Of course they did.
If they showed that their existing carriers were safe against attack, that wouldn't be productive now would it. If you want new carriers, you need to show the old ones are no damn good.
it is time to recognize Taiwan...
- Thread starter barnacler
- Start date
If they showed that their existing carriers were safe against attack, that wouldn't be productive now would it. If you want new carriers, you need to show the old ones are no damn good.
Then imagine what Taiwan could do to any Chinese forces with their American Equipment.
Taiwan will not capitulate to China, nor be forced to join them.
I imagine Taiwan would do to Chinese forces what
the Republic of Formosa did to Imperial Japan in
1895---token resistance followed by subordination.
Last edited:
Id say comparing weapon deployments today compared to 1895 is ridiculous. Its a whole other world now.
Being on an island with an airforce. So long as their planes and missiles hold out the PRC can't land anything. Then add in the USA mutual defense treaty. The British are there now. And if they take damage NATO kicks in. Then Australia and India(who share a land border with the PRC).
China won't do it because the long term price is too high. There is a lot of hate on for them right now, they have already lost the PR war.
There will be no need for invasion. There will be a referendum, and Taiwan will rejoin PRC.
Give it a little time.
Invasion and takeover of a Taiwan fighting by itself
will be a cakewalk for PRC. In the Korean war the red
army without the support of bombers and fighters in
the air braved overwhelming firepower to push back
the allies to the 38th parallel at the cost of nearly one
million casualties. PRC army today equipped with
stolen U.S. military technology shouldn't have much
difficulty braving U.S. supplied missiles crossing the
Taiwan Strait. We will have to station our soldiers
along the coastline to fight off landing invaders.
In such event I'd rather our boys hide behind the
butts of the U.S. soldiers like the Saudi army in
the 1st Gulf War. It is not worth the sacrifice of
their lives just to piss off the communists.
will be a cakewalk for PRC. In the Korean war the red
army without the support of bombers and fighters in
the air braved overwhelming firepower to push back
the allies to the 38th parallel at the cost of nearly one
million casualties. PRC army today equipped with
stolen U.S. military technology shouldn't have much
difficulty braving U.S. supplied missiles crossing the
Taiwan Strait. We will have to station our soldiers
along the coastline to fight off landing invaders.
In such event I'd rather our boys hide behind the
butts of the U.S. soldiers like the Saudi army in
the 1st Gulf War. It is not worth the sacrifice of
their lives just to piss off the communists.
What most people here do not realize, is that the Taiwan's manufacturing and economy is very tightly linked to PRC. Much more so than USA's.
I imagine that PRC could cripple Taiwan's economy any day they want to. That might be a powerful incentive to vote for reunification, maybe via a special status for 50 years.
PS: The second largest political party in Taiwan supports a form of reunification with PRC.
I imagine that PRC could cripple Taiwan's economy any day they want to. That might be a powerful incentive to vote for reunification, maybe via a special status for 50 years.
PS: The second largest political party in Taiwan supports a form of reunification with PRC.
Are you comparing launching a invasion over land to an invasion over a substantial body of water. By an army with no real experience [which matters] in doing so against a small target with limited shoreline. Even ignoring the dominance of the US navy. You just did that right?
His argument was reasonable. I don't know enough of business relations between the two countries but I'm sure you can tell me why his analysis is flawed.
I understand the U.S. fleet of aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines
have the might to make the shoreline of Taiwan impenetrable. PRC would
be smart enough to hold back its invading army onshore at the crossing
point. They are known to be very patient with the takeover of Hong
Kong--Chairman Mao actually had the option of seizing the colony half a
century before 1997. The U.S. can station its fleet in Taiwan Strait permanently
or until it goes bankrupt.
Once the U.S. navy is gone the lack of experience on the part of the PRC
army should not be a factor. Stalin was planning to invade Japan at the
end of WWII using an army with little experience in naval warfare.
Last edited:
No idea. It's just a general principle. He's wrong way more often that he is right about anything so it is best just to ignore him.
If he is right on this particular case you should assume it is by accident.
In general, though, he has pushed the "countries that have trade will never go to war against each other" for decades now. He even used to jokingly call it the Golden Arches Theory of Deterrence or something stupid like that. (No two countries with a McDonald's have gone to war).
I see no reason to believe him about this.
Taiwan has the technology and means to covertly create a MAD (mutually assured destruction) scenario.
The US will not allow this so they are committed to defending Taiwan, but to what degree is debatable.
Same goes for Japan.
China has allowed North Korea to reach this status while violating every agreement they ever made, so why not let Taiwan do the same?
I think the status quo will continue long after all of us are gone.
The US will not allow this so they are committed to defending Taiwan, but to what degree is debatable.
Same goes for Japan.
China has allowed North Korea to reach this status while violating every agreement they ever made, so why not let Taiwan do the same?
I think the status quo will continue long after all of us are gone.
It does a pretty good job of explaining why despite the occasional tough talk, no western country is willing to piss off China.
