ok, Im going to make this very quick.

China as we all know has become in the last years one of the most powerful countries in the world.
Lately it has stated that Taiwan is part of their mainland and any attempt to halt reunification will lead to a possible war to ensure its reunification.

Taiwan, as stupid as it is (not the people the government, as most of the people would like to reunify with China) refuses to come to any peaceful agreement with the mainland. Yet Taiwan would benefit so much from this reuinifaction, its in their interest.

Anyway, I do not see Taiwan and China joining back together in the near future.
(If I governed China, I would think of taking out Taiwan's president, he is the one causing dissagreements.)
Realistically, China would declare war on Taiwan.
And as we know, US has a habit of interfering with other countries interests in various parts of the world.

US has repeatadly stated it will back Taiwan in war.

However, China has formed a strong alliance with Russia, India, aswell as Brazil.


A few comments related to the UN:
-Has encouraged peacefull reunification
-Would consider allowing China attacking Taiwan if no agreement is obtained.
-US does not like to follow UN rules. (Why are they so special?)

A few economic factors:
-China is the fastest growing economy with $B100 a year.
-China has huge maturites invested in US
-China has a huge population
-US has a huge debt to China
-"US are China's customers"
-(Many South American countries are opposed to US's government, Venezuela would consider war)


This could well be WWIII.
Furthermore, Japan and US have close relations, Great Britan would probably follow any orders from US.
(US also has close relations with Isreal, Australia)


I'd like to know what people think of this.
Do you think this issue will be resolved peacefully or by war?
What countries would cooperate in the war?
What would be the outcomes?

[edit on 9-1-2006 by ufobug]

[edit on 9-1-2006 by ufobug]

Well i would have to say it would for one depend on who got in on the war, I would imagine that if Russia did and they were provocted far engough they might use the nuclear option, but the US would as well, secondly China is on its way to haveing one of the largest navys in the world and if they built enough ships they could land an invasion force on the island, Thirdly Venaslia wouldnt need to move troops by sea if they were giving the okay by there nebiors they could march troops though Mexico and into America that wouldnt be hard, supply wise it could be but other then that it would defantly work. So in thinking of many possiablites of military stragey, i would say lets wait and see how it plays out if it does

Russia wouldnt be able to move troops in to help China. . . there is a area on the northern Chinesse border were Russia is nebioring them, they could easily move troops, armor, and matrial across it to help China in a ground war agianst Taiwan

There is no way Mexico allow Venezuela(or any other country) troops into our territory and remember countries like Bolivia(their president is going to Iran, Iran has stated they want to strength their relations with the socialist goverments in south america) and the classic, Cuba.
Also, you forgot Pakistan, they have nukes and are semi-allies of the US, they also hate India so the USA has one more nuclear ally in this theoretical war.

ps. sorry my english o_o

[edit on 10-1-2006 by Zeratul]

[edit on 10-1-2006 by Zeratul]

Originally posted by k4rupt


Well, the Kuomingtang party has recently won the elections and has the majority power in Taiwan's parliament. The KMT party is looking to pass an ANTI-SECCESSION law. If you know anything about Taiwan's politics (which I really doubt you know) the KMT party is pro-reunification.

[edit on 9-1-2006 by k4rupt]

Hello K4rupt

That's the big difference, isn't it? They have a democracy in Taiwan and a non-democratic form of 'socialism' in the People's Republic. Why would a population that has the right to change the government by ballot reunify with a population that, frankly, has precious few rights?

Is the KMT actively looking to join the People's Republic of China, or is the 'anti-secessionist' law aimed at stopping any further trouble with mainland China? Wasn't it an implicit (or even explicit) threat that Beijing would invade if Taiwan ever tried to become an 'official' country?

Regards

TD

Basically, Taiwan will receive 50 years of non-intervention just like HK and Macau. Most people (Chinese) know that 50 years down the road, China would have some sort of democracy... if not democracy itself.

The way China is changing, IMO cannot be done any better. Gradual adaptation of Democracy. Look at Russia and Eastern Europe. I remember reading a sign that said "We miss you Communism" in Yugoslavia.

And BTW its a FACT that the KMT party wants reunification with the mainland.

[edit on 10-1-2006 by k4rupt]

Originally posted by ufobug
However, China has formed a strong alliance with Russia, India, aswell as Brazil.

All of which would be destroyed by the US nuclear stockpile.

Nothing can defeat the US, or Russia, because of their cold war era world devouring nuclear weapons. Russia is disadvantaged because its conventional army is poorly funded and doesn't seem to have any power projection abilities left.

Nice theory, but I don't think WW3 is about to start. The UN would not allow for it, along with other countries. If there was the slightest possibility of WW3 it would be all over the papers. I doubt also that most of your "allies" of China would actually back China in a war against the United States and its allies. They are too smart for that.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by ufobug
However, China has formed a strong alliance with Russia, India, aswell as Brazil.

All of which would be destroyed by the US nuclear stockpile.

Nothing can defeat the US, or Russia, because of their cold war era world devouring nuclear weapons. Russia is disadvantaged because its conventional army is poorly funded and doesn't seem to have any power projection abilities left.

That is irrational. The US would not jump to full scale nuclear war.

And after the Iraq War, you think America's allies would back the U.S. against China? Look around and open your eyes. No one will support the U.S. in a war against China. Go read up some current events and see how much criticism world leaders that supported the US in the invasion against Iraq are getting. I.E. Tony Blaire. Do you think the American people would suport such a LARGE SCALE war? Take a look at the polls, how many Americans suppot the Iraq war hm?

Originally posted by Nygdan

All of which would be destroyed by the US nuclear stockpile.

Another "Imma nuke you, we're invincible" American statement... Some people really have to learn that war isn't just fun and games, PEOPLE DIE. Do you honestly think that those nations won't use THEIR nuclear weapons back at the U.S. if the U.S. used nukes against them? Millions of Americans would be dead alongisde those "destroyed by the US nuclear stockpile".

[edit on 11-1-2006 by k4rupt]

[edit on 11-1-2006 by k4rupt]

well, although I doubt the claim that most of Taiwan wants to re-unify, a seccesionist move is as likely as anything to kick off WW3.

For likely allies, look no further than other regional powers that have an interest in China being thwarted. Japan and South Korea come to mind. (although getting those two over thier differences may be challenge enough) Singapore is in excellent position to be a support base, if things start escalating out of theater.

For those likely to side with China, it's a bit more difficult to say. North Korea would probrably jump on any anti-US bandwagon they can find, especially with their primary supporters. While in a full scale 1 on 1 war with the US N. Korea would be in serious trouble, in a multi-party war involving China they've certainly got enough guns, rockets, and everything else pointing at South Korea to keep the US pretty tightly tied up there. By no means an insignifigant contribution, especially if the main theater shifts to the Korean peninsula.

India and Pakistan probrably would stay out of the fight. freinds are nice, but friends that get you into nuclear shootouts I think they could do without. It's in thier mutual self interest not to get involved. Venezuala is just as likely to say "no thanks" to getting involved. European involvment should occur on the US side, but I cannot see many European countries outside the UK going really gung-ho into a potentially nuclear war.

Now Russia becomes a VERY interesting potential antagonist. I do not see them getting worked up and going into WW3 just to try and get China 1 little island. However, getting involved with the Korean War, part two, is another matter. Russia becomes the true wild card in this match-up, who's involvement depends entirely on the success of diplomacy to keep them out, or the actions of others to draw them in. The only thing I see for Russia to gain out of the whole mess is to try and act as the peace broker, much as the US did in the middle east after the Arabs and Isrealees started shooting at eachother. (thereby displacing the others as a regional power)

As for Nukes, I do not hink any country would use nukes over the fate of Taiwan. However, any country that has them may use them if thier own fate is on the line. Which makes the most likely user of a nuclear weapon in a Taiwan based WW3 North Korea. The final questions that raises of course are 1) who are they shooting at? and 2) how far along is BMD?

I could see North Korea using a nuclear device and the US withholding the use of thier own.

*edit* in more or less direct responce to the post above, I'd expect far more support for a war with a more clearly defined external cause than was seen in Iraq. (both at home and abroad) However, I fully agree that many nations would be quite reluctant to involve themselves. GW burnt up a lot of clout there.

[edit on 11-1-2006 by Travellar]

Japan and S. Korea is NOT going to go into direct military conflict against China...
YOu honestly think the U.S. alone can handle China, Iraq, possible Iran AND NK? *dont even get started on GB, they are NOT going to be there with men supporting the fight.

I'd expect far more support for a war with a more clearly defined external cause than was seen in Iraq.

You have got to be kiddin... We can all agree that the United States has barely any support in the Iraq war... abroad or home. The reason for the Iraq War is because Iraq was said to have WMDs that was a danger against the U.S. What would be the excuse presented to the American public in a war 50x bigger than the Iraq War with possible NUKES involved... Only 2000 dead in Iraq and supoprt of the war is almost unheard of. How many Americans do you honestly think would die in a war against China? (*hint: a lot more)

Would the American public risk the lives of hundreds of thousands of American casualities to support this war that has NO affect on the U.S.? I don't think so...

I know that as long as China plays it's cards right, the United States would have NO support at HOME or ABROAD in a war against China.



[edit on 11-1-2006 by k4rupt]

but playing thier cards right cannot include an overt invasion of what most people realise is in fact a free running democracy.

As for Japan, they're the other major regional power, and would have much to gain froma Chineese defeat or embarrassment.

And South Korea may not have much choice, if North Korea decides it's a good opportunity to invade.

Still, time is the biggest factor. Right now would be bad, in a few years once BMD is up and commitments in Iraq and Afganistan drop to levels comperable with European commitments prior to the Persian Gulf war. 1991.

A free running democracy... Taiwan's government is FILLED with corruption on both parties AND there are members of the parliament who have TRIAD affiliations. Imagine the senate being filed with mafia kingpins and you have an idea about Taiwanese politics.

As for Japan, they're the other major regional power, and would have much to gain froma Chineese defeat or embarrassment.

Japan? Their constitution doesn't even permit them to go offensive and I seriously doubt Japan wants to go into military conflict with China. China is just waiting for an excuse to get revenge on the Japanese brutality against them in WWII. Japan is definately out of the question, they would in NO WAY be militarily involved.

What would Japan gain from a Chinese defeat?

Hello. To paraphase Churchill, Democracy is a crappy system, but can you think of a better one?

Not denying a good percentage of politicians are corrupt - all over the world, not just in Taiwan. *However*, if you have a modicum of a free press and free elections, there is at least some accountability.

Who tells Chinese officials when *they* have crossed the line?

I don't have any candle burning for Taiwan, but give me an imperfect democracy over a repressive autocracy any day.

TD

Yes I do agree democracy is better than autocracy, but without the Communist takeover in China, would China be where it is right now? I honestly doubt so. It wuold've been overrun by local warloads, foreigners, bandits... Now when the KMT went to Taiwan, they didn't have to face these problems which is why they were able to create a running democracy. But China is changing towards democracy, slowly but surely. Like Tom Clancy said, "Communism can only hold the Chinese down so long."

Even if Japan needed to stay nominally out of a war, by providing secure bases for US operations, they could be just as valuble. In addition, China would have to contend with the actual power, (not just the theoreticly limited power) of Japan's military in order to consider the possibility of takeing out US bases in the area, or otherwise limiting US influence.

Like I said before, the U.S. would not even be involved if China plays it's cards right. If the U.S. DOES decide to go ahead with it, it would be Vietnam all over again. This war CANNOT be won without the support of the American public.



[edit on 13-1-2006 by k4rupt]