3 ms·

Right so weapons of war, air raids and bombs, the threat of death is not a big deal but if the US moved nukes to taiwan then China will go into hysteria? If th

Right so weapons of war, air raids and bombs, the threat of death is not a big deal but if the US moved nukes to taiwan then China will go into hysteria? If there was a Chinese carrier off the coast of california (but no nuclear weapons) you're saying that's not a big deal? Of course it's a big deal. It's provocative either way. You're argument is like saying threatening someone with a knife to their throat is not as big of a deal as threatening someone with a gun to their throat. Btw, for the cuban missile crisis, the US already had weapons pointing at Russia from adjacent countries long before Russia made a move.

fnordpiglet 3y ago
I’m not sure any of your points counter any of what I said. The carriers near China are near China because Taiwan is near China, a carrier or even a carrier group isn’t an offensive posture against a nation, it’s too small a force. It’s provocative because there’s a provocative situation between Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines, et al, and China all of whom are U.S. allies. However I don’t see any evidence the U.S. is preparing to attack China. On the rest re: Soviet and U.S. deployments, I’m not taking a side. I’m taking issue with you repeatedly saying “a missile” in the threads, when it was much more than that. Absolutely the Cold War was a two sided war. There were no clean hands. But in the Cuban missile crisis it was much different than the situation in and around Taiwan.
- corethree 3y ago
  >I’m not sure any of your points counter any of what I said. The carriers near China are near China because Taiwan is near China, a carrier or even a carrier group isn’t an offensive posture against a nation, it’s too small a force. It’s provocative because there’s a provocative situation between Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines, et al, and China all of whom are U.S. allies. However I don’t see any evidence the U.S. is preparing to attack China. What exactly are you saying then? Taiwan is not an official ally of the US. It's an unofficial relationship. Probably going to be made official soon because it's advantageous to the US. US is not preparing to attack China. The US just wants to keep Taiwan and TSMC out of China to slow down it's economic progress. Additionally the US wants to maintain military power in the pacific and Taiwan is a key strategic point here. China on the other hand sees Taiwan as a rogue state seceding from the Union. Similar to what the southern states tried to do during the US civil war. >On the rest re: Soviet and U.S. deployments, I’m not taking a side. I’m taking issue with you repeatedly saying “a missile” in the threads, when it was much more than that. Absolutely the Cold War was a two sided war. There were no clean hands. But in the Cuban missile crisis it was much different than the situation in and around Taiwan. No i disagree. The US reaction to it was obviously uncharacteristic. Other countries have to accept neighboring threats calmly when they have missiles at their door step but for the US it's unacceptable by their reaction to the missile crisis. I bring it up because it's hypocritical. Of course the US is self aware that what they're doing to other countries is a known physical threat. We know this by their own reaction to weapons on their doorstep during the cuban missile crisis.

fnordpiglet 3y ago

I’m not sure any of your points counter any of what I said. The carriers near China are near China because Taiwan is near China, a carrier or even a carrier group isn’t an offensive posture against a nation, it’s too small a force. It’s provocative because there’s a provocative situation between Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines, et al, and China all of whom are U.S. allies. However I don’t see any evidence the U.S. is preparing to attack China. On the rest re: Soviet and U.S. deployments, I’m not taking a side. I’m taking issue with you repeatedly saying “a missile” in the threads, when it was much more than that. Absolutely the Cold War was a two sided war. There were no clean hands. But in the Cuban missile crisis it was much different than the situation in and around Taiwan.

corethree 3y ago
>I’m not sure any of your points counter any of what I said. The carriers near China are near China because Taiwan is near China, a carrier or even a carrier group isn’t an offensive posture against a nation, it’s too small a force. It’s provocative because there’s a provocative situation between Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines, et al, and China all of whom are U.S. allies. However I don’t see any evidence the U.S. is preparing to attack China. What exactly are you saying then? Taiwan is not an official ally of the US. It's an unofficial relationship. Probably going to be made official soon because it's advantageous to the US. US is not preparing to attack China. The US just wants to keep Taiwan and TSMC out of China to slow down it's economic progress. Additionally the US wants to maintain military power in the pacific and Taiwan is a key strategic point here. China on the other hand sees Taiwan as a rogue state seceding from the Union. Similar to what the southern states tried to do during the US civil war. >On the rest re: Soviet and U.S. deployments, I’m not taking a side. I’m taking issue with you repeatedly saying “a missile” in the threads, when it was much more than that. Absolutely the Cold War was a two sided war. There were no clean hands. But in the Cuban missile crisis it was much different than the situation in and around Taiwan. No i disagree. The US reaction to it was obviously uncharacteristic. Other countries have to accept neighboring threats calmly when they have missiles at their door step but for the US it's unacceptable by their reaction to the missile crisis. I bring it up because it's hypocritical. Of course the US is self aware that what they're doing to other countries is a known physical threat. We know this by their own reaction to weapons on their doorstep during the cuban missile crisis.