Can China Invade Taiwan?

page: 179
1
<< 176  177  178    180  181 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
China is patient, we can wait 100 years for as long as we reach our goals.

Howl, its not a matter of being a rebel faction, we were an equal political party among the GMD political apparatus before Chiang-Kai-Shek instigated the Civil War, we did not start it nor want it, we were content with trying to swing the GMD to better represent the masses and have a say in a coalition government.

Even if we haven't complated it in he literal sense, but now your just being nitpicky we have about 99% of mainland China's population and control every inch of ground that was China's (with the exception of some Tibetan land given to India as a result of the Dalai Lama's failed diplomacy) on the mainland, for good or ill we have won the civil war, our enemy has no ability to contest it, and he is isolated and along and without the resources to bring the fight to us, under the military writings of Clauswitz and Sun Tzu we won even if it is a tad tarnished.


You what? First you say there were only 400 of them and then you say they were an equal partner. Make up your mind.

No, not nit-picking. Stating the truth. You haven't completed it. Simple as that. And that failure to complete has left you with the prolem you have today, fifty years later. You cannot, now, justify to the world the act of completion for the simple fact it would be an aggressive, expansionist war against a foreign nation. And the world just doesn't like it when people do that.

Look at the Russians in Afghanistan.

Saddam in Kuwait.

Whether it's direct action or not, the world finds a way to oppose you. You're already fighting a losing battle in the PR stakes over your continued occupation of Tibet. You just don't know how to play the game the way the west does, because we invented the game.

All this "peaceful first, invasion last resort" stuff is some of the worst PR campaigning I've seen since Saddam thought stroking a boy's hair would make him look cuddly.




posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 06:23 PM
link   
I said their were at first only 400 CCP members, but we we're equal and were actively helping the GMD-Left by helping to make the GMD into a modern party with a wide base, it was Chiang a few years after Sun's death that he turned on us and attacked us, we did not start it.

Afghanistan was never Russian, Kuwait you could argueably say was part of Iraq and was cheating Iraq out of its money by keeping the price of crude low, but that is neither here nor there. It wouldn't even by legal standards be an act of aggression because legally it is a province of China, just as Tibet was, you don't see the world getting angry at Russia for crushing the Chechnyans do you?

And if 80% of Taiwan still supports the status quo, and if since the 50's more and more nations have been recognizing the One China Policy esp. in Europe, then I think our PR campaign is pretty effective.

After all if even the USA recognizes that there can only be one China then I think we've pretty much one the PR campaign, now whats left to do is to wait until the time is right for peaceful unification for both sides, and we both can wait however long it takes.



posted on Nov, 13 2005 @ 07:17 PM
link   
All this "peaceful first, invasion last resort" stuff is some of the worst PR campaigning I've seen since Saddam thought stroking a boy's hair would make him look cuddly.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

If Middle Kingdom held to this point, I would have no problem continuing to side with Taiwanese in regards to self defence.

But It appears that MD has considered the logic of peaceful overtures ... and not the superficial "gun and flowers" approach either.

Look at the long term goal here ... what is the harm in China improving itself by becoming an egalitarian governing entity? Think of the good that can do for the people of mainland China ... and being a force for social democratic reform, what harm can peaceful overtures to Taiwan be? (besides being ALOT more compatible from the ideological stance and thus potentially desirable).

Remember Howl, We Americans, as well as the rest of the world, will be looking on to "see how our neighhors are doing".

... and I can't speak for you, but I would welcome another democracy into the fold, especially one that was a former adversary.

Besides, Howl, Taiwan like the proverbial "belle of the ball" can always say no ... if the New China does not measure up to expectation.

Great motivation would you not agree to improve oneself?


LCKob



[edit on 13-11-2005 by LCKob]



posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Hahaha...LCKob, I think that is a bad motivation. A nation should not work hard just to impress others or to get more territories. Others might be impressed and the nation might get more territories, but those are the side effects, not the goal a nation should have. A nation's main goal is simple, I think, to work toward the well being of its citizens, providing possibilities for its citizens, and safeguard the citizens. (of course, simpler said than done) Of course, there are other things government should do, but I think those are the main goals.

One should not motivate oneself just so a girl or a boy will notice him or her. One should motivate oneself so one can be a better person, right?

Also, Taiwan and China's relationship is not that romantic. If you know Taiwan's histories and the recent events between China and Taiwan, it really doesn't look like a romantic relation at all.


[edit on 14-11-2005 by twchang]

[edit on 14-11-2005 by twchang]



posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 12:41 AM
link   
Hahaha...LCKob, I think that is a bad motivation. A nation should not work hard just to impress others or to get more territories. Others might be impressed and the nation might get more territories, but those are the side effects, not the goal a nation should have. A nation's main goal is simple, I think, to work toward the well being of its citizens, providing possibilities for its citizens. (of course, simpler said than done)

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

From that perspective I would agree with you ... but following the metaphor for human development ... I would counter with this ...

As a human, you go through life, much of your character and personality is based upon experiences and the ever present trials that one must overcome.

Part of this developmental process includes the notions of self worth and pride ... I was taught, that one cannot truly value and respect others until one values and respects the self.

So within this context, change and growth occur for multiple reasons ... first and foremost for personal growth BUT also as a social function for the attraction of friends and possible mates. The model I depicted was admittingly simplistic, for the purpose of point clarity ... but since you raise the point, contextual elaboration is required.

... add two further elements ... the basic human bias for challenges and a focused goal ... think back to instances where these two elements helped you become better than you thought you could be ... and that change must begin with the self first ...before looking looking at others.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One should not motivate oneself just so a girl or a boy will notice him or her. One should motivate oneself so one can be a better person, right?

Also, Taiwan and China's relationship is not that romantic. If you know Taiwan's histories and the recent events between China and Taiwan, it really doesn't look like a romantic relation at all.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

For this I take your word, given the fact that the situation is of far greater impact and relevance to you being Taiwanese ... but I offer this in return.

I am Japanese, born and raised on Hawaii ... 3rd generation Japanese. My parents were children when Pearl Harbor was bombed and by great fortune and circumstance ... avoided being interned in camps like Manzanar ... but the reality was that there was a great deal of friction due to the fact that Japan was the proverbial boogie man for us in the Pacific ...

The point to this story? Well, Japan, despite being bitter enemies to America during WWII ... has become one of its closest allies (behind Britain).

Now I realize that the circumstances are not the same, and there are aspects to the politics that I am not aware of ... but it seems to me that IF such enemies can become integral allies ... then there is hope for significant change and improvement globally... especially as the world becomes a smaller place with internet and the consequent rising "global" awareness.

The world is changing, some of it good and some bad, but one of the good things is that it allows for bridges of communication like this ... who would have imagined 20 years ago that one could converse, argue, reason and just interact with humans half a world away?

Who would have thought, that outside millitary channels, we normal civilians (and mililtary) could thrash out our differences with the symbolic pen? ... as opposed to the sword?

All that I ask, is that you consider the possibilities of a more enlightened future ... review the exchanges between Middle Kingdom and myself, and see if reason did not manage to creep in at the end? Between two cold war adversaries no less ... haha

I believe in the addage "Time heals all wounds" ... and that if we allow for enough time to pass, it is possible that the succeeding generations that are more educated, more worldly and consequently more tolerant will be able to embrace reason and friendship ... where bitterness, hate and anger once festered.


Please keep in mind, that I still defend the notion of freedom of choice ... the girl and the country has the right to say no.


... and this is not some dark alley, the world is watching ...


The question is will you support the possibilities that this future may offer?


LCKob


[edit on 14-11-2005 by LCKob]



posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
Afghanistan was never Russian,


Agreed.


Kuwait you could argueably say was part of Iraq


That's a REALLY long bow to be drawing. Especially considering that Iraq was created by the British solely to give Prince Faisal somewhere to go.


and was cheating Iraq out of its money by keeping the price of crude low


Then I guess it was also cheating the UAE, Saudi, Venezuela, the UK and Australia out of their money as well, they are, after all, all oil-producing nations as well.


but that is neither here nor there.


Or relevant.


It wouldn't even by legal standards be an act of aggression because legally it is a province of China


There's 178 pages worth of debate on that point right here. And it's not just me saying they are independent. Taiwan is a diplomatically-recognised soveriegn nation, therefore not legally a province of the People's Republic of China.


just as Tibet was


Don't get that one started.


you don't see the world getting angry at Russia for crushing the Chechnyans do you?


Without the stellar PR efforts of Shamil Basayev, it just might be the opposite. As it is there is a steady murmuring from US politicians and foreign correspondents (not to mention the OSCE) about Russia using George W Bush's War on Terror (tm) to insure themselves against international condemnation.


And if 80% of Taiwan still supports the status quo, and if since the 50's more and more nations have been recognizing the One China Policy esp. in Europe, then I think our PR campaign is pretty effective.


And yet more than 50% of Taiwanese voted in a president who's party manifesto states independence. Better get a refund for that PR policy.


After all if even the USA recognizes that there can only be one China then I think we've pretty much one the PR campaign, now whats left to do is to wait until the time is right for peaceful unification for both sides, and we both can wait however long it takes.


2 things.

1. Yes, the US recognises "one China". They invented the policy. That China is the PRC. The Republic of China is publicly referred to as Taiwan, that's a way of separating the two in the minds of the people of the USA. It makes it easy next time there's a dispute to identify the parties and allows the protesters to burn the correct flag and demand action. That flag will be yours. Remember, Americans (that would be US citizens) still divide the world into good guys and bad guys. And commies are bad guys along with Muslim terrorists and military dictators.

2. So if you can wait however long it takes why all the sabre-rattling, anti-seccession laws, missiles and general school-ground bully tactics?



posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 10:06 AM
link   

That's a REALLY long bow to be drawing. Especially considering that Iraq was created by the British solely to give Prince Faisal somewhere to go.


Kuweit was a profince of Iraq under the Ottoman Empire, under that pretext and the succesion of states theory it is arguably Iraq's.


Or relevant.


That is what i said, just in a fancier format.


Without the stellar PR efforts of Shamil Basayev, it just might be the opposite. As it is there is a steady murmuring from US politicians and foreign correspondents (not to mention the OSCE) about Russia using George W Bush's War on Terror (tm) to insure themselves against international condemnation.


Ah but in your view there is a "right and wrong" and I don't see you complaining about Russia dispite said PR compaign, if you believed in right or wrong and not just what your propoganda mill tells you, you'ld be making threads in support of chechnya but I don't see any.

And also, I've found a more similar anology; Kashmir, the Indians claim it, they have 800,000 troops doing heavy policing with authoritan tactics to keep down rebellion and the people in Kashmir want independance, but alas no condemnation from the world at large... hmm...

[quoteAnd yet more than 50% of Taiwanese voted in a president who's party manifesto states independence. Better get a refund for that PR policy.

Ahh, but you zee the poll was done after his election and effectively shattering any chances he had of trying to go for independence.


Then I guess it was also cheating the UAE, Saudi, Venezuela, the UK and Australia out of their money as well, they are, after all, all oil-producing nations as well.


In the case of the UK/Aussies, i think they would benefit from it since I believe they are an overal importer of oil. As for Venezuela, they're too far away to complain, and the Saudi's weren't being hurt from it, Iraq however was building up its prestige in the Arab world through a war machine and a infant space program, lower crude oil prices would lower their income thus hurt their ability to build up armed strength.


There's 178 pages worth of debate on that point right here. And it's not just me saying they are independent. Taiwan is a diplomatically-recognised soveriegn nation, therefore not legally a province of the People's Republic of China.


By whom? They're still LEGALLY part of "China", the UN recognizes the PRC not the ROC, more and more EU nations are affriming their One China Policy (see the People's Daily) as President Hu visits more and more EU head of States and Head of Governments.

So how are they diplomatically independant? They might be "de facto" independant for now but de jure they are a part of us.


2 things.

1. Yes, the US recognises "one China". They invented the policy. That China is the PRC. The Republic of China is publicly referred to as Taiwan, that's a way of separating the two in the minds of the people of the USA. It makes it easy next time there's a dispute to identify the parties and allows the protesters to burn the correct flag and demand action. That flag will be yours. Remember, Americans (that would be US citizens) still divide the world into good guys and bad guys. And commies are bad guys along with Muslim terrorists and military dictators.

2. So if you can wait however long it takes why all the sabre-rattling, anti-seccession laws, missiles and general school-ground bully tactics?


As mentioned somewhere else, probly here, most Americans only know that most of their stuff is made in China and that they have tasty food, "good guys, bad guys" is starting to blurr because of some of your recent policies origining from your War on Terror, most Americans according to my correspondants are getting more and more sick of the lies and the bull the white house keeps feeding the US people, and your debt is only going up not down.



posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 04:04 PM
link   
hahaha ... well so much for "ending" this thread ...

Well, my hope is still with our future generations (of all of our respective countries) ... one day, our descendants will look back at our "barbaric" times and muse amongst themselves

... hey guys did our ancestors really do that?

... can't imagine what they were thinking though ... (shudders)

... well give them SOME credit though, ... were here.

LCKob



posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by LCKob
... add two further elements ... the basic human bias for challenges and a focused goal ... think back to instances where these two elements helped you become better than you thought you could be ... and that change must begin with the self first ...before looking looking at others.


That is what I am trying to say basically. China should look at itself first, Taiwan should look at itself first...etc. Just trying to impress other is not a strong reason for self improvement, and it sometimes fail that way.



All that I ask, is that you consider the possibilities of a more enlightened future ... review the exchanges between Middle Kingdom and myself, and see if reason did not manage to creep in at the end? Between two cold war adversaries no less ... haha


I think I read through all the exchanges between MK and you, and understand your point of view. I agree with many points and disagree with some points, as usual.

Of course, through your discussion with MK, good thinkings come out. However, although I have taken your views into consideration, I have other thinkings, reasons and sources about this issue as well.



I believe in the addage "Time heals all wounds" ... and that if we allow for enough time to pass, it is possible that the succeeding generations that are more educated, more worldly and consequently more tolerant will be able to embrace reason and friendship ... where bitterness, hate and anger once festered.


That is true.



Please keep in mind, that I still defend the notion of freedom of choice ... the girl and the country has the right to say no.


... and this is not some dark alley, the world is watching ...


The question is will you support the possibilities that this future may offer?


LCKob


[edit on 14-11-2005 by LCKob]


Of course, if I am still alive. To be specific, for example, if a well developed and friendly China comes to be, everyone will be better off, especially Taiwan. If it doesn't happen that way, everyone is probably worse off. But in any case, just hoping for someone else to be better is not a practical thing to do. For example, I think it is foolish for Taiwan to base its policies on the assumption of "a possible dream China" in the future while China is still hostile toward Taiwan, because it might or might not happen. Taiwan should look at itself first, and then look at the world around it, and see what it can do.

Hmm...but it seems that I am a pessimist. Although the world has generally became better, I think it still has a lot of dark alleys, and sometimes the advancement in technologies and economy actually makes them darker.


[edit on 14-11-2005 by twchang]



posted on Nov, 14 2005 @ 11:47 PM
link   
That is what I am trying to say basically. China should look at itself first, Taiwan should look at itself first...etc. Just trying to impress other is not a strong reason for self improvement, and it sometimes fail that way.

VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV

Perhaps it's the fustrated engineer in me, but I hold to the notion of accomlishing multiple tasks with one effort. So yes, I totally agree with you ... IF the goal is "just to impress"...

Yet, personal experience has taught me that love or attraction is a great motivator for change ... IRREGARDLESS of actually getting the girl (been there haha) ... but the experience did make me a better person.

_____________________________________________________________


All that I ask, is that you consider the possibilities of a more enlightened future ... review the exchanges between Middle Kingdom and myself, and see if reason did not manage to creep in at the end? Between two cold war adversaries no less ... haha


I think I read through all the exchanges between MK and you, and understand your point of view. I agree with many points and disagree with some points, as usual.

Of course, through your discussion with MK, good thinkings come out. However, although I have taken your views into consideration, I have other thinkings, reasons and sources about this issue as well.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

... as is wise ... one should not place all the eggs in one basket so to speak ... I have no problems with such a practice ( I do it often myself ... especially for important issues)

____________________________________________________________

I believe in the addage "Time heals all wounds" ... and that if we allow for enough time to pass, it is possible that the succeeding generations that are more educated, more worldly and consequently more tolerant will be able to embrace reason and friendship ... where bitterness, hate and anger once festered.

That is true.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

Nuff said!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please keep in mind, that I still defend the notion of freedom of choice ... the girl and the country has the right to say no.


... and this is not some dark alley, the world is watching ...


The question is will you support the possibilities that this future may offer?


LCKob




Of course, if I am still alive. To be specific, for example, if a well developed and friendly China comes to be, everyone will be better off, especially Taiwan. If it doesn't happen that way, everyone is probably worse off. But in any case, just hoping for someone else to be better is not a practical thing to do. For example, I think it is foolish for Taiwan to base its policies on the assumption of "a possible dream China" in the future while China is still hostile toward Taiwan, because it might or might not happen. Taiwan should look at itself first, and then look at the world around it, and see what it can do.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

Very true, and THAT IS WHY the U.S. funds to such a degree the Military.

Roosevelt said ... "speak softly and carry a big stick" ... I add to this "hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.

So as I stated with MK I am a realist and yet hold to an "impossible dream" ... in order to preserve the hope for this better future ...

... in the compounded hope that those preparations for the worst never have to be used.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hmm...but it seems that I am a pessimist. Although the world has generally became better, I think it still has a lot of dark alleys, and sometimes the advancement in technologies and economy actually makes them darker.

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

A pessimist, hmmmm I wonder, in your shoes, I wonder how much of an optimist I would be ... and I agree there are a lot of dark alleys out there and technology is the proverbial two edged sword ... but given what we are ... weak , bipedal mammals that excel at nothing but thinking ... I'll take that sword, and count myself lucky.

... but perhaps my favorite way to look at technology is that it is a good equalizer ... the obsidian chip became the claws for man, fire, its watchdog, the spear, bow and sling, the distance weapons that animals could not match ... the gun ... the leveling device that cast down the spector of raw physical force.

... a lowly peasant, a woman or small country could stand eye to eye to a bigger opponent and say ... come forth and bring me down, but I warn you that in so doing, you shall live with the pain of my passing for the rest of your life ... for I will not go meekly, nor shall I go without taking at least a part of you with me into the dark.

Think on that before you think me easy prey.



posted on Nov, 18 2005 @ 02:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
Kuweit was a profince of Iraq under the Ottoman Empire, under that pretext and the succesion of states theory it is arguably Iraq's.


There was no Iraq prior to the treaty of Versailles.


Ah but in your view there is a "right and wrong" and I don't see you complaining about Russia dispite said PR compaign, if you believed in right or wrong and not just what your propoganda mill tells you, you'ld be making threads in support of chechnya but I don't see any.


Threads, no. Posts, yes.


And also, I've found a more similar anology; Kashmir, the Indians claim it, they have 800,000 troops doing heavy policing with authoritan tactics to keep down rebellion and the people in Kashmir want independance, but alas no condemnation from the world at large... hmm...


The Pakistanis claim it, too. And they have thousands of troops in Pakistani Kashmir, looking across the Line of Control at the thousands of Indian troops in Jammu and Kashmir, all the way up to world's highest battlefield, on a glacier. India accuse Pakistan of supporting Muslim pro-union militants, who have gone as far as attacking the Indian parliament while it sat in session in New Delhi. So, not a very similar analogy after all.



And yet more than 50% of Taiwanese voted in a president who's party manifesto states independence. Better get a refund for that PR policy.


Ahh, but you zee the poll was done after his election and effectively shattering any chances he had of trying to go for independence.


And yet, more than 50% of voting Taiwanese voted for a President whose party manifesto states independence.



Then I guess it was also cheating the UAE, Saudi, Venezuela, the UK and Australia out of their money as well, they are, after all, all oil-producing nations as well.


In the case of the UK/Aussies, i think they would benefit from it since I believe they are an overal importer of oil. As for Venezuela, they're too far away to complain, and the Saudi's weren't being hurt from it, Iraq however was building up its prestige in the Arab world through a war machine


Prestige? Iraq had no prestige in the Arab world. He attacked a fellow Arabic and Islamic country. He allowed the Israelis to destroy the Osirak reactor. He didn't win against the Iranians. In 1990 Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Saudi all sided with the UN against Iraq. So much for his prestige.


and a infant space program,


Are you referring to Gerry Bull's guns?


lower crude oil prices would lower their income thus hurt their ability to build up armed strength.


How could lower crude oil prices also not hurt the Saudis? They have one of the least diversified economies on earth.



Taiwan is a diplomatically-recognised soveriegn nation, therefore not legally a province of the People's Republic of China.


By whom? They're still LEGALLY part of "China", the UN recognizes the PRC not the ROC, more and more EU nations are affriming their One China Policy (see the People's Daily) as President Hu visits more and more EU head of States and Head of Governments.


And the US president is highlighting China's poor human rights performance as we type this...

Other soveriegn nations, recognised by the UN, diplomatically recognise Taiwan, they exchange ambassadors with full plenipotentiary powers. Thus, by international legal precedent, Taiwan (as the ROC) is a nation independent of the PRC.

For a decade the UN recognised the Khmer Rouge and Prince Norodom Sihanouk as the "legal" government of Cambodia. Never mind that they were living in the jungle on the Thai border and a Vietnamese-backed government existed in Phnom Penh, collecting taxes and setting national policy.


So how are they diplomatically independant? They might be "de facto" independant for now but de jure they are a part of us.


See above.




As mentioned somewhere else, probly here, most Americans only know that most of their stuff is made in China and that they have tasty food, "good guys, bad guys" is starting to blurr because of some of your recent policies origining from your War on Terror, most Americans according to my correspondants are getting more and more sick of the lies and the bull the white house keeps feeding the US people, and your debt is only going up not down.


I don't know how many times I have to say this, I would assume you would be able to tell from all I have posted previously, but I am NOT an American.



posted on Nov, 19 2005 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
Kuweit was a profince of Iraq under the Ottoman Empire, under that pretext and the succesion of states theory it is arguably Iraq's.


There was no Iraq prior to the treaty of Versailles.


Ah but in your view there is a "right and wrong" and I don't see you complaining about Russia dispite said PR compaign, if you believed in right or wrong and not just what your propoganda mill tells you, you'ld be making threads in support of chechnya but I don't see any.


Threads, no. Posts, yes.


And also, I've found a more similar anology; Kashmir, the Indians claim it, they have 800,000 troops doing heavy policing with authoritan tactics to keep down rebellion and the people in Kashmir want independance, but alas no condemnation from the world at large... hmm...


The Pakistanis claim it, too. And they have thousands of troops in Pakistani Kashmir, looking across the Line of Control at the thousands of Indian troops in Jammu and Kashmir, all the way up to world's highest battlefield, on a glacier. India accuse Pakistan of supporting Muslim pro-union militants, who have gone as far as attacking the Indian parliament while it sat in session in New Delhi. So, not a very similar analogy after all.



And yet more than 50% of Taiwanese voted in a president who's party manifesto states independence. Better get a refund for that PR policy.


Ahh, but you zee the poll was done after his election and effectively shattering any chances he had of trying to go for independence.


And yet, more than 50% of voting Taiwanese voted for a President whose party manifesto states independence.



Then I guess it was also cheating the UAE, Saudi, Venezuela, the UK and Australia out of their money as well, they are, after all, all oil-producing nations as well.


In the case of the UK/Aussies, i think they would benefit from it since I believe they are an overal importer of oil. As for Venezuela, they're too far away to complain, and the Saudi's weren't being hurt from it, Iraq however was building up its prestige in the Arab world through a war machine


Prestige? Iraq had no prestige in the Arab world. He attacked a fellow Arabic and Islamic country. He allowed the Israelis to destroy the Osirak reactor. He didn't win against the Iranians. In 1990 Egypt, Syria, Jordan and Saudi all sided with the UN against Iraq. So much for his prestige.


and a infant space program,


Are you referring to Gerry Bull's guns?


lower crude oil prices would lower their income thus hurt their ability to build up armed strength.


How could lower crude oil prices also not hurt the Saudis? They have one of the least diversified economies on earth.



Taiwan is a diplomatically-recognised soveriegn nation, therefore not legally a province of the People's Republic of China.


By whom? They're still LEGALLY part of "China", the UN recognizes the PRC not the ROC, more and more EU nations are affriming their One China Policy (see the People's Daily) as President Hu visits more and more EU head of States and Head of Governments.


And the US president is highlighting China's poor human rights performance as we type this...

Other soveriegn nations, recognised by the UN, diplomatically recognise Taiwan, they exchange ambassadors with full plenipotentiary powers. Thus, by international legal precedent, Taiwan (as the ROC) is a nation independent of the PRC.

For a decade the UN recognised the Khmer Rouge and Prince Norodom Sihanouk as the "legal" government of Cambodia. Never mind that they were living in the jungle on the Thai border and a Vietnamese-backed government existed in Phnom Penh, collecting taxes and setting national policy.


So how are they diplomatically independant? They might be "de facto" independant for now but de jure they are a part of us.


See above.




As mentioned somewhere else, probly here, most Americans only know that most of their stuff is made in China and that they have tasty food, "good guys, bad guys" is starting to blurr because of some of your recent policies origining from your War on Terror, most Americans according to my correspondants are getting more and more sick of the lies and the bull the white house keeps feeding the US people, and your debt is only going up not down.


I don't know how many times I have to say this, I would assume you would be able to tell from all I have posted previously, but I am NOT an American.


Ok so your not an American my bad.

The British separated Kuweit from Iraq when they partitianed the Ottoman Empire into Mandates, historically Kuweit has been part of Mesopetania.

Well then give me a link to any post related to a protest vs Russian chauvinism with the Chechnyans, not created within the last or next 24 hours preferably within the last month or so.

The Politics between two claiment nations is irrelevent, BOTH may claim it but the Kashmerians want Independance and the Indians and the Pakistanis are keeping them down with active military force to prevent them.

50% as I stated may have voted for him originally just as more then 50% of Canadians may have voted for a certain Prime Minister, but when said Prime Minister had an overal vote and the issue was crushed his government lost power and a new government got elected in. The Poll done on what how the Taiwanese may feel about independance have crushed any attempt to have a referendum on the matter because even if 50% may have voted him in even if its in his platform, 70-80% however have decided that they do not wish to be independant, your logic is similar to saying that 51% of Americans voted for Bush and will keep voting for him and his party, however even if Americans did indeed vote for Bush in 2004 (assuming the elections weren't rigged) it still doesn't mean they'll vote Republican AGAIN and AGAIN. People change their minds.

Yes I am referring to his guns, many consider it an attempt t put together a space program that doesn't have to depend on the billions say put into NASA or Russia's Strategic Rocket Force. And Iraq did indeed have quite alot of respect in the Arab world, they were the leading miliary and economic power and carried prestige. The space program and launching a sateilleite would only have increased it.

But lowering said prices would have accelerated Iraq's debt and made matters worse a trade war would've involved quite a bit of backpeddling to make it workable and at the time it seemed like they could get consessions out of Kuweit and when they annexed them seemed like the world may appease a dictator once again.

I'm just saying Kuweit was "argueably" Iraq's whatever course of policy they took in regards to it is not the point of the discussion.

Whatever Bush is saying is not the Issue, whatever the case of human rights there may be Bush still recognizes Taiwan and so did Colin Powel who him and Kissinger were the only American State Department Ministers who I can respect.

So give me a list of each country that "recognizes" Taiwan as a separate state and/or the only representative of China (foreign policy wise). This does not include nations with trading agreements of defencive treaties, or arms deals. And I think we'll see not a single major nation actually recognizes Taiwan.

What does the Khmer Rouge have to do with this? They had they're nation for a while then picked a fight with someone who was much bigger then they were and lacked the ability to get Russia to help and the PLA was not in any shape for peace keeping at that time and got a bloody nose.



posted on Nov, 20 2005 @ 03:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
I It wouldn't even by legal standards be an act of aggression because legally it is a province of China, just as Tibet was, you don't see the world getting angry at Russia for crushing the Chechnyans do you?


Neither Taiwan nor Tibet were or are legally parts of China. Tibet was an independent nation when the Chinese brutally annexed the territory in the 1950s. China signed away all rights and title to Taiwan in 1895. There is no legally binding peace treaty that awards China the title to Taiwan following the second world war or at any other time. This notion that Taiwan is legally China's is false.


And if 80% of Taiwan still supports the status quo, and if since the 50's more and more nations have been recognizing the One China Policy esp. in Europe, then I think our PR campaign is pretty effective.


If you honestly believe that, why does your side oppose the right of the Taiwanese people to hold a referendum on the question? According to the UN charter, the Taiwanese people have the right to self-determination. As such, a plebiscite (referendum) would seem to be the best way to determine the will of the Taiwanese people. However, you side opposed that (just as it opposed ICJ adjudication) because you know you will lose.



posted on Nov, 20 2005 @ 04:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom

The British separated Kuweit from Iraq when they partitianed the Ottoman Empire into Mandates, historically Kuweit has been part of Mesopetania.


The Mandates were authorized by the League of Nations, NOT done by the British unilaterally.


The Politics between two claiment nations is irrelevent, BOTH may claim it but the Kashmerians want Independance and the Indians and the Pakistanis are keeping them down with active military force to prevent them.


Still, legally that territory is a part of India. It was part of British India and deeded over to India following independence. Let's not forget that China is a party to this. China currently hold about 15% of Kashmir, territory that legally belongs to India.


50% as I stated may have voted for him originally just as more then 50% of Canadians may have voted for a certain Prime Minister, but when said Prime Minister had an overal vote and the issue was crushed his government lost power and a new government got elected in.


Actually, Canadians don't vote for their Prime Minister, they vote for MPs who when choose the PM. PM Martin's party did not get a majority of the vote in the last election and has been running a fragile minority government. That eggshell finally cracked.

President Chen got more than 50% of the vote in his own right. The pan-Green alliance got more than 53% of the vote in the National Assembly elections earlier this year. THe Pan-Blue media is doing all it can to discredit the pan-Green coming into the local elections in less than two weeks. We shalls see how effective it is.


The Poll done on what how the Taiwanese may feel about independance have crushed any attempt to have a referendum on the matter because even if 50% may have voted him in even if its in his platform, 70-80% however have decided that they do not wish to be independant, your logic is similar to saying that 51% of Americans voted for Bush and will keep voting for him and his party, however even if Americans did indeed vote for Bush in 2004 (assuming the elections weren't rigged) it still doesn't mean they'll vote Republican AGAIN and AGAIN. People change their minds.


Please cite the poll including the exact wording of the poll question? Again, why does your side oppose a referendum to formally determine the will of the Taiwanese people?



I'm just saying Kuweit was "argueably" Iraq's whatever course of policy they took in regards to it is not the point of the discussion.


No, it was not. The boundary division was formally recognized by the League of Nations following World War I. Iraq as a sovereign entity never exercised sovereignty over Kuwait.


Red

posted on Nov, 20 2005 @ 05:39 AM
link   
To make the long story short. China will not invade Taiwan.



posted on Nov, 20 2005 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ludahai

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
I It wouldn't even by legal standards be an act of aggression because legally it is a province of China, just as Tibet was, you don't see the world getting angry at Russia for crushing the Chechnyans do you?


Neither Taiwan nor Tibet were or are legally parts of China. Tibet was an independent nation when the Chinese brutally annexed the territory in the 1950s. China signed away all rights and title to Taiwan in 1895. There is no legally binding peace treaty that awards China the title to Taiwan following the second world war or at any other time. This notion that Taiwan is legally China's is false.



And if 80% of Taiwan still supports the status quo, and if since the 50's more and more nations have been recognizing the One China Policy esp. in Europe, then I think our PR campaign is pretty effective.


If you honestly believe that, why does your side oppose the right of the Taiwanese people to hold a referendum on the question? According to the UN charter, the Taiwanese people have the right to self-determination. As such, a plebiscite (referendum) would seem to be the best way to determine the will of the Taiwanese people. However, you side opposed that (just as it opposed ICJ adjudication) because you know you will lose.



We just had about 2-3 pages of discussion on this please reread the last 10 or so pages, Taiwan ie Formosa was given back to China ie The Republic of China in 1945.

There was a revolution and the CCP took power away from the GMD and expelled them from the mainland. Now we are China and according to succesion of states theory Taiwan is also part of China, unless by your logic the ROC has no claim over Taiwan either.

You are evading the issue, Chechnya wants to separate, Russia ain't letting them. Where are the denounciations?

The UN may support the right to self determination but only if it is whithin their interests to do so. Taiwan is our territory, self determination only legally applies when they "win".



posted on Nov, 20 2005 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ludahai

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom

The British separated Kuweit from Iraq when they partitianed the Ottoman Empire into Mandates, historically Kuweit has been part of Mesopetania.


The Mandates were authorized by the League of Nations, NOT done by the British unilaterally.


The Politics between two claiment nations is irrelevent, BOTH may claim it but the Kashmerians want Independance and the Indians and the Pakistanis are keeping them down with active military force to prevent them.


Still, legally that territory is a part of India. It was part of British India and deeded over to India following independence. Let's not forget that China is a party to this. China currently hold about 15% of Kashmir, territory that legally belongs to India.


50% as I stated may have voted for him originally just as more then 50% of Canadians may have voted for a certain Prime Minister, but when said Prime Minister had an overal vote and the issue was crushed his government lost power and a new government got elected in.


Actually, Canadians don't vote for their Prime Minister, they vote for MPs who when choose the PM. PM Martin's party did not get a majority of the vote in the last election and has been running a fragile minority government. That eggshell finally cracked.

President Chen got more than 50% of the vote in his own right. The pan-Green alliance got more than 53% of the vote in the National Assembly elections earlier this year. THe Pan-Blue media is doing all it can to discredit the pan-Green coming into the local elections in less than two weeks. We shalls see how effective it is.


The Poll done on what how the Taiwanese may feel about independance have crushed any attempt to have a referendum on the matter because even if 50% may have voted him in even if its in his platform, 70-80% however have decided that they do not wish to be independant, your logic is similar to saying that 51% of Americans voted for Bush and will keep voting for him and his party, however even if Americans did indeed vote for Bush in 2004 (assuming the elections weren't rigged) it still doesn't mean they'll vote Republican AGAIN and AGAIN. People change their minds.


Please cite the poll including the exact wording of the poll question? Again, why does your side oppose a referendum to formally determine the will of the Taiwanese people?



I'm just saying Kuweit was "argueably" Iraq's whatever course of policy they took in regards to it is not the point of the discussion.


No, it was not. The boundary division was formally recognized by the League of Nations following World War I. Iraq as a sovereign entity never exercised sovereignty over Kuwait.



-And the league was a British/French tool, a farce compared to the UN.

-Still doesn't change the fact that The people within Kashmere want independence yet there is no complaints or comdemnation from the world at large.

-I am not refering to Martin I am refering to a previous Canadian gov't that upon a failure to pass a bill/order (I don't recal the details) their gov't collapsed.

-We shall see.

-The poll is refered to several pages back, I'm to tired to retreave it, maybe later. I think ChinaWhite supplied it.



posted on Nov, 20 2005 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
You are evading the issue, Chechnya wants to separate, Russia ain't letting them. Where are the denounciations?


Get your posters right...



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Middle Kingdom
The British separated Kuweit from Iraq when they partitianed the Ottoman Empire into Mandates, historically Kuweit has been part of Mesopetania.


Well Jerusalem should be the capital of Greater Arabia then. No, wait, before it belonged to Saladin the Assyrians had claim to some of the area. As did the Akkadites, and the Petrans. Mesopotamia is not Iraq, although you could say Sumer is. Mesopotamia is one the the Cradles of Civilisation, the area between and surrounding the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Over time that has included Ur, Babylon (capital of Persia) etc. By the 19th century Persia was what is now Iran, it didn't even own its own ancient capital anymore. Heck, historically Bavaria should be a soveriegn nation, Gibralter belongs to Spain and half of southern Vietnam is Cambodian territory. Maybe Italy should lay claim to half of France and the Middle East...


Well then give me a link to any post related to a protest vs Russian chauvinism with the Chechnyans, not created within the last or next 24 hours preferably within the last month or so.


Clearly you are using an older definition of chauvinism to the one I use. I wouldn't call it chauvinism. I'd call it brutal oppression and land piracy.


your logic is similar to saying that 51% of Americans voted for Bush and will keep voting for him and his party, however even if Americans did indeed vote for Bush in 2004 (assuming the elections weren't rigged) it still doesn't mean they'll vote Republican AGAIN and AGAIN. People change their minds.


Yes, you might want to remember that last sentence.


Yes I am referring to his guns, many consider it an attempt t put together a space program that doesn't have to depend on the billions say put into NASA or Russia's Strategic Rocket Force. And Iraq did indeed have quite alot of respect in the Arab world, they were the leading miliary and economic power and carried prestige. The space program and launching a sateilleite would only have increased it.


Iraq's construction of Dr Gerald Bull's superguns had nothing to do with space and everything to do with whomping Tel Aviv, or any other unfriendly regional capital. The space program, which it never was, involved tying multiple Scuds together to create an ICBM from an IRBM. Although the launcher (kind of) worked, the re-entry did not. There was no space program.


I'm just saying Kuweit was "argueably" Iraq's


No, it wasn't. Just as the Falklands were not Argentine.


Whatever Bush is saying is not the Issue, whatever the case of human rights there may be Bush still recognizes Taiwan and so did Colin Powel who him and Kissinger were the only American State Department Ministers who I can respect.


Of course you respect Kissinger, he had nothing but disdain for democracy. Next time, check your post before you post. This looks like you're agreeing with me over Taiwan's independence. Plus, at cabinet level in the US tthey're called Secretaries, not Ministers.


I think we'll see not a single major nation actually recognizes Taiwan.


Who said anything about major?


What does the Khmer Rouge have to do with this? They had they're nation for a while then picked a fight with someone who was much bigger then they were and lacked the ability to get Russia to help and the PLA was not in any shape for peace keeping at that time and got a bloody nose.


The KR were anathema to the USSR. The USSR's local client was VN. Phnom Penh's only backer was Beijing, under the Gang of Four. You were highlighting the UN's recognition of your claim. So I gave you another example of UN recognition.

As for the PLA peacekeeping:



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
With all the talk about about the US, China, and Taiwan one really has to look at the simple fact. China cannot invade at this time.

Why?
1) China lacks the amphibious capacity to move enough troops over
2) Any attempt to airlift in the necessary equipment/troops would in all likelyhood be decimated by Taiwans Pac 2's and thier AF.
3) For all thier thugary, the ChiCom leadership seems to understand that in order to take over Taiwan they would in essence have to burn it down. If they are persuing a scorched earth policy, then there may not be much the US or Taiwan can do to stop them. However, I think they want and need to keep Taiwan viable for thier own economy. Can you imagine the efficiency of slave labor coupled to the quality controll and moderinzation that Taiwan posseses?????
4) The US would not stand by and allow Taiwan to be taken by conventional means. Aside from being a great customer from our planes and weapons systems we also benifit from an economic/industrial standpoint.
5) China can sabre rattle all they want, but can they affort to piss off thier most important trading partner the US?


Before i was working in a big Import/Export cie. We have delivered a lot of primary goods in china like Steel, Aluminium... and a lots more, they are accumulating those goods as they have done before with Pearl Harbour. At this time they are producing a lots of military materials and it's a matter of time before war will be declared.





new topics
top topics
 
1
<< 176  177  178    180  181 >>

log in

join