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.

 

Can China Invade Taiwan?

page: 59
1
<< 56  57  58    60  61  62 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by proteinx
www.csis.org...
then you know her fall infront of People's Hall is not something that I imaged.


So she fell, you mentioned the great Ding (I think, he was the criminal that ordered the Tienneman massacres no?) faced down Thatcher on the Hong Kong issue, not that she actually took a fall. Were did you get that information?



Nox

posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Wow, what revisionist historical ChiCom propaganda manual did that one come out of? Sounds to me the writer of the book must have been chasing the dragon no?


Yes, but we have propaganda going both ways. Don't forget that America currently has the strongest media engine.

@ twchang:

I suppose you're right. I just consider it wasteful that the two countries have weapons pointed at each other.

It might sound fascist or something, but I was simply hoping the two countries would become friendlier with each other. That is much more easily realizeable given reunification. (EDIT: Maybe then, both countries won't have to spend as much on propaganda against each other
)
You have to have to understand the level of my cynicism. Extremist on both sides don't make your argument any better (*looks towards ProteinX and bodebliss*
).

Your analogy is faulty because you can't compare Canada and Mexico to Japan, Korea, and India. No offense to Canada and Mexico intended, but I think China's Asian neighbors are much more intimidating.

[edit on 5-12-2004 by Nox]



posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nox

Your analogy is faulty because you can't compare Canada and Mexico to Japan, Korea, and India. No offense to Canada and Mexico intended, but I think China's Asian neighbors are much more intimidating.

[edit on 5-12-2004 by Nox]


Well, I wasn't trying to compare Mexico and Canada to Japan, Korea and India. And I wasn't comparing US and China or their current situation. I was just pointing out that US is far from the type of country I talked about. I don't think China right now is that type of country neither. WW2 German fits better with my description.

And it goes both ways. From Korea, Japan, and India's perspective, China is probably intimidating to them as well.


[edit on 5-12-2004 by twchang]


Nox

posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 08:28 PM
link   
I was under the impression that we both agreed that if Taiwan agreed to any terms of unification, Chiwan would have been at the peak of its power, and hardly willing to risk or sacrifice that in a nuclear war.

Pre-WW2 Germany is an even worse analogy because nukes weren't readily available at that time like they are now.

I think some public boasting, sabre rattling, and bullying will pretty much be it. Similar to what the US is doing right now, though I could care less.

Frankly, I think it's healthy for a country to have that kind of nationalism.
I wouldn't mind seeing middle class Taiwanese and Chinese being proud of and wearing domestically made clothing instead of American clothing for the same price.

Germany's nationalism was dangerous because it was blindly emotional from the supposedly unjust treatment that was served to it as a punishment for the first WW.

EDIT: Why would you dislike your country any less if it became more powerful? Sure it seems evil to the rest of the world when the US attacks Iraq, but just because the Bush Administration may have made a mistake, doesn't invalidate the goodness that we may have done. Most US soldiers I know went to Iraq with the full intention of doing good, not stealing oil.

abcnews.go.com...

EDIT: In response to twchang's edit,
I THINK that the intimidation would also be there between the US and China. This will spawn some healthy competition between the countries. IMO, I'm not worried about war, because I'm optimistic. I think countries are becoming more mature and they will continue to do so. I think competition between the two countries will lead to nationalism and greater incentive for technological advances.

The Cold War was scary, but many great technological leaps were made during that time. (And this time, the Cold War 2 would be between two democratic (working) countries.)

Personally, I don't think a Chiwan would be as great of a deal as we are making it seem. A reunified Germany wasn't as big of a deal as many claimed it would be. I think the biggest effect will be a stronger nationalism for both Taiwanese and Chinese.

I have faith that neither the US nor China are stupid enough to engage in war against each other.

Why do you automatically assume that nationalism = Nazism? I am a nationalist. I'm very proud of being American, that shouldn't make me a Nazi.

[edit on 5-12-2004 by Nox]



posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Nox,
You don't have to have nukes to do great "evil."

I am not against nationalism or things like that. But when nationalism goes to extreme it will be very bad for people in the nation and other nations around it.

I like Taiwan. If I like it more it will be because it becomes better, not just because it becomes more "powerful".


Nox

posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 09:25 PM
link   
Perhaps I overgeneralized when I used the term "power". My terminologies are strange.

By a country being powerful, I mean that it is both nationalistic and influential.

How do you define "better"? How does a country become better without becoming influential?

Suppose I used the idea of "better" that doesn't include nationalism or influence.

Most of the countries I can think of, ones that have high standards of living, but relatively low influences on the rest of the world (I won't name them, just to preserve sensitivities) are all countries with very low populations or low population densities. Or they could have natural resource exports (like Norway) or a large amount of land (Canada).

Taiwan's economy very much depends on its image and level of competitiveness (like technology), because it lacks land, and lacks natural resources.

By becoming "better" Taiwan NEEDS to be an influence. It's products need to be marketed as superior to its neighbors. For its citizens not to lose money to American imports, they need to have more faith on their own products.

Hey, wait a minute. Wasn't it I the original one who was arguing that "power" doesn't just come in the form of nukes anymore when arguing with Proteinx? Now you're using that argument against me without reading its full context?


By power, I meant national identity. Show me a globally iconic symbol like Mickey Mouse with "Made in Taiwan" or "Made in China" stamped on it. You can't. Chinese influence is felt mostly on a physical level, militarily. It's not felt at the subconscious level. If anything, most people stereotype all Chinese as Chicoms (like many people on this thread are doing right now).

They are surprisingly surprised when a Chinese individual says something like, "Does it ever occur to you that you can think for youselves, and that not all Chinese people sacrifice their first-born daughters to Chairman Mao?"


I read through the thread, and it seems like it wasn't until I stumbled along that any mention of Taiwanese propaganda was even mention. The imbalance is obvious.

Many people in the world would sacrifice a limb to become average American citizens. Not AS many would be likely to sacrifice that limb to become average Chinese citizens. THAT is power to me.

I am saying that Chiwan would have power. It COULD be a bully too (the US obviously is), but it would also have other forms of power that would definitely increase standards of living for both Taiwanese and Chinese. I'm also considering that the unification would be mostly in name, and like Hong Kong, Taiwan would be a bird cage country (not in a bad way, I just mean as in, mostly untouched by the Chinese gov't. The same way Hong Kong is a bird cage city).

[edit on 5-12-2004 by Nox]



posted on Dec, 5 2004 @ 10:40 PM
link   
for nox:

please check page 60s, people like you have been through this question with him. he answered exactly same without clear idea what 'better' means and what 'liberty' or 'freedom' means.

All his logic is amazingly naive and very superficial and seems he just come out of brainwash center: "Once taiwan get independent, taiwan will share all the previliigies as nation and life will be better and better". And he never answer me or himself exactly-------- "how"??? economically, militarily, politically for normal taiwanese. It's been a week since I asked him this question, he just could not answer it. I asked if he can give even single solid analysis I would admire him and shut up here, he just could not do it.

Then he start to jump around talking all the bad things in China mainland, then I asked him: did China ever want you live the same way as Chinese mainland people live? all China want is not let taiwan be utlized by enemies. Chinese in mainland have no inention to invovle taiwanese daily life. and China also have no intention rush to reunit with taiwan as long as taiwan dont stimulate mainland.

Then he started to jump out talking about history. considering himself has nothing to do with China, and taiwan originally was not occupied by Chinese so taiwan shall be independent. Not alone his history book has beem complete different from others, but he could not answer a simple question that I asked : "was taiwan originally occupied by you? was north america originally occupied by white people? " History was wrote by winner---he even donot know that.

Then he started to shoot around talking about attacking shanghai or beijing. or even three gorges dams to defer Chinese to take taiwan back---you see, he start to burn inside---exactly a mania syndrom. I even reluctantly respond to that.


Did you see his logic here? None, he simply has NOT completed even one single logic round of debate. I even wonder he is she cause only girls show such confused reasoning ability.

Nox, you are wasting your time here, do you know what it means "play music infront of cow?". They are in a kind of mania state--------amazingly similar to culture revolution that was happened 40 years ago in China mainland. Only when themselves understand the pain, they will undestand it they are simply a tool used by others to against China.

But consider the dangerous environment with other "ugly nations" like Japan, we dont have time to wait until they themselves get idea what "pain" means.
My plan is very simple, send ships over there and ask: "if chinese, come to this ship and let's go back to China; if not , please stay there. "
after get all chinese out of the island. bomb that island into wasteland and use it as pure military base .




[edit on 5-12-2004 by proteinx]



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nox
I think bodebliss just discredited himself.



Nope.

Chinese losses in manpower far outweighed any gains and they acheived no strategic design at all. Being forced to withdraw.



EDIT: Some other sites suggested that this war was also a challenge to the Soviet Union who had previously claimed it would defend its Vietnamese ally in a war. It turns out those promises were hollow.

[edit on 5-12-2004 by Nox]


The Chinese invaded VN in response to the Vietnamese invasion of Democratic Kampuchea (Cambodia under the KR). The KR were clients of China, VN was a client of the USSR. The Chinese feared encirclement by the USSR (VN, Laos PDR, Cambodia), VN feared encirclement by the Chinese (China, DK). Geopolitics in action.

The upshot was the Chinese retreated and VN retained Cambodia. Who won that then?

The USSR didn't have to come to VN's aid.



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 01:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by COWlan
Are you simply not informed with history or are you just plain ignorant. We beat Vietnam alright? We almost attacked to Chim (something something, you know, their capital) and then we noticed attacked our communist partner does not harm our enemy and only weakens ourselves so we stopped. Man learn a little about history of China first, oops I forgot you don't wanna be Chinese. So I guess now your gonna say oh we retreated back to Taiwan in 1949 and we could still take back the whole entire mainland. By the way if you just can't notice, that was sarcasm.


Yes, learn a little history. How about a little geography.

Chim (something something)? Do you mean Ho Chi Min City? As in Saigon? Do you know where that is?

The capital of VN is Hanoi. In the north. Saigon was the capital of the Republic of Vietnam, the south. It is now Ho Chi Min City, a very looong way from the capital. Try looking at a map. Besides which, you didn't almost attack to the capital at all.
And your stated reasons for retreating are spurious. Wholly so.


Nox

posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 01:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV

Originally posted by Nox
I think bodebliss just discredited himself.

Nope.

Chinese losses in manpower far outweighed any gains and they acheived no strategic design at all. Being forced to withdraw.



EDIT: Some other sites suggested that this war was also a challenge to the Soviet Union who had previously claimed it would defend its Vietnamese ally in a war. It turns out those promises were hollow.

[edit on 5-12-2004 by Nox]


The Chinese invaded VN in response to the Vietnamese invasion of Democratic Kampuchea (Cambodia under the KR). The KR were clients of China, VN was a client of the USSR. The Chinese feared encirclement by the USSR (VN, Laos PDR, Cambodia), VN feared encirclement by the Chinese (China, DK). Geopolitics in action.

The upshot was the Chinese retreated and VN retained Cambodia. Who won that then?

The USSR didn't have to come to VN's aid.


Yes, and if the intentions were to free Cambodia, then the Chinese failed. The most commonly cited reason for invasion I've read was the supposed mistreatment of Vietnamese's ethnic Chinese minority and Vietnamese occupation of these islands (forgot the name) that were claimed by China. The Chinese only launched a punitive assault on Vietnam after Vietnamese attack on Phnom Penh.

Don't get me wrong, I have no gripes against the Vietnamese. Personally, I'm GLAD they fought with Pol Pot, and I think it lends further evidence that America was simply fighting against the wrong side during the Vietnamese War.

The point is that a victor is not clear in my eyes (it doesn't help that most sources I've read describe it as a "punitive" war), but I do know that history is written by the victors. All of my information came from western (not Chicom) sources, like Wikipedia, and OnWar.

So bodebliss might not be completely off, but taking into context the situation and his tone, you can't help but wonder if his words weren't at least slightly inspired by anti-Chinese propaganda.

I'd be equally offended if he said the same thing about America losing the Vietnamese War in the same tone, because it shows a lack of understanding for the other country. A very one-sided view.

It's very arrogant to assume that America left the war for moral reasons including lack of moral support for the war, and on the same note accuse China of backing off (after it claimed victory) solely due to cowardice.

I'm sure the Chinese population wasn't too actively fond of Pol Pot's genocidal agenda either.

[edit on 6-12-2004 by Nox]



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 03:23 AM
link   
To go just a tad off-topic...

The Chinese population knew nothing of the KR regime. No-one did. The Vietnamse were the only ones to be attacked by the KR. They responded to that, they had no-one's humanitarian interests in mind.

I doubt the Chinese still know anything about it. But that's just my personal opinion based on the general lock of world-knowledge displayed by most Chinese students I have enountered. Much like most westerners know nothing of the KR.

Edit: damn spelling!

[edit on 6-12-2004 by HowlrunnerIV]



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 05:11 AM
link   
It is a sad case when the Chinese who come here can't see that the most recent living examples of China's projections of power were faulty and weak. Let's look at the products of Chinese aggression. '62-'63 sino-indian war, china gave up 70% of it's claim. '69 sino-USSR border war ,china started the conflict and quit and gave up it's claims. '79 Viet-sino border war china backs-off after heavy losses with no gains.


China's claims and aims are senile and lack focus and effort.

So now they are focusing on a little island feeling ,'OH, China can at least handle this'.

China is again misguided, and befuddled by it's insane ideology and historical view.



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 07:03 AM
link   
here is something i'm sure you will all find interesting



Pentagon warns of China's `credible military options'


www.taipeitimes.com...

According to the report:
* If China equipped its 500 short-range ballistic missiles with adequate guidance systems, they could destroy key leadership facilities, military bases and communication nodes with minimal advanced warning

* China's air force now has nearly 3,400 aircraft

* The lack of a credible amphibious lift capability still hampers China's ability to stage a massive invasion

* Taiwan's army has major shortcomings in training and reservist mobilization and its naval operations are not well integrated with those of the other forces


Nox

posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 08:51 AM
link   
Alright.

If status quo is not sufficient, I'd like to hear some logical explanations of why Taiwan wants official independence.

I'll try to list everything I can think of:
- Joining the UN / International recognition as a sovereign state

And that's my conclusive list.

Taiwan is already recognized as a participant of APEC and WTO, organizations that actually make a difference. The current UN is a joke. If you want to debate the effectiveness of the UN, do so against BlackJackal. He has a good thread about it here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

This international recognition (instead of Status Quo) I can see as nothing more than a public embarassment of China (which I'm sure would please many of the Taiwanese). Outcries from people like bodebliss on yourside don't do well to convince me otherwise.

China has recently surpassed the US as an export partner of Taiwan. China is fast becoming the most dominant economic partner of Taiwan.
I think given a chance and time, China and Taiwan would have naturally come to peaceful terms. I get the impression that an official declaration of independence would lead to nothing but poor relations between the two countries, which would be a great waste.

www.cia.gov...

The figures suggest a strong dependence on Chinese economic involvement. Over 25% of Taiwanese exports are to the Chinese. And over 10% of Chinese imports are from Taiwan.
Given time, the ties will become stronger. Why stop it? Are the Taiwanese that worried of stronger relation with China?



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Ok!

If you had a wife and you loved her and she wanted a refrigerator , or to work @ a job, or a little more freedom of decision on discretionary spending, would you beat her till she felt otherwise?


Nox

posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by bodebliss
Ok!

If you had a wife and you loved her and she wanted a refrigerator , or to work @ a job, or a little more freedom of decision on discretionary spending, would you beat her till she felt otherwise?


That's a terrible analogy.
Let me revert to a more combative mode of thinking, and introduce you to a Chinese exremist's point of view to counter your own extremist views.

"If you had a wife, who had a grudge against you for something you did in the past (like not being able to find a job, even though you had no control over the situations), and she decides to punish you by making publicly known that she has no ties to you, and then decides to screw the entire neighborhood... Would you sit by idly and watch her as your dignity is slowly stripped away?"



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 09:10 AM
link   
If you loved someone , but the feeling was not mutual , or you were married and your significant other was calling it quits, would threaten to and prepare to kill the object of your desire?


Nox

posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Your original analogy did not suggest this. It merely showed a very one-sided view.

This latest proposition of divorce is more reasonable, as it has implied meaning to it that is slightly less biased that the previous.

You see why any husband would be unwilling to divorce when he feels that his wife's opinion of him was solely based on exaggerated (but not completely unfounded) rumors? Especially consider that some of those rumors are being debunked as we speak.


Nox

posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 09:17 AM
link   
Wait a minute.

Taiwan's current "discretionary spending" is dubious at most anyway.
The spending is heavily monitored against the Chinese.

If anything, stronger ties with China, an alliance OR unification should make the economy stronger.



posted on Dec, 6 2004 @ 10:21 AM
link   
I know they are going to think Jesus was born in Taiwan sooner or later.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 56  57  58    60  61  62 >>

log in

join