4 ms·

The war would start if China starts an invasion and not before. That is completely on China.

lenkite 3y ago
No, its not. The U.S. cannot abrogate responsibility. Taiwan is not recognized by the U.N. If the U.S. declares Taiwan as a free, independent nation when the Chinese have an explicitly declared, stated political claim since independence and the U.S. has left the matter as "strategically ambiguous" for decades, then such a deliberate change in position along with active militarization of Taiwan simply begs for Chinese intervention. The U.S. has started bombing campaigns for less reasons when organizations whose existence it has objected to have become armed. So the sanctimonious hypocrisy of baiting someone then claiming foul when the other responds won't really work here. The U.S. media will of-course fully blame China with 24x7 "evil china" campaigns. The non-NATO world will just shake their heads.
- samus 3y ago
  Taiwan is the rump state of the ROC, which admittedly survived so far because of US influence. But Taiwan is also not recognized by most states as a country because of China flexing its diplomatic and economic muscles. Many countries also just don't like the West. The current status quo is quite confusing, but has resulted in economic prosperity on both sides of the straits and mutual economic dependency of China and the West. There is little to gain and a whole lot to lose for all involved parties.
  - lenkite 3y ago
    Precisely. But a significant section of the U.S. government and lots of high-income U.S. citizens WANT to change the status quo. See OP. And there are good, legitimate reasons that most non-NATO nations don't like the West. They have brone the brunt of NATO interventions. Or American support for terrorism and coups. The rich strata of the U.S. who would never serve in a real, active war and have never faced human suffering in their lives - will actively cheer on and sponsor the losing side resulting in extreme number of human casualties.
    - samus 3y ago
      I don't really agree; the training mission can contribute to stabilize the situation. It raises the incentives to not change the status quo, for both sides, since contrary to most past US interventions, escalating this issue will hurt US interests as well. Even if one side prevails without large-scale destruction, the economic impact would be severe for both sides. Apart from that, the training mission could be recalled just as quickly again. Curious about what's gonna happen after the next election.
- Paradigma11 3y ago
  Where is the US is talking about officially recognizing Taiwan? The only thing changing is that there are US soldiers in Taiwan, so if China invades it might kill them and trigger a response. It shouldnt be that hard not to invade Taiwan in the first place, many countries are not doing it.
sandspar 3y ago
China doesn't want to invade. It thinks of Taiwan like a rebellious child who will one day return home. Chinese leaders well understand that invasion would be catastrophic, both on a realistic level of money and loss of life, and more importantly on a symbolic level. It may invade but it does not wish to do so.
- Paradigma11 3y ago
  China is a big boy and responsible for its own actions. If it does not want to invade, it does not have to.
ifyoubuildit 3y ago
"Not touching you! Not touching you! Still not touching you! Ow! Moooooom, he just hit me for no reason! Seriously, I wasn't doing anything at all"
- Paradigma11 3y ago
  One is being annoying. The other is assault.
  - ifyoubuildit 3y ago
    We're talking about nations though. Calling it assault doesn't win you anything. It just means you got yourself assaulted when you could have not, and there's no authority that's going to make it right for you.
  - maxglute 3y ago
    Since PRC represents "Chinese" territory at UN, one is illegal trespassing, other is self defense. US physically inserting itself in PRC territory during a legally ongoing civil war and eventually getting slapped is perfectly "legal", whether legality matters in international law when great powers interest clash is another matter.

No, its not. The U.S. cannot abrogate responsibility. Taiwan is not recognized by the U.N. If the U.S. declares Taiwan as a free, independent nation when the Chinese have an explicitly declared, stated political claim since independence and the U.S. has left the matter as "strategically ambiguous" for decades, then such a deliberate change in position along with active militarization of Taiwan simply begs for Chinese intervention. The U.S. has started bombing campaigns for less reasons when organizations whose existence it has objected to have become armed. So the sanctimonious hypocrisy of baiting someone then claiming foul when the other responds won't really work here. The U.S. media will of-course fully blame China with 24x7 "evil china" campaigns. The non-NATO world will just shake their heads.

samus 3y ago
Taiwan is the rump state of the ROC, which admittedly survived so far because of US influence. But Taiwan is also not recognized by most states as a country because of China flexing its diplomatic and economic muscles. Many countries also just don't like the West. The current status quo is quite confusing, but has resulted in economic prosperity on both sides of the straits and mutual economic dependency of China and the West. There is little to gain and a whole lot to lose for all involved parties.
- lenkite 3y ago
  Precisely. But a significant section of the U.S. government and lots of high-income U.S. citizens WANT to change the status quo. See OP. And there are good, legitimate reasons that most non-NATO nations don't like the West. They have brone the brunt of NATO interventions. Or American support for terrorism and coups. The rich strata of the U.S. who would never serve in a real, active war and have never faced human suffering in their lives - will actively cheer on and sponsor the losing side resulting in extreme number of human casualties.
  - samus 3y ago
    I don't really agree; the training mission can contribute to stabilize the situation. It raises the incentives to not change the status quo, for both sides, since contrary to most past US interventions, escalating this issue will hurt US interests as well. Even if one side prevails without large-scale destruction, the economic impact would be severe for both sides. Apart from that, the training mission could be recalled just as quickly again. Curious about what's gonna happen after the next election.
Paradigma11 3y ago
Where is the US is talking about officially recognizing Taiwan? The only thing changing is that there are US soldiers in Taiwan, so if China invades it might kill them and trigger a response. It shouldnt be that hard not to invade Taiwan in the first place, many countries are not doing it.

sandspar 3y ago

China doesn't want to invade. It thinks of Taiwan like a rebellious child who will one day return home. Chinese leaders well understand that invasion would be catastrophic, both on a realistic level of money and loss of life, and more importantly on a symbolic level. It may invade but it does not wish to do so.

Paradigma11 3y ago
China is a big boy and responsible for its own actions. If it does not want to invade, it does not have to.

ifyoubuildit 3y ago

"Not touching you! Not touching you! Still not touching you! Ow! Moooooom, he just hit me for no reason! Seriously, I wasn't doing anything at all"

Paradigma11 3y ago
One is being annoying. The other is assault.
- ifyoubuildit 3y ago
  We're talking about nations though. Calling it assault doesn't win you anything. It just means you got yourself assaulted when you could have not, and there's no authority that's going to make it right for you.
- maxglute 3y ago
  Since PRC represents "Chinese" territory at UN, one is illegal trespassing, other is self defense. US physically inserting itself in PRC territory during a legally ongoing civil war and eventually getting slapped is perfectly "legal", whether legality matters in international law when great powers interest clash is another matter.