It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Taiwan President talks Independence

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by k4rupt
You're duty? Who's duty? The US, EU, UN all agree that Taiwan belongs to China.


Well, officially that is the position, but the agreements are ambiguously
worded, and unofficially the U.S., and most European countries consider
Taiwan a separate entity itself.




Even France has stated that it would not help Taiwan in an event that China decides to attack Taiwan for whatever reason AND the US has stated that they would drop all support for Taiwan if the President declares independence.


France does'nt like going to war, so that is'nt very surprising.
The U.S. would'nt give up all support, but we would not directly/officially
support Taiwan militarily if it declared independence.




posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 05:45 PM
link   
The actual US military expenditure is around $580,000,000,000. Im ok with that. Thats what you would expect from the worlds most powerful nation.

Russia was never a true superpower. Not in the sense that the US is. One of the reasons for the soviets demise was the inability to keep up with the smaller yet more technologically sophisticated american military. It was said that after the soviet collapse the the US was some 10-15 years more advanced militarily speaking then that of russia. Today it is said to be about 25 years behind the US.

It is my belief that the US would come to taiwans aid regardless if they voiced there independence or not. We dont have to "support" their decision. but that still doesnt change the fact that we like japan and Australia, wouldn't help the island out if it ever did get in a bind with the PRC.

Hey I applaud china for "opening up" more. But alot still remains to be seen there. I for one would love to see china become a democracy like the US.

Lets give it a few years though and see just how much more china is willing to open up.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by snafu7700
so you come from a country in which you cannot get a fair trial, and millions of people have been executed or sent to labor camps simply for disagreeing publicly with the government and wanting freedom. sure, you've got every right to call americans "warmongers" and celebrate the death of brave soldiers. guess your history classes dont teach you about how we warmongering americans liberated you from japan's tyranny.

preach your propaganda someplace else, troll.

HAHAHA, From your description of China,
I know how successful the propaganda work made by your government.
the same governmnet once made more than 70% of Americans believe Iraq
own WMD and made people like you believe Chinese people live in hell.
I don't want to defend Chinese government for everything,
But if you hurt the interest of Chinese people(for instance taiwan affair)
you will be our enemy.
yes, USA did something good in history,
but now the fact is USA's reputation is worse than that of China
--a so called autarchy:-)
So Americans should have some self-examination in stead of demonizing others


[edit on 8-3-2007 by gs001]



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Well, the CFR has decided to make a comment on the ongoing talk of independence. They had a rather lengthy article.


It remains unclear if the tensions between Taiwan and China represent anything more than another round of strong rhetoric over Beijing's “one China” policy. The U.S. deal (Defense News) includes 218 air-to-air missiles and 236 Maverick air-to-surface missiles. Beijing opposes the sale of the Maverick missiles, citing concerns Taiwan could use them to arm its F-16 jets. The United States, Taiwan's leading ally, is bound by the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act to provide Taipei with defensive weapons to maintain a balance of power across the strait, given that China is thought to have about nine hundred missiles pointed at Taiwan. But Washington also ended diplomatic recognition of Taiwan during the Carter administration and has warned Taipei not to push for independence, a position repeated by the State Department on March 5 after Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian's recent calls for an independent Taiwan.




Original Source



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 08:51 PM
link   
How can you even define Taiwan as an independent entity? Taiwan's own constiution states VERY clearly that the Province of Taiwan is part of the Republic of China. Taiwan belongs to the Republic of China and the Republic of China belongs to the Chinese people.

President Bush made a statement stating that the U.S. WILL NOT back Taiwan up if the President officialy declares independence or continues to stray from the status quo. How can you guys say that he means any different?

The status quo is simple - the Province of Taiwan will reunify with the new People's Republic of China when the PRC adopt more democratic principles.

There is little doubt that democracy is where China is heading, whether it be in the near or farther future. No one in China is denying that - a recent speech given by the Premier stated that he would see China as a democratic nation, but first must concentrate on more growth to sustain it's path into modernization. Looking at the unbelievable amount of people the gov't has lifted out of poverty and the GENERAL feeling of satisfication among the Chinese people, it makes perfect sense. Now I'm not saying there isn't any problems with the current system, but all in all, I think a gradual approach to democracy would be best for China. Just take a look the Soviet Union and what happened after they immediately went from Communism to Democracy... "We miss you Communism" was a heading of a newspaper in Yugoslavia meant to be a half-joke.



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 02:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by k4rupt
President Bush made a statement stating that the U.S. WILL NOT back Taiwan up if the President officialy declares independence or continues to stray from the status quo. How can you guys say that he means any different?

I think it's interesting in regards to the Tiananmen Square 1989 demonstrations that different PLA units did engage each other. Allegedly some did attempt to protect the demonstrators from other elements of the PLA. I wonder if the same would apply if the PLA attacked taiwan? Possibly putting china on the brink of a civil war?

I find it odd how we the US would come to taiwans aid only if china attacked the island in the name of "reunification" but yet we wouldnt come to its aid if taiwan did infact claim independence forcing the chinese to attack the small island anyways. Sounds a bit contradictory to me.. I dont see it.. I dont see america, the leader of the free world, sitting around twiddling its thumbs while communist china fights a small independent democracy like taiwan. I dont think the america ppl would stand for it either. And what about Australia and Japan? ..Think theyre just going to sit idly by and watch?..



The status quo is simple - the Province of Taiwan will reunify with the new People's Republic of China when the PRC adopt more democratic principles.

I dont know about that. One of the worrys china has about becoming a democracy is that china would then 'break up' into several different nations. If that is the case. This would give taiwan more of a reason to claim its independence..

Plus, how do you administer democracy to 1.25 Billion people? India can't do it properly, and hell, the USA even has a few problems with it as well.. Western democracies which we live in today are a result of hundreds of years of development, a bit of bloodshed, greed, slavery and eventual rising of the 'masses'. China effectively has a 5000 year tradition of dictatorship. It would be foolish to think that could change in 10 to 20 or to even 50 years. Though I suppose anything is possible.. And shouldnt be ruled out. I just happen to think china has a long ways to go in regards to becoming a democracy.

Heres a read by the futurist. It predicts china will become a democracy by 2015, "or its growth rate slows down dramatically after 2015, to a rate not much faster than that of the US. The two are mutually exclusive, so one of the two must occur. "
futurist.typepad.com...

I just dont see it happening by 2015..




[edit on 023131p://5403am by semperfoo]



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 05:23 AM
link   
NO ONE in the world has the right to decide who owns taiwan besides themselves and china. Taiwan especially should settle whatever they feel they owe in per person taxes and any owing national debt and pay them to china. Then move to make themselves independent.

We here in canada have the same issue with quebec wanting to separate. I'm all for it because its their right as a people and their provincial government what they want to do with their land.

ALSO the U.s wouldn't dare get involved because China would beat them down the ground and they know it. This isn't fighting iraq and Afghānistān who are in the stone ages and can't rub two pennies together.

[edit on 9-3-2007 by leafer]



posted on Mar, 9 2007 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfoo


I find it odd how we the US would come to taiwans aid only if china attacked the island in the name of "reunification" but yet we wouldnt come to its aid if taiwan did infact claim independence forcing the chinese to attack the small island anyways.


It's because the United States is IN FAVOR of the status quo which is the EVENTUAL reunification when China adopts more democracy. If China attacked NOW, it would be against the status quo. However, if the President declares independence, that too is against the status quo.



Plus, how do you administer democracy to 1.25 Billion people? India can't do it properly, and hell, the USA even has a few problems with it as well.. Western democracies which we live in today are a result of hundreds of years of development, a bit of bloodshed, greed, slavery and eventual rising of the 'masses'. China effectively has a 5000 year tradition of dictatorship. It would be foolish to think that could change in 10 to 20 or to even 50 years. Though I suppose anything is possible.. And shouldnt be ruled out. I just happen to think china has a long ways to go in regards to becoming a democracy.[/quote

EXACTLY! That's why China is taking a slow and gradual process into democracy. This isn't going to be an overnight FULL DEMOCRACY thing... it's going to take, according to the Premier, roughly 100 years before China can fully adopt democracy. It's a brilliant decision.



posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by leafer

ALSO the U.s wouldn't dare get involved because China would beat them down the ground and they know it. This isn't fighting iraq and Afghānistān who are in the stone ages and can't rub two pennies together.



"china would beat them down to the ground and they know it"?

Great we have a miss cleo who just so happens to read minds..guess what im thinking right now.



The US military is superior to china in conventional sense. IMO our military would own chinas.. Thats not the problem. the problem is disrupting the interdepedant world economy. Im sure china could bloody are nose or whatever. but the conventional US military is second to none. So I disagree with your blind, ill informed asshole opinion that china would "take us to the ground". Exactly what is it that china has that is superior to americas military? Get back to me when you actually find something other then china"trying" to stealing US military tech "to try and level the playing field".


[edit on 123131p://5603am by semperfoo]



posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Semper... "bloody nose?" Is that it?

Iraq was a bloody nose... China would be an emergency room. Just because the United States has superior military technology, doesn't mean a CONVENTIONAL war would be certain victory. Remember Vietnam? By all means, the United State's military was FAR, not even comparable, better than N. Vietnam's. But what happened?

You've got to factor in other things - such as the public feeling. Do you honestly think that the American public would support a war against one of the most powerful militaries on earth for Taiwan? Hell, do I even need to tell you how Iraq has changed America, and you dare say China would only be a "nose bleed?"

If you were alive during Vietnam and saw the frenzy the American public made... just imagine that multiplied by 10000, and you have a fair glimpse of what a war against China would be like... WITHOUT the use of nukes.



[edit on 10-3-2007 by k4rupt]



posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by k4rupt
Semper... "bloody nose?" Is that it?

Iraq was a bloody nose... China would be an emergency room. Just because the United States has superior military technology, doesn't mean a CONVENTIONAL war would be certain victory. Remember Vietnam? By all means, the United State's military was FAR, not even comparable, better than N. Vietnam's. But what happened?

You've got to factor in other things - such as the public feeling. Do you honestly think that the American public would support a war against one of the most powerful militaries on earth for Taiwan? Hell, do I even need to tell you how Iraq has changed America, and you dare say China would only be a "nose bleed?"

If you were alive during Vietnam and saw the frenzy the American public made... just imagine that multiplied by 10000, and you have a fair glimpse of what a war against China would be like... WITHOUT the use of nukes.



[edit on 10-3-2007 by k4rupt]


Iraq is more of a paper cut. Its a bloody pain in the ass.

We wouldnt go unscathed in a full out war with china. but honestly, China doesnt stand a chance in hell against americas military..We would own the air with our superior aircraft making china suspect to bombings on a regular day to day basis, at the same time allowing the US military to deploy the EMP (electro magnetic pulse) bomb which would fry all of chinas inferior military hardware, and at the same time, totally killing the PLAs communications with there commanders on the ground. We did it to iraqs conventional military which is one reason why Iraq fell so quickly. "Its like shooting fish in a bucket" one US commander was quoted as saying about the EMP bomb. And before you go "well china isnt Iraq", fiber optics are the only 'known' way to combat EMP which can be incredibly expensive and sophisticated to use in its own right. Right now the US military is the only military to successfully use fiber optics to "soundproof" its military infrastructure from EMP.
Our navy is far superior and our armed forces as a whole are better trained and equipped. Now I by no means condone a war with china. It would be a bloody mess. Now, Iraq as well as Vietnam were and are nothing more than unconventional warfare. If china even dare tried to stand toe to toe with the US military it would result in the total destruction and demise of the PLA. To be honest ANYONE stupid enough to fight the US in a conventional manner stands no chance and deserve nothing more then a swift quick in the butt that they will undoubtedly receive..

And theres always the nuclear option to fall back on. The US has nuclear primacy over russia let alone china. We could destroy all of russias and chinas nuclear weaponry in a first strike leaving no nukes for china and russia to retaliate with.."successfully disarming" that threat.


The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy
www.foreignaffairs.org...

[edit on 093131p://3803pm by semperfoo]



posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 10:14 PM
link   
China wouldn't stand a chance? Not according to East Asian allies of the U.S., diplomats, officials, and Asian analysts.

www.insightmag.com...


The overwhelming assessment by Asian officials, diplomats and analysts is that the U.S. military simply cannot defeat China.


So where in the hell do you get "China wouldn't stand a chance."

And now you want to get into nukes? China has enough nukes to destroy the United States... and vice versa. The U.S. cannot even ably stop ONE nuke throughout many tests of it's anti-missile defense system... let alone a barrage of Chinese nukes. Even if a MINOR fraction of it's nukes landed on American soil, the U.S. would be as good as gone.... Can you imagine: NY, Washing DC, LA, SF, Seattle, etc... all gone? How could the U.S. recover?

If the U.S. couldn't even stop a N. Vietnam invasion decades ago, how the hell do you think the U.S. can prevent CHINA from taking Taiwan.... let alone factor in the public's mood of war. Just because the U.S. has superior airpower and military, it doesn't at all mean the U.S. can stop China whatsoever, let alone take China down.

Honestly, do you believe that Americans would be willing to fight China for Taiwan? Honestly, in the situation the U.S. is in Iraq right now, do you HONESTLY believe Americans would be willing to fight China.... for Taiwan?!



And before we continue further into the discussion, there ISN'T even a need to discuss WAR. The U.S. has stated that it would drop support for Taiwan if the President declares independence... China has stated it would only invade if the President declares independence. Note the fact that the President is an extremist lameduck executive and is as good as gone AND THE FACT that the KMT party (pro reunification) controls parliament and most likely the next presidency... war is FAR, FAR, FAR down the road. Hell, even during President Chen's 2000 inauguration speech, he made a clear voice that he would not seek any sort of independence or maneuver AWAY from the status quo...





[edit on 10-3-2007 by k4rupt]



posted on Mar, 10 2007 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by k4rupt
China wouldn't stand a chance? Not according to East Asian allies of the U.S., diplomats, officials, and Asian analysts.

www.insightmag.com...


The overwhelming assessment by Asian officials, diplomats and analysts is that the U.S. military simply cannot defeat China.


So where in the hell do you get "China wouldn't stand a chance."


Hold on. you cant just post something that doesnt delve into the reason why they think this.. I actually think it has an agenda. where is the formulated facts?

EDIT: OK I skimmed through it first. Shame on me...

This is what it bases its "facts" off of. I wouldnt put to much credibility into this one k4rupt.


"In any case, if tension between the United States and China heightens, if each side pulls the trigger, though it may not be stretched to nuclear weapons, and the wider hostilities expand, I believe America cannot win as it has a civic society that must adhere to the value of respecting lives," Mr. Ishihara said in an address to the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Mr. Ishihara said U.S. ground forces, with the exception of the Marines, are "extremely incompetent" and would be unable to stem a Chinese conventional attack. Indeed, he asserted that China would not hesitate to use nuclear weapons against Asian and American cities—even at the risk of a massive U.S. retaliation.

It doesnt hold much water in any case..


The governor said the U.S. military could not counter a wave of millions of Chinese soldiers prepared to die in any onslaught against U.S. forces. After 2,000 casualties, he said, the U.S. military would be forced to withdraw.


Its called metal storm. And it fires 1,000,000 rounds per minute. Set these babys up strategically and you could easily mow down millions of soldiers that have a death wish.

I found this bit interesting.

As a result, Asian allies of the United States are quietly preparing to bolster their militaries independent of Washington. So far, the Bush administration has been strongly opposed to an indigenous Japanese defense capability, fearing it would lead to the expulsion of the U.S. military presence from that country.


Now heres the agenda I was talking about up above. Japan just wants its own capable military. That is all. That is all the whole report is about. I dont blame Japan for wanting there own capable military either. They should have their own military capabilities.

It also talks a little about Iraq and the current situation that is going on their. As If that somehow would have an actual impact in a full out war between the US and china. Its a completely biased article that shows no formulated opinion that more or less has an agenda behind it as previously stated by me.


If the U.S. couldn't even stop a N. Vietnam invasion decades ago, how the hell do you think the U.S. can prevent CHINA from taking Taiwan.... let alone factor in the public's mood of war. Just because the U.S. has superior airpower and military, it doesn't at all mean the U.S. can stop China whatsoever, let alone take China down.


We couldnt? On what occasion are you talking about? The US military won the battles of Vietnam. Politics were what "lost" us that war.

Also, the difference between then and now is night and day in terms of our military lethality. The US has newer more deadlier weapons that have a greater "kill" impact on the wars that are fought today. One example of this is smart weapons and munitions.
The US could without a doubt in my mind successfully defend taiwan from china. Chinas military in relative terms is pretty weak. Perhaps you would like to go through military scenarios with me?

Also a war would severely hurt chinas economy. They are a nation that relies to heavily on its cheap exports. A war even with lil ole taiwan would most likely have a negative affect on the chinese economy.


Honestly, do you believe that Americans would be willing to fight China for Taiwan? Honestly, in the situation the U.S. is in Iraq right now, do you HONESTLY believe Americans would be willing to fight China....


Not only america, but australia and japan as well. And you just had to bring Iraq into it.. Baghdad the city that gets plenty of face time on the liberal media is not all of Iraq bub.
Funny how that is where most of the news about Iraq gets reported from...

EDIT: Agreed, war is not the answer. But if sh*t ever hit the fan.....


[edit on 113131p://1003pm by semperfoo]

[edit on 113131p://2003pm by semperfoo]



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfoo


Hold on. you cant just post something that doesnt delve into the reason why they think this.. I actually think it has an agenda. where is the formulated facts?

EDIT: OK I skimmed through it first. Shame on me...

This is what it bases its "facts" off of. I wouldnt put to much credibility into this one k4rupt.


No... whether you believe it or not, it definately shows that "China doesn't stand a chance" is completely ill-stated. If the overwhelming assessment that Asian allies, diplomats, and analysts ALL believe that the U.S. CANNOT defeat China, then stating "China doesn't stand a chance" is... well, you get the picture.



Its called metal storm. And it fires 1,000,000 rounds per minute. Set these babys up strategically and you could easily mow down millions of soldiers that have a death wish.


You think that the Chinese military's main strategy is to send a million soldiers running down a straight path towards American guns? LOL, you honestly think they don't have any military tactics? These guys wrote the freakin' Art of War...



Now heres the agenda I was talking about up above. Japan just wants its own capable military. That is all. That is all the whole report is about. I dont blame Japan for wanting there own capable military either. They should have their own military capabilities.


It's not just Japananese officials and other Asian officials... it's analysts as well. Whether you believe it has an agenda or not, you've got to admit "China doesn't stand a chance" or "China would be a nose bleed" is VASTLY, VASTLY understated.



We couldnt? On what occasion are you talking about? The US military won the battles of Vietnam. Politics were what "lost" us that war.


On what occasion.. hm... the occasion that Vietnam is now a Communist state? Exactly, politics "lost" you guys the war, so how would China be any different than Vietnam? In any case, it'd be MUCH, MUCH, MUCH worse. When the U.S. first entered Vietnam, the American public weren't as weary of war as they are now.. and Vietnam back then is not even COMPARABLE to China's military right now.


Also, the difference between then and now is night and day in terms of our military lethality. The US has newer more deadlier weapons that have a greater "kill" impact on the wars that are fought today. One example of this is smart weapons and munitions.
The US could without a doubt in my mind successfully defend taiwan from china. Chinas military in relative terms is pretty weak. Perhaps you would like to go through military scenarios with me?


Okay, the US has deadlier weapons than they did back in Vietnam... but that cmoparison isn't even CLOSE to Vietnam back then to China right now.


Also a war would severely hurt chinas economy. They are a nation that relies to heavily on its cheap exports. A war even with lil ole taiwan would most likely have a negative affect on the chinese economy.


It would hurt the U.S.'s economy as well. Didn't you hear the news? When China's stock market dropped, the U.S.'s did as well. It's all VERY inter-connected. If there was a war between the U.S. and China, the global economy would be a disaster... If you think America's economy would be destroyed as well... well, lol.



Not only america, but australia and japan as well. And you just had to bring Iraq into it.. Baghdad the city that gets plenty of face time on the liberal media is not all of Iraq bub.
Funny how that is where most of the news about Iraq gets reported from...

EDIT: Agreed, war is not the answer. But if sh*t ever hit the fan.....



Yeah,... if # ever hit the fan... then let's all meet up to say our last prayers.





[edit on 11-3-2007 by k4rupt]



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by k4rupt
No... whether you believe it or not, it definately shows that "China doesn't stand a chance" is completely ill-stated. If the overwhelming assessment that Asian allies, diplomats, and analysts ALL believe that the U.S. CANNOT defeat China, then stating "China doesn't stand a chance" is... well, you get the picture.


Let me dumb it down for you. Theres a big desert, on one side you have the US military, and on the other side you have china. Now our weapons are far superior to chinas. We own the air with our superior fighter aircrafts such as the Raptor and F-15 eagles. We own the sea with our VASTLY superior navy. Essentally if you own the Air and sea you own the land dictating what the other side can and cant do in a "CONVENTIONAL WAR". You can destroy supply lines. The US could put an oil embargo all around china destroying the chinese economy from within. Also I believe that California is one of the largest exporters of rice to china. what if we simply stopped shipping rice to china?


You think that the Chinese military's main strategy is to send a million soldiers running down a straight path towards American guns?


you should really read what you post then. That was one of the reasons YOUR ARTICLE gave as to why the US "CANT" win a war against china.


The governor said the U.S. military could not counter a wave of millions of Chinese soldiers prepared to die in any onslaught against U.S. forces.


And I pointed out to you that there is a way to "counter" all those soles who have a death wish. And its called metal storm
And thats not even taking into consideration the smart weapons that would be used from the land, sea and the air either if such a scenario took place in a conflict between the US and China.



It's not just Japananese officials and other Asian officials... it's analysts as well.


Well where are the formulated facts that support their claim? The only "facts" that I saw from the article you posted was that "the US public wouldnt like it" and "the millions of onslaughting chinese soldiers that have a death wish"...

I dont see how china has the 'upper hand' out of that... Maybe you could point it out to me?


In any case, it'd be MUCH, MUCH, MUCH worse. When the U.S. first entered Vietnam, the American public weren't as weary of war as they are now.. and Vietnam back then is not even COMPARABLE to China's military right now.


The Vietnam war was conducted by charlie using gorilla warfare tactics. Which is the only 'successful' way to go against Americas military. We are second to NONE in conventional warfare. Im sure the US would welcome a conventional war over an unconventional war being as that is our bread and butter right there.. If china tried to go toe to toe with the US on a conventional war it would end in the quick demise of the PLA. This is not me trying to beat my chest. Its a fact!



Okay, the US has deadlier weapons than they did back in Vietnam... but that cmoparison isn't even CLOSE to Vietnam back then to China right now.

and let the pissing contest continue...
What does china have that gives them a superior advantage over americas military?



It would hurt the U.S.'s economy as well.


America would also suffer economic pain (T-Shirt prices would rise) from these trade restrictions, but domestic policy would limit that pain, and turn it into an advantage. By adopting the FairTax, America would begin to return as a manufacturing juggernaut. Reducing government interference in the free market would assist this process. American products, no longer burdened by the income tax, would compete with Chinese made products on the world market, further enriching America and hurting China. This American growth in manufacturing would drive prices lower to compensate for the price increases from restricted trade with China. This would put pressure on China to democratize.

Make no mistake. China needs the US more then the US needs china. China holds 300,000,000,000 dollars in american debt. It's likely that China's response will be to stop buying America's debt. America can diffuse that problem by cutting spending to balance the budget. Without American money flowing into China, it won't be able to purchase as much fuel. Oil prices will fall, in return helping the US economy.



Yeah,... if # ever hit the fan... then let's all meet up to say our last prayers.

War is bad. People die that shouldnt... I agree, no war is needed. That is why china doesnt need to attack taiwan either.



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 08:24 PM
link   
Whether you believe the U.S. can win or not, saying "China doesn't stand a chance" is vastly, to put it at best, understated. So what if the U.S's military is the most powerful? A war against China would make Iraq+Afghanistan+Vietnam+Korea all combined together, pudding cake. You forget to factor in the American publics feeling of war. According to a reporter during Vietnam, "We didn't lose the war in the Mekong valley, we lost the war in the Mississippi valley." With Iraq being as it is right now, DO YOU HONESTLY, swear to God honest, believe the American public would approve of a war against China... for TAIWAN?



America would also suffer economic pain (T-Shirt prices would rise) from these trade restrictions, but domestic policy would limit that pain, and turn it into an advantage. By adopting the FairTax, America would begin to return as a manufacturing juggernaut. Reducing government interference in the free market would assist this process. American products, no longer burdened by the income tax, would compete with Chinese made products on the world market, further enriching America and hurting China. This American growth in manufacturing would drive prices lower to compensate for the price increases from restricted trade with China. This would put pressure on China to democratize.


Are you serious? You think a war against China would only "increase t-shirt prices?" Man, come on. When the Chinese stock market went down, what happened to the U.S.'s stock market? It nearly took it down as well bringing the largest drop in America SINCE 9/11. With such sensitivity giong on between global markets, you honestly think that a war would have no affect on the U.S. indexes, economy, and jobs? "T shirt prices," lol, thats a joke right?


Make no mistake. China needs the US more then the US needs china. China holds 300,000,000,000 dollars in american debt. It's likely that China's response will be to stop buying America's debt. America can diffuse that problem by cutting spending to balance the budget. Without American money flowing into China, it won't be able to purchase as much fuel. Oil prices will fall, in return helping the US economy.


Hm... China can not only stop buying America's debt, but they can dump what they have RIGHT away causing the dollar to tumble - and let's not even factor in the fact how other investors would see this as - with the U.S. 9 trillion dollars in debt, heading into a major war, and one of it's largest holders jsut dumped everything.... HM, makes you think doesn't it?


War is bad. People die that shouldnt... I agree, no war is needed. That is why china doesnt need to attack taiwan either.


That's exactly what I've been saying... China doesn't, and won't, attack Taiwan. I've explained it already the reasons why.



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 09:06 PM
link   
k4rupt.


I was talking about america adopting the "fairtax" which would basically have a counter affect on outsourcing of american jobs. The fairtax would make china more or less irrelevant. American jobs such as manufacturing ones get outsourced because of the hidden compound tax costs that follow our exports everywhere they go. This in return gives foreign markets such as india and china an unfair advantage against american products out in the open market because of the cheap labor that they have to offer. The fairtax would make america the largest tax haven on the face of the earth. If the fairtax became law today many economist have said that in its first proposed year it would help americas economy grow at 10.5%. And by 2015 americas economy would more then double its current economic size. This would more or less make the world more depedant on the US. Ya see where im getting at? China would become less and less of a factor on the world stage.(irrelevant)That is until they became a democracy and enacted a fairtax of their own.(which is very unlikly) And the fairtax will pass. Its not a matter of how, but when. the republicans are said to be campaigning around the fairtax in 08 which will blow the liberal democrats away.

[edit on 093131p://0903pm by semperfoo]



posted on Mar, 12 2007 @ 07:07 PM
link   
You honestly think China is only there to make cheap American products?
Hang on right there, semper.

Do you know how the global economy works? If China were cut off from the U.S., the U.S. indexes would be obliterated and the U.S. would be heading towards a big-time depression... jobs would be lost and the economy would be put on a standstill. Oh, and must I mention what would happen if China decided to dump American debt... and what other investors would see happen when China dumps it's share and the U.S. heads towards a MAJOR war with 9 trillion dollars in debt, a destroyed economy, and a major recession... HM? The U.S. economy and the dollar destroyed just like that.

When China's index nearly crashed a few weeks ago, the U.S. indexes went down with it , dropping to levels seen only during 9/11 amid fears of a stalling Chinese economy by U.S. investors. There were BILLIONS OF DOLLARS in losses that day. Now you're going to say that a war with China would do nothing to the U.S. economy and actually HELP the United States... that China is only needed for "cheap t-shirts?"

So what IF Fairtax actully DOUBLED the American economy and made it a bigger force? When China's stock index went down, NEARLY EVERY SINGLE ECONOMY throughout the world went straight down as well. The European markets, Japanese markets, S. Korean, Australian.... ALL OF THEM.

I seriously don't mean to be rude or anything; but jeez, even if you didn't take economics in college or high school, you should know better than that. I'm not trying to start a flame war, seriously I don't, but... that's VERY ignorant.

BTW, we'd all better pray Hillary doesn't win the primary and take the presidency in '08... or we'd all be screwed.


[edit on 12-3-2007 by k4rupt]



posted on Mar, 13 2007 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by k4rupt

Do you know how the global economy works? If China were cut off from the U.S., the U.S. indexes would be obliterated and the U.S. would be heading towards a big-time depression... jobs would be lost and the economy would ]be put on a standstill. Oh, and must I mention what would happen if China decided to dump American debt... and what other investors would see
happen when China dumps it's share and the U.S. heads towards a MAJOR war with 9 trillion dollars in debt, a destroyed economy, and a major recession... HM? The U.S. economy and the dollar destroyed just like that.


While I dont disagree with you, I dont entirely agree with you either.

The world economy is interdependant. however the US economy means alot more to the world economy then chinas does. If china collapsed it would hurt the US economy as well as the world economy. But not as bad as you might think. The US economy has evolved into a league of its own. For instance When oil reached $90 in today's dollars back in 1980, this caused a very deep recession, even though prices quickly dropped after that. In 2006, oil reached $78 per barrel before dropping, without causing a recession. In fact, it appears that sustained prices near $60/barrel are not sufficient to cause a significant drag on the US economy. This is partly because of the US economy evolving to a state where a large portion of output is based on innovation and technological advancement, which are much less tied to oil prices. At the same time, US corporations such as Google, Yahoo, Goldman Sachs, Pixar, Citigroup, or Oracle are much less vulnerable to high oil prices. Yet, these knowledge-based businesses are the ones that have created most of the new wealth in the US during the last 25 years, and are the industries in which America's dominance over the rest of the world is the largest. So how would a war with china put those business's out of business?

Now higher oil prices affect china and india much more then they do the US. $500 a year more for gasoline actually is a lot for those who make $10,000 a year and just bought their very first car. Chinese and Indian consumer spending is much more sensitive to $70 oil than US consumer spending is. In other words higher oil prices have a negative impact on the chinese economy more then they do the US economy.

So if the US were to put an oil embargo all across china, gasoline prices would go down and would pretty much kill the chinese economy that revolves around industrys that need oil for transportation purposes. This would kill chinas exports.

As for Americas debt. The US deficit is actually shrinking..
www.csmonitor.com...



So what IF Fairtax actully DOUBLED the American economy and made it a bigger force? When China's stock index went down, NEARLY EVERY SINGLE ECONOMY throughout the world went straight down as well. The European markets, Japanese markets, S. Korean, Australian.... ALL OF THEM.


So what?
You have got to be joking! Do you even know what you just typed? The US economy would become an even bigger force then it already is under the fairtax. Americans will buy american under the fairtax because more american companys will be able to compete with china and india who have a plethora of cheap labor which makes their products so much cheaper.

The fairtax will make china and india both less relevant in the world market when the US adopts the fairtax. Thus insuring american dominance well into the 21st century.


BTW, we'd all better pray Hillary doesn't win the primary and take the presidency in '08... or we'd all be screwed.


Yep.. I dont think she'll get it. Atleast i hope she doesnt. To many what ifs.. Bill Clinton screwed america over when he was in office by sleeping with the chinese, no pun intended.
(that was monicas job)He was a horrible president, I dont know why so many ppl liked him.. Isnt it odd that Mr. Clinton still receives a monthly check from china to this day? Theres even speculation that hillary could use this money to fund her campaign to the white house..



[edit on 023131p://5903pm by semperfoo]



posted on Mar, 13 2007 @ 08:15 PM
link   
I believe your greatly underestimating how interconnected the Chinese and American markets are. You do realize that when Shanghai's index dropped, the American indexes dropped to record lows seen only since 9/11 resulting IN BILLIONS of dollars of losses - this isn't even any sign of trade disagreements between the two nations, just a drop in the stock markets in CHINA, THAT alone resulted in billions dollars in losses greatly damaging the American economy and scarily hinting at a recession. Now, with that in mind, what would happen if the Chinese and American economies were plainly CUT OFF from each other. It'd make that day look like a wet dream... massive sell-offs worldwide is beyond certain if a war were to ensure. Not only would the U.S. head into a DEEP depression, but so would every other nation on earth. Recession = job losses, businesses destroyed, economic downturn. There's no doubt an American rescesssion would ensure if a war between the U.S. and China were to happen, it's not even a debate - it's FOR CERTAIN.

And let's talk about the debt. If a war were to ensure, the Chinese would immediately sell off ALL of it's debt. Now, think - that alone would hurt the dollar tremendously. Remember that day when China HINTED at expanding it's currency holdings, before even SELLING off dollars, the dollar tumbled. Now, if China got rid of all it's dollars, and global investors seeing the U.S. heading into a war with 9 trillion dollars in debt and a global depression ahead... what would they do? It's quite simple...

It doesn't MATTER if America is the dominant market... if China goes down, so will the U.S.... a complete cut-off would be a huge recession globally. Don't ignore this fact - that day when the Shanghai index dropped, Dow dropping should be more than enough proof to even need me to explain.


And BTW, Hillary has a strong chance of winning, no matter how much I hate to admit it. What other Democrat has the support that hillary does? Obama - too inexperienced. Odds are, hilary will take the Democratic primary. Since Bush's EXTREME unpopularity has brought down the GOP, who knows? I'm hoping for McCain... but who knows?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join