10 ms·

America and China are preparing for a war over Taiwan

58 points by xqcgrek2 4y ago

avgcorrection 4y ago
> Ignore the polite abstractions. The marines are training for a war with China, probably precipitated by an invasion of Taiwan. I guess the consent manufacturing has started. "If shit hits the fan, remember: it was probably China who started it."
- ianburrell 4y ago
  The initiators of violence are the ones blamed for starting it. Like how Russia is blamed for the invasion of Ukraine.
  - avgcorrection 4y ago
    You must be confused. PRC has not invaded anything.
    - spywaregorilla 4y ago
      shit hasn't the fan
    - NicoJuicy 4y ago
      Art of war Pushing Russia to start a war ( friends with no limits was even publicly announced), see how the west reacts, but don't interfere enough ( so you won't get involved and have more time to identify weak points + weaken the enemy support - eg. Availability of artillery supplies). Base yourself on that. Or do you think it's a confidence the invasion started just after the Beijng Olympics ( ~ propaganda)? In the muddy season.
      - avgcorrection 4y ago
        > Or do you think it's a confidence the invasion started just after the Beijng Olympics? Not a “confidence” no, since there were rumors already a year ago that Xi asked Putin to delay the invasion based on that. But it’s a leap from that to claiming that China indirectly master-minded the invasion of Ukraine.
        NicoJuicy 4y ago
        Coincidence... I'm not saying masterminded, but it embolded Russia. Poo-tin was already eager to show "who's boss" after he didn't get enough "attention" in ~ 2000 for his ego. Little guys...
        avgcorrection 4y ago
        I can see that you are very serious about geopolitics.
        NicoJuicy 4y ago
        I'm jokingly describing the situation where Putin was the first to condolence the US after 9/11 ( for personal gain). But was hurt in his ego because of Iraq, since it was in/near the self-claimed Russian sphere of influence and he wasn't aware until it started. Relations between the US and Russia deteriorated after that. He's been planning "revenge" for the next 20 years => the reference to little guys...
        avgcorrection 4y ago
        Why are you dunking on the US for their illegal invasion of Iraq? This is a thread about China. Stop with the whataboutism.
- ilaksh 4y ago
  This is the biggest threat to security globally is that once it has been decided that the war is strategic, both sides will use propaganda to motivate their population into thinking that the war is a moral mission. There is not going to be anything moral about it. War is caused by a total failure of management over a number of years. A big part of what is increasing tensions are the real world economic problems globally. Then if the nation-states decide that things are serious enough they will make the calculation that mass murder is a good way to enhance their strategic position. But there will be lies about China, lies about the United States, and a huge propaganda effort to dehumanize the other population or focus on whatever bad acts that have come before in order to justify war which again is a national policy of mass murder. My take is that the leaders that push this war forward should be held to account as criminals themselves since they are advocating for millions to be killed.
  - avgcorrection 4y ago
    Yep. All true.
  - ianburrell 4y ago
    My worry from debating Chinese nationalists is that they think war is necessary, that it will go their way, and that it will end. I totally understand China wanting to be superpower. They seem to think that the US is coercing everybody, including allies, by force. They think that if US is defeated and they can replace them or at least coerce the local area. I wish they kept using soft power, that was working well for them. They talk about Taiwan falling immediately and nobody helping them. China is stronger now but even alone Taiwan could put up a strong fight. Excluding big change in politics, the US will defend Taiwan. China could still win, but it would be uncertain. They also ignore the consequences like cutting off trade with most of the world. Finally, I'm most worried about how the war ends. If China succeeds in invasion, then war will probably end. But do they realize that trade will never return to normal. Or that South Korea and Japan will build nuclear weapons if US commitment wavers. Also, that there are actions, like attacking US mainland, which will escalate the war and make it hard to end except in nuclear war.
    - 4y ago
- rnk 4y ago
  No one made Russia invade Ukraine. They could have just... not have invaded them, and they could declare victory and leave tomorrow. It's the same with China and Taiwan here, China can just ... not invade Taiwan if they want to avoid a war.
aborsy 4y ago
I don’t think such war will happen. The tensions will be on technological “supremacy”, political and economic isolation, corporate sanctions, and international support, somewhat a Cold War. I also believe China is a peaking (rather than a rising) power at this stage. Its growth rate has declined from 14% to less than 5% now. China is facing an aging population (due to the one child policy of the past), international hostility, internal political and numerous other problems.
- ianburrell 4y ago
  I hope China recognizes that challenging the West politically and economically is much better option. I think the best thing China could do would be negotiate with Taiwan for their independence. It is funny that option is never suggested as possibility.
  - unity1001 4y ago
    > I hope China recognizes that challenging the West politically and economically is much better option The Taiwan War is being pushed precisely because China has been doing exactly that and the US wants China to stop and do what Japan did in 1985 by signing the Plaza Accords. China will never do that. Hence, the war...
    - ianburrell 4y ago
      China is concerned about currency markets so that is why they have to invade Taiwan? China is strong enough that they don't have to listen. It doesn't really show you are strong to threaten to invade another country to demonstrate strength.
      - unity1001 4y ago
        > China is concerned about currency markets so that is why they have to invade Taiwan? China has to invade Taiwan only if the US starts arming Taiwan to use it as a pawn against China like how the US openly declared that it intends doing. China will not make the mistake of waiting 8 years like Russia. > China is strong enough that they don't have to listen. Any sane observer of geopolitics who doesnt have a 6-figure paycheck that depends depend on saying what his employers want said, would say that China has been silent for way too long and the US would immediately start a war if anyone did so much as to threaten doing what the US has been doing to other countries. Then again, China has only recently reached the military power that could fight the US on even grounds without having to resort to a nuclear war.
ashwagary 4y ago
It's awful that the whole world will possibly be dragged into China's incomplete civil war because of anxious interventionistas. Is this the tipping point for WWIII or will it be isolated enough to not spill over?
- roundandround 4y ago
  I don't really see how it can't spill over. For example, I've been wondering why China's neighbors wouldn't see Taiwan's independence and/or absorption of Chinese naval capability as an opportunity in their territorial waters disputes and I think it's unlikely none of them would become proxies for (or get favorable arms deals from) the US or others interested in containing China.
swamp40 4y ago
It would be a proxy war, not direct US troop involvement. But China says any response from Taiwan will be taken as a direct response from the US. So, that could go south in a hurry. I think Ukraine showed China exactly what the world response would be to such an invasion - i.e. shunning, so I doubt this would happen except as a way to goad the US into a war. And China certainly isn't ready for that yet. From the US POV, we are only posturing economically so China can't jump ahead of us technologically. I think we are growing concerned their AI vision systems might soon allow suicide drones that can target US politicians. But that's coming anyway. In general, we have finally decided it doesn't make a lot of sense to hand them technology that they then turn around and put into military hardware that will be used against us.
- avgcorrection 4y ago
  The whole world has not shunned Russia over the invasion.
  - rasz 4y ago
    Slowly but surely https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-12/india-to-ensure-no-breach-on-russia-oil-purchase-sanctions?srnd=premium-middle-east https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-12/india-to-... https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/india-to-ensure-no-breach-on-russia-oil-purchase-sanctions/articleshow/98585120.cms https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/...
  - baal80spam 4y ago
    OK, whole/most of the _civilized_ world did.
    - rnk 4y ago
      China, India, Syria, NK, a few other countries. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-gets-shrugs-in-india-outrage-over-ukraine-war-isnt-universal/ar-AA18h8OD https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-gets-shrugs-in-i...
chester195 4y ago
https://archive.is/rTwVK https://archive.is/rTwVK
Overtonwindow 4y ago
I disagree. War is too expensive for both countries and no calculus beyond lunacy can reason it to be a positive
- 1270018080 4y ago
  Russia invaded Ukraine for basically no reason, it still happened. If you have enough fervent nationalism in the population and an authoritarian government, lunacy isn't going to stop anything.
  - HarryHirsch 4y ago
    Russia invaded Ukraine over control of the ports of Sebastopol and Odessa, and over control of the Varangian Road from the Black Sea to Moscow. These are immediate national security concerns. There were those of us who looked at the Eastern expansion of NATO with great concern, a proxy war was going to be fought, and Europe was going to have to deal with the refugees and the political instability.
    - rnk 4y ago
      And so why did Russia invade or attack Moldova and multiple other countries like Georgia? I believe the underlying reason is Russia wants to absorb all of those back or at least control them with puppets. I'm sure in each country they can point to a national security issue. Russia is going to invade and control all the small countries around them unless Europe works together to stop them with the US.
      - HarryHirsch 4y ago
        And so why did Russia invade or attack Moldova and multiple other countries like Georgia? Alsace was fought over by Germany and France for centuries for very much the same reason - access to defensible terrain and natural resources. Many Europeans do not care for US proxy wars but they are affected by political instability and hordes of war refugees.
    - 4y ago
yalogin 4y ago
This has a very ominous inevitable tone to it. I question how wise it is to even publish an article with this tone given how grave the consequences of such a war would be. Just reading the title sent a chill for me. Any war like that will push the whole world into protracted recession and it will be hell for every country.
- Invictus0 4y ago
  Is your head in the sand? The US has been preparing for this war for years.
  - skinnymuch 4y ago
    Yes that’s manufactured consent. Not a good thing. Being surprised by BS nationalism is good. People should be shocked by how bad this is for the world.
- avgcorrection 4y ago
  The Press’ place is to massage public opinion. It is not their place to worry about the consequences of yelling Fire.
  - flandish 4y ago
    Except for when they are a purchased tool for a philosophy called “manufactured consent.” Remember all those articles about why we “should” go invade iraq? Or that report about a completely fabricated gulf of tonkin incident? The media has a duty to report facts, only after they know them to be facts. Well.. they used to have that duty. Now it’s just clickbait.
    - avgcorrection 4y ago
      That’s what I meant by massage public opinion.
- sb618 4y ago
  I definitely appreciate that inflammatory articles might push us closer to war but it also seems rather dangerous to cover up anything that suggests war. That feels a bit reminiscent of Neville Chamberlain before WWII.
ergonaught 4y ago
I’ve always found it strange that military planning and training is considered newsworthy and informational. I’d be a whole lot more upset and surprised if USA and China were not preparing for a war over Taiwan. It is one of the top 3 most likely sparks for war between them. Which is not to say that it is “likely”.
- twblalock 4y ago
  Seriously. We should even be training for war with Canada -- just in case. Getting ready for a war does not provoke war. Both sides are doing it, we know each other are doing it, we do war games all the time all over the world and it's fine. Freaking the public out about how the game is played is the real danger. That happened with the balloon incident too -- oh gee China spies on us? Yeah, and we spy on them too, and we've got way better stuff than balloons, and they know it.
  - SapporoChris 4y ago
    "War of 1812, when troops from Canada — then a British colony — marched to Washington, D.C., finished James and Dolly Madison’s unfinished dinner and burned down the White House. " https://www.politico.eu/article/us-war-with-canada-cross-border-squabble-history/ https://www.politico.eu/article/us-war-with-canada-cross-bor...
    - cafard 4y ago
      Wow, all the way from Montreal? The troops were landed on the Patuxent River, and marched a considerably shorter distance to Washington. I would also mention that the British called the burning retaliation for the burning of York (now Toronto). But supposedly the War Department had plans in its files for an invasion of Canada as late as the 1930s.
      - SapporoChris 4y ago
        That's a great clarification. Yes, the didn't march the entire distance. The war was very much a naval exercise.
no_wizard 4y ago
Is anyone really equipped to go to war with the USA? Unrestrained war with the US war machine would be....catastrophic, to say the least. I mean for both parties, but the US out spends everyone by a wide margin[0] and the US military is very advanced and well resourced, and well trained. Even if the fighting was just constrained to Taiwan, it would be pretty bad for everyone, but I think it would be especially bad for China. Now just for the mental exercise, if we take nukes off the table and assume actual, all out, total war, I'm pretty sure the US can level just about any country on earth, or at least, we have the hubris to believe we can. With nukes? well, I mean, I had a good life I guess, thats pretty apocalyptic, but I'm certain the US would have more than enough ICBMs and the like to level an entire country in hours [0]: https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2023/jan/military- https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2023/jan/military-...
- curiousgal 4y ago
  Maybe you're overestimating the USA the way Russia was overestimated. How many actual wars did the USA win? Out of Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Gulf War only the latter was an actual victory.
  - no_wizard 4y ago
    Actual wars? In WWII the US engaged successfully in a two front war as part of the allied coalition and more directly against Imperial Japan, and I don't think that should be understated. What we call in the US the Korean War was a good show of military might, and ended short of things getting out of hand. The Gulf War is another decisive showing of force. Nation building, however? God we do suck at that. Thats why I made the distinction. We tried nation building (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan) and failed miserably, but we are not talking about nation building. We are talking about all out total war, and I've seen enough of the war machine up close to tell you, that if it was unrestrained, it would have laid waste to their targets in short order, and without much fuss. What Russia is doing, from the aspects of their aims, is also not total war, its trying to do nation building in the Ukraine. I hate all war, FWIW, enough experience with it to know better, but it would be a fools errand to take on the US military machine in present by any nation, really. Short of nukes, there just isn't any single nation that could really go to task with it, its massive, and thats why it scares me.
stephc_int13 4y ago
This is diplomatic flexing, and this is part of the intimidation game. It would be foolish for China to go into this war, they have very little to gain in case of success and a lot to lose. Also their probability of success is quite small. They have a large army and they have a lot of equipment and weapons. But war is something special, you can't really train soldiers outside of a real conflict. They are newbs.
markus_zhang 4y ago
I think war is the last resort (as no one really knows what a modern all out war looks like, even when nuclear weapons are out of the picture, which no one is sure either). As long as China is getting some international trading and unemployment is still controllable she should be fine with some pressure from outside. If not then it's really difficult to tell what's going to occur.
rg2004 4y ago
How about this.. China tries anything, and we repatriate Chinese-owned real estate in the western world, and give it to the displaced Taiwanese people.
meowfly 4y ago
I've been pretty skeptical of an invasion scenario. It's never made sense to me, because Taiwan is so close to the Mainland. If Taiwan wanted to, they could do an immense amount of damage to valuable infrastructure. When this is posited online to a Chinese audience, it seems people believe that they would never do that because China would annihilate the country. My take is that China just plans to harass Taiwan. Last week it's believed China cut internet cables. We might continue to see China escalate until they start creating real economic damage (i.e an embargo). This military build up is to make the US more hesitant to get involved in behaviors that don't quite warrant a war, but are severe enough to start pressuring Taiwan for concessions. This whole situation is honestly pretty scary still, because it relies on no miscalculations. My own take is I blame Xi. Past presidents, like Obama, are often blamed for their weak stance against China, but many don't realize Hu Jin Tao was an entirely different leader. All the NYTimes articles about China joining the global order seemed far more reasonable, because Hu was very pro-globalization and no where close to as nationalistic. The KMT (Taiwan's pro-China party), was much stronger when China was run by Hu. Recently Xi has broken convention and is in his third term. He has through anti-corruption campaigns and politicking filled the politburo with his people. There was a brief belief that post-covid, the country would pivot, however that now looks unlikely. China and America are going to have a tumultuous half-decade at-least.
bvoq 4y ago
Who wakes up one day and chooses war? China has no threat from Taiwan, yet they chose violence through preparation. Russia has no threat from Ukraine, yet they chose violence through actions. Disgusting.
- traveler01 4y ago
  And somehow they wil still find a way of blaming NATO on their actions, and some people eat that crap.
  - tpoacher 4y ago
    Having said this, the Economist has been priming us with increased frequency for the necessity of war in Taiwan for a few good weeks/months now. NATO being "to blame" or not, I do have to wonder to what extent such actions being directly precipitated by provocation could have been avoided in the absence of it.
my_city 4y ago
> The economist. The most warmongering piece of shit publication to ever exist. Literally a publication for the pro-slavery british elite that somehow is now considered a reputable source. Google "the economist covers iraq war". Fuck to hell this fiendish "magazine".

58 points by xqcgrek2 4y ago

> Ignore the polite abstractions. The marines are training for a war with China, probably precipitated by an invasion of Taiwan. I guess the consent manufacturing has started. "If shit hits the fan, remember: it was probably China who started it."

ianburrell 4y ago
The initiators of violence are the ones blamed for starting it. Like how Russia is blamed for the invasion of Ukraine.
- avgcorrection 4y ago
  You must be confused. PRC has not invaded anything.
  - spywaregorilla 4y ago
    shit hasn't the fan
  - NicoJuicy 4y ago
    Art of war Pushing Russia to start a war ( friends with no limits was even publicly announced), see how the west reacts, but don't interfere enough ( so you won't get involved and have more time to identify weak points + weaken the enemy support - eg. Availability of artillery supplies). Base yourself on that. Or do you think it's a confidence the invasion started just after the Beijng Olympics ( ~ propaganda)? In the muddy season.
    - avgcorrection 4y ago
      > Or do you think it's a confidence the invasion started just after the Beijng Olympics? Not a “confidence” no, since there were rumors already a year ago that Xi asked Putin to delay the invasion based on that. But it’s a leap from that to claiming that China indirectly master-minded the invasion of Ukraine.
      - NicoJuicy 4y ago
        Coincidence... I'm not saying masterminded, but it embolded Russia. Poo-tin was already eager to show "who's boss" after he didn't get enough "attention" in ~ 2000 for his ego. Little guys...
        avgcorrection 4y ago
        I can see that you are very serious about geopolitics.
        NicoJuicy 4y ago
        I'm jokingly describing the situation where Putin was the first to condolence the US after 9/11 ( for personal gain). But was hurt in his ego because of Iraq, since it was in/near the self-claimed Russian sphere of influence and he wasn't aware until it started. Relations between the US and Russia deteriorated after that. He's been planning "revenge" for the next 20 years => the reference to little guys...
        avgcorrection 4y ago
        Why are you dunking on the US for their illegal invasion of Iraq? This is a thread about China. Stop with the whataboutism.
ilaksh 4y ago
This is the biggest threat to security globally is that once it has been decided that the war is strategic, both sides will use propaganda to motivate their population into thinking that the war is a moral mission. There is not going to be anything moral about it. War is caused by a total failure of management over a number of years. A big part of what is increasing tensions are the real world economic problems globally. Then if the nation-states decide that things are serious enough they will make the calculation that mass murder is a good way to enhance their strategic position. But there will be lies about China, lies about the United States, and a huge propaganda effort to dehumanize the other population or focus on whatever bad acts that have come before in order to justify war which again is a national policy of mass murder. My take is that the leaders that push this war forward should be held to account as criminals themselves since they are advocating for millions to be killed.
- avgcorrection 4y ago
  Yep. All true.
- ianburrell 4y ago
  My worry from debating Chinese nationalists is that they think war is necessary, that it will go their way, and that it will end. I totally understand China wanting to be superpower. They seem to think that the US is coercing everybody, including allies, by force. They think that if US is defeated and they can replace them or at least coerce the local area. I wish they kept using soft power, that was working well for them. They talk about Taiwan falling immediately and nobody helping them. China is stronger now but even alone Taiwan could put up a strong fight. Excluding big change in politics, the US will defend Taiwan. China could still win, but it would be uncertain. They also ignore the consequences like cutting off trade with most of the world. Finally, I'm most worried about how the war ends. If China succeeds in invasion, then war will probably end. But do they realize that trade will never return to normal. Or that South Korea and Japan will build nuclear weapons if US commitment wavers. Also, that there are actions, like attacking US mainland, which will escalate the war and make it hard to end except in nuclear war.
  - 4y ago
rnk 4y ago
No one made Russia invade Ukraine. They could have just... not have invaded them, and they could declare victory and leave tomorrow. It's the same with China and Taiwan here, China can just ... not invade Taiwan if they want to avoid a war.

aborsy 4y ago

I don’t think such war will happen. The tensions will be on technological “supremacy”, political and economic isolation, corporate sanctions, and international support, somewhat a Cold War. I also believe China is a peaking (rather than a rising) power at this stage. Its growth rate has declined from 14% to less than 5% now. China is facing an aging population (due to the one child policy of the past), international hostility, internal political and numerous other problems.

ianburrell 4y ago
I hope China recognizes that challenging the West politically and economically is much better option. I think the best thing China could do would be negotiate with Taiwan for their independence. It is funny that option is never suggested as possibility.
- unity1001 4y ago
  > I hope China recognizes that challenging the West politically and economically is much better option The Taiwan War is being pushed precisely because China has been doing exactly that and the US wants China to stop and do what Japan did in 1985 by signing the Plaza Accords. China will never do that. Hence, the war...
  - ianburrell 4y ago
    China is concerned about currency markets so that is why they have to invade Taiwan? China is strong enough that they don't have to listen. It doesn't really show you are strong to threaten to invade another country to demonstrate strength.
    - unity1001 4y ago
      > China is concerned about currency markets so that is why they have to invade Taiwan? China has to invade Taiwan only if the US starts arming Taiwan to use it as a pawn against China like how the US openly declared that it intends doing. China will not make the mistake of waiting 8 years like Russia. > China is strong enough that they don't have to listen. Any sane observer of geopolitics who doesnt have a 6-figure paycheck that depends depend on saying what his employers want said, would say that China has been silent for way too long and the US would immediately start a war if anyone did so much as to threaten doing what the US has been doing to other countries. Then again, China has only recently reached the military power that could fight the US on even grounds without having to resort to a nuclear war.

ashwagary 4y ago

It's awful that the whole world will possibly be dragged into China's incomplete civil war because of anxious interventionistas. Is this the tipping point for WWIII or will it be isolated enough to not spill over?

roundandround 4y ago
I don't really see how it can't spill over. For example, I've been wondering why China's neighbors wouldn't see Taiwan's independence and/or absorption of Chinese naval capability as an opportunity in their territorial waters disputes and I think it's unlikely none of them would become proxies for (or get favorable arms deals from) the US or others interested in containing China.

swamp40 4y ago

It would be a proxy war, not direct US troop involvement. But China says any response from Taiwan will be taken as a direct response from the US. So, that could go south in a hurry. I think Ukraine showed China exactly what the world response would be to such an invasion - i.e. shunning, so I doubt this would happen except as a way to goad the US into a war. And China certainly isn't ready for that yet. From the US POV, we are only posturing economically so China can't jump ahead of us technologically. I think we are growing concerned their AI vision systems might soon allow suicide drones that can target US politicians. But that's coming anyway. In general, we have finally decided it doesn't make a lot of sense to hand them technology that they then turn around and put into military hardware that will be used against us.

avgcorrection 4y ago
The whole world has not shunned Russia over the invasion.
- rasz 4y ago
  Slowly but surely https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-12/india-to-ensure-no-breach-on-russia-oil-purchase-sanctions?srnd=premium-middle-east https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-12/india-to-... https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/india-to-ensure-no-breach-on-russia-oil-purchase-sanctions/articleshow/98585120.cms https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/...
- baal80spam 4y ago
  OK, whole/most of the _civilized_ world did.
  - rnk 4y ago
    China, India, Syria, NK, a few other countries. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-gets-shrugs-in-india-outrage-over-ukraine-war-isnt-universal/ar-AA18h8OD https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/russia-gets-shrugs-in-i...

chester195 4y ago

https://archive.is/rTwVK https://archive.is/rTwVK

Overtonwindow 4y ago

I disagree. War is too expensive for both countries and no calculus beyond lunacy can reason it to be a positive

1270018080 4y ago
Russia invaded Ukraine for basically no reason, it still happened. If you have enough fervent nationalism in the population and an authoritarian government, lunacy isn't going to stop anything.
- HarryHirsch 4y ago
  Russia invaded Ukraine over control of the ports of Sebastopol and Odessa, and over control of the Varangian Road from the Black Sea to Moscow. These are immediate national security concerns. There were those of us who looked at the Eastern expansion of NATO with great concern, a proxy war was going to be fought, and Europe was going to have to deal with the refugees and the political instability.
  - rnk 4y ago
    And so why did Russia invade or attack Moldova and multiple other countries like Georgia? I believe the underlying reason is Russia wants to absorb all of those back or at least control them with puppets. I'm sure in each country they can point to a national security issue. Russia is going to invade and control all the small countries around them unless Europe works together to stop them with the US.
    - HarryHirsch 4y ago
      And so why did Russia invade or attack Moldova and multiple other countries like Georgia? Alsace was fought over by Germany and France for centuries for very much the same reason - access to defensible terrain and natural resources. Many Europeans do not care for US proxy wars but they are affected by political instability and hordes of war refugees.
  - 4y ago

yalogin 4y ago

This has a very ominous inevitable tone to it. I question how wise it is to even publish an article with this tone given how grave the consequences of such a war would be. Just reading the title sent a chill for me. Any war like that will push the whole world into protracted recession and it will be hell for every country.

Invictus0 4y ago
Is your head in the sand? The US has been preparing for this war for years.
- skinnymuch 4y ago
  Yes that’s manufactured consent. Not a good thing. Being surprised by BS nationalism is good. People should be shocked by how bad this is for the world.
avgcorrection 4y ago
The Press’ place is to massage public opinion. It is not their place to worry about the consequences of yelling Fire.
- flandish 4y ago
  Except for when they are a purchased tool for a philosophy called “manufactured consent.” Remember all those articles about why we “should” go invade iraq? Or that report about a completely fabricated gulf of tonkin incident? The media has a duty to report facts, only after they know them to be facts. Well.. they used to have that duty. Now it’s just clickbait.
  - avgcorrection 4y ago
    That’s what I meant by massage public opinion.
sb618 4y ago
I definitely appreciate that inflammatory articles might push us closer to war but it also seems rather dangerous to cover up anything that suggests war. That feels a bit reminiscent of Neville Chamberlain before WWII.

ergonaught 4y ago

I’ve always found it strange that military planning and training is considered newsworthy and informational. I’d be a whole lot more upset and surprised if USA and China were not preparing for a war over Taiwan. It is one of the top 3 most likely sparks for war between them. Which is not to say that it is “likely”.

twblalock 4y ago
Seriously. We should even be training for war with Canada -- just in case. Getting ready for a war does not provoke war. Both sides are doing it, we know each other are doing it, we do war games all the time all over the world and it's fine. Freaking the public out about how the game is played is the real danger. That happened with the balloon incident too -- oh gee China spies on us? Yeah, and we spy on them too, and we've got way better stuff than balloons, and they know it.
- SapporoChris 4y ago
  "War of 1812, when troops from Canada — then a British colony — marched to Washington, D.C., finished James and Dolly Madison’s unfinished dinner and burned down the White House. " https://www.politico.eu/article/us-war-with-canada-cross-border-squabble-history/ https://www.politico.eu/article/us-war-with-canada-cross-bor...
  - cafard 4y ago
    Wow, all the way from Montreal? The troops were landed on the Patuxent River, and marched a considerably shorter distance to Washington. I would also mention that the British called the burning retaliation for the burning of York (now Toronto). But supposedly the War Department had plans in its files for an invasion of Canada as late as the 1930s.
    - SapporoChris 4y ago
      That's a great clarification. Yes, the didn't march the entire distance. The war was very much a naval exercise.

no_wizard 4y ago

Is anyone really equipped to go to war with the USA? Unrestrained war with the US war machine would be....catastrophic, to say the least. I mean for both parties, but the US out spends everyone by a wide margin[0] and the US military is very advanced and well resourced, and well trained. Even if the fighting was just constrained to Taiwan, it would be pretty bad for everyone, but I think it would be especially bad for China. Now just for the mental exercise, if we take nukes off the table and assume actual, all out, total war, I'm pretty sure the US can level just about any country on earth, or at least, we have the hubris to believe we can. With nukes? well, I mean, I had a good life I guess, thats pretty apocalyptic, but I'm certain the US would have more than enough ICBMs and the like to level an entire country in hours [0]: https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2023/jan/military- https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2023/jan/military-...

curiousgal 4y ago
Maybe you're overestimating the USA the way Russia was overestimated. How many actual wars did the USA win? Out of Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Gulf War only the latter was an actual victory.
- no_wizard 4y ago
  Actual wars? In WWII the US engaged successfully in a two front war as part of the allied coalition and more directly against Imperial Japan, and I don't think that should be understated. What we call in the US the Korean War was a good show of military might, and ended short of things getting out of hand. The Gulf War is another decisive showing of force. Nation building, however? God we do suck at that. Thats why I made the distinction. We tried nation building (Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan) and failed miserably, but we are not talking about nation building. We are talking about all out total war, and I've seen enough of the war machine up close to tell you, that if it was unrestrained, it would have laid waste to their targets in short order, and without much fuss. What Russia is doing, from the aspects of their aims, is also not total war, its trying to do nation building in the Ukraine. I hate all war, FWIW, enough experience with it to know better, but it would be a fools errand to take on the US military machine in present by any nation, really. Short of nukes, there just isn't any single nation that could really go to task with it, its massive, and thats why it scares me.

stephc_int13 4y ago

This is diplomatic flexing, and this is part of the intimidation game. It would be foolish for China to go into this war, they have very little to gain in case of success and a lot to lose. Also their probability of success is quite small. They have a large army and they have a lot of equipment and weapons. But war is something special, you can't really train soldiers outside of a real conflict. They are newbs.

markus_zhang 4y ago

I think war is the last resort (as no one really knows what a modern all out war looks like, even when nuclear weapons are out of the picture, which no one is sure either). As long as China is getting some international trading and unemployment is still controllable she should be fine with some pressure from outside. If not then it's really difficult to tell what's going to occur.

rg2004 4y ago

How about this.. China tries anything, and we repatriate Chinese-owned real estate in the western world, and give it to the displaced Taiwanese people.

meowfly 4y ago

I've been pretty skeptical of an invasion scenario. It's never made sense to me, because Taiwan is so close to the Mainland. If Taiwan wanted to, they could do an immense amount of damage to valuable infrastructure. When this is posited online to a Chinese audience, it seems people believe that they would never do that because China would annihilate the country. My take is that China just plans to harass Taiwan. Last week it's believed China cut internet cables. We might continue to see China escalate until they start creating real economic damage (i.e an embargo). This military build up is to make the US more hesitant to get involved in behaviors that don't quite warrant a war, but are severe enough to start pressuring Taiwan for concessions. This whole situation is honestly pretty scary still, because it relies on no miscalculations. My own take is I blame Xi. Past presidents, like Obama, are often blamed for their weak stance against China, but many don't realize Hu Jin Tao was an entirely different leader. All the NYTimes articles about China joining the global order seemed far more reasonable, because Hu was very pro-globalization and no where close to as nationalistic. The KMT (Taiwan's pro-China party), was much stronger when China was run by Hu. Recently Xi has broken convention and is in his third term. He has through anti-corruption campaigns and politicking filled the politburo with his people. There was a brief belief that post-covid, the country would pivot, however that now looks unlikely. China and America are going to have a tumultuous half-decade at-least.

bvoq 4y ago

Who wakes up one day and chooses war? China has no threat from Taiwan, yet they chose violence through preparation. Russia has no threat from Ukraine, yet they chose violence through actions. Disgusting.

traveler01 4y ago
And somehow they wil still find a way of blaming NATO on their actions, and some people eat that crap.
- tpoacher 4y ago
  Having said this, the Economist has been priming us with increased frequency for the necessity of war in Taiwan for a few good weeks/months now. NATO being "to blame" or not, I do have to wonder to what extent such actions being directly precipitated by provocation could have been avoided in the absence of it.

my_city 4y ago

> The economist. The most warmongering piece of shit publication to ever exist. Literally a publication for the pro-slavery british elite that somehow is now considered a reputable source. Google "the economist covers iraq war". Fuck to hell this fiendish "magazine".