your opponents. Because if they credibly think you might have bluffed, at some point they will call with drastic results. (And every time you're caught in a bluff, your credibility goes down for the next conflict. See the German invasion of Austria.)

robbedpeter 5y ago

China initiating military invasion of Taiwan would start WWIII, the US has no choice but to defend. The world is likely more than a decade away from any sort of reliable chip infrastructure with parity to the current south Asian concentration. China is driving the world to nuclear conflict, especially with the first strike noises they've been making in recent months.

bee_rider 5y ago
From a development point of view, I suspect taking step back to the previous semiconductor node would be preferable to a nuclear WWIII. However, humanitarian concerns and international obligations seem to be a better framework for analyzing this sort of decision, and thankfully that's all over my head. Hopefully it doesn't come up.
dillondoyle 5y ago
Do you have anything I can read about their first strike posturing? I haven't read anything about that. I have read about this war of super super sonic weapons which is scary to me.
- ChemSpider 5y ago
  https://news.sky.com/story/china-not-ruling-out-military-force-as-it-seeks-inevitable-reunification-with-taiwan-11596648 https://news.sky.com/story/china-not-ruling-out-military-for...
  - dillondoyle 5y ago
    Wow thanks. That's some pretty scary rhetoric.
m0zg 5y ago
Defend _how_ though? How do you defend against an adversary with ICBMs, fleet, and air force who, on top of that, can draft an army that exceeds the entire population of the US? "Nuclear conflict" only works as a deterrent when the situation is one-sided. That is very much not the case here.