5 ms·

It is not a matter of risk. If the USA fails to liveup to its obligations we are done as a world power, period. There is no calculation here in which we would b

It is not a matter of risk. If the USA fails to liveup to its obligations we are done as a world power, period. There is no calculation here in which we would back down.

a8da6b0c91d 13y ago
I think a high casualty count and domestic food shortages would finish the USA as a world power even in victory. The American people have only ever weakly supported the global policeman imperial project. Americans would gladly go right back to being a continental power if the going got tough.
- ForHackernews 13y ago
  There wouldn't be food shortages. The US in a net exporter of foodstuffs, and produces about 50% of the world's grain. I agree that the US people are mostly not interested in being an empire, and massive economic disruption plus high casualties would mean a very very unpopular war.
  - a8da6b0c91d 13y ago
    International shipping would shut down and oil would go up 20X. Domestic transport would be problem very quickly. The shock to the financial system would mean most people were broke and the food production/distribution system runs on credit, which wouldn't exist. A jackbooted rationing system would probably dole out enough gruel to keep people from starving.
    - ForHackernews 13y ago
      The US is on track to be the world's largest oil producer this year[1] and it has an outstanding freight rail system for moving bulk goods like corn or wheat. Don't get me wrong, a US-China war would be absolutely catastrophic in both humanitarian and economic terms, but the average US citizen wasn't exactly starving even during WWII. Unless the war seriously damaged domestic infrastructure, (which it very well could) people would get by with ration coupons and price controls. [1] http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/01/12/will-the-united-states-really-export-oil-heres-wha.aspx http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/01/12/will-the-un...
    - EliRivers 13y ago
      International shipping would shut down As a general rule of thumb, that's not true. From time to time I work with merchant shipping, particularly in times and areas of serious risk (such as warzones) and they don't stop. They happily traversed the straits of Hormuz while missiles were being fired across it. They kept serving Libya during the civil war, with shipping companies literally calling ahead to check which port to head for. They won't stop unless someone starts attacking them specifically, and even then they'll just be going around. China doesn't have the global reach to threaten shipping beyond what is, on the global scale, a small range, and threatening the shipping in their own waters would harm them more than anyone else.
jsun 13y ago
Of course there is. We need to separate intent from action. There's myriads of different actions to achieve the same result. Imagine this scenario: China postures for military action, the U.S does not intent to interfere. Rather than "abandon it's ally" the U.S puts on a show of strength, joint military exercises, recommitting to the defense of Taiwan, the whole 9 yards. Quietly however, the U.S. withdraws support for secessionist factions within Taiwan, shifting the fragile equilibrium. pro-china factions gain power quickly, the weakening direct U.S support combined with China's military posturing drives moderates and anti-war secessionists towards the pro-china faction. With the balance of power now in their favor, mainland + the pro-china factions ramp up propaganda efforts, strengthening ties, eventually setting the stage for reunification. The U.S of course, while "extremely disappointed", won't oppose the popular will of the Taiwanese people. And that's how the U.S abandons its ally without abandoning its ally, and China takes Taiwan by force without ever firing a single shot. Of course, that's just one possible scenario out of thousands. The question here is intent - if the U.S intends to fight China it will for its own purposes. if the U.S doesn't intent to fight China it won't for its own purposes. Countries aren't as beholden to their public image as people think, because there's a million ways to spin anything.
- myrandomcomment 13y ago
  Staying within the story, the Chinese occupation of this island in the Philippines is not an act that could be solved with a show of force. That action is very much a boots on the ground end game. To your other point: I have traveled to Taiwan 6 times in the last year (going again in Feb.) It is quite clear there is close to zero support in the population for reunification under current Chinese (mainland) system. This is not to say there is no support for being part of China again - just not as it is today. If the government of mainland China became an full Democracy however it is clear this would happen.

It is not a matter of risk. If the USA fails to liveup to its obligations we are done as a world power, period. There is no calculation here in which we would back down.

a8da6b0c91d 13y ago

I think a high casualty count and domestic food shortages would finish the USA as a world power even in victory. The American people have only ever weakly supported the global policeman imperial project. Americans would gladly go right back to being a continental power if the going got tough.

ForHackernews 13y ago
There wouldn't be food shortages. The US in a net exporter of foodstuffs, and produces about 50% of the world's grain. I agree that the US people are mostly not interested in being an empire, and massive economic disruption plus high casualties would mean a very very unpopular war.
- a8da6b0c91d 13y ago
  International shipping would shut down and oil would go up 20X. Domestic transport would be problem very quickly. The shock to the financial system would mean most people were broke and the food production/distribution system runs on credit, which wouldn't exist. A jackbooted rationing system would probably dole out enough gruel to keep people from starving.
  - ForHackernews 13y ago
    The US is on track to be the world's largest oil producer this year[1] and it has an outstanding freight rail system for moving bulk goods like corn or wheat. Don't get me wrong, a US-China war would be absolutely catastrophic in both humanitarian and economic terms, but the average US citizen wasn't exactly starving even during WWII. Unless the war seriously damaged domestic infrastructure, (which it very well could) people would get by with ration coupons and price controls. [1] http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/01/12/will-the-united-states-really-export-oil-heres-wha.aspx http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/01/12/will-the-un...
  - EliRivers 13y ago
    International shipping would shut down As a general rule of thumb, that's not true. From time to time I work with merchant shipping, particularly in times and areas of serious risk (such as warzones) and they don't stop. They happily traversed the straits of Hormuz while missiles were being fired across it. They kept serving Libya during the civil war, with shipping companies literally calling ahead to check which port to head for. They won't stop unless someone starts attacking them specifically, and even then they'll just be going around. China doesn't have the global reach to threaten shipping beyond what is, on the global scale, a small range, and threatening the shipping in their own waters would harm them more than anyone else.

jsun 13y ago

Of course there is. We need to separate intent from action. There's myriads of different actions to achieve the same result. Imagine this scenario: China postures for military action, the U.S does not intent to interfere. Rather than "abandon it's ally" the U.S puts on a show of strength, joint military exercises, recommitting to the defense of Taiwan, the whole 9 yards. Quietly however, the U.S. withdraws support for secessionist factions within Taiwan, shifting the fragile equilibrium. pro-china factions gain power quickly, the weakening direct U.S support combined with China's military posturing drives moderates and anti-war secessionists towards the pro-china faction. With the balance of power now in their favor, mainland + the pro-china factions ramp up propaganda efforts, strengthening ties, eventually setting the stage for reunification. The U.S of course, while "extremely disappointed", won't oppose the popular will of the Taiwanese people. And that's how the U.S abandons its ally without abandoning its ally, and China takes Taiwan by force without ever firing a single shot. Of course, that's just one possible scenario out of thousands. The question here is intent - if the U.S intends to fight China it will for its own purposes. if the U.S doesn't intent to fight China it won't for its own purposes. Countries aren't as beholden to their public image as people think, because there's a million ways to spin anything.

myrandomcomment 13y ago
Staying within the story, the Chinese occupation of this island in the Philippines is not an act that could be solved with a show of force. That action is very much a boots on the ground end game. To your other point: I have traveled to Taiwan 6 times in the last year (going again in Feb.) It is quite clear there is close to zero support in the population for reunification under current Chinese (mainland) system. This is not to say there is no support for being part of China again - just not as it is today. If the government of mainland China became an full Democracy however it is clear this would happen.