Taiwan trembling with fear as dragon arms itself

Originally posted by Odium
True...it could starve America! Or it could stop selling oil to America? Or stop selling anythign to America?

Also, remember Main Land China, keeps moving people to Taiwan so come next election a 'certain', party might just win and this problem could be avoided.

And China wouldn't attack like most people think. It'd send every one of those missiles it has pointed at Taiwan and destroy most the defence of the Island before invading.

They'd not just blindely fly over the Island with its SAMs still operational.

What do you mean keep sending people to Taiwan? Even if they are those people can't vote.

As matter of fact, after the last presidential election more and more people are disappointed by the result and thinking about moving to other countries which would in turn ensure "certain" party stay in power. I know this because I am one of those people who got out of the country.

Originally posted by zakattack
US would not loose to china first off US has Way bigger navy with Much better Technology And US has the Largest and Best Airforce while china has alot of airplanes they only have a handful of 3rd and 4th generation fighters that are combat ready, and plus not to mention that while our focus is on Terrorism That if a country does something to Unite the US they best be gettin the # out of the way, not only does the US fight but so do our allies all of the US and all allies would be 20,000+ fighters and bombers not uncluding Navy planes or any planes in reserves 80,000+ tanks and armored Vehicles and about 7.5 million well trained troops, china has alot to loose by pikin a fight with the US however I am in no support of Going to war with anyone.

Your allies? The only allies you have are those with the same bad table manners and those you bullied into submission.

What is the last body count of US casualities in Iraq? If that number happened in one afternoon would the American public still support the war? I mean, there is a chance that America will lose the war simply due to civil riots, dont you agree? No politician wants to get on people's bad side right?

I think you also had a bigger navy, airforce and more vehicles plus better tech not to mention more cans of spam in Korea war and Vietnam war....

Alot of things can affect the outcome of a war and force is the least effective of all...

Originally posted by RedHare
I think you also had a bigger navy, airforce and more vehicles plus better tech not to mention more cans of spam in Korea war and Vietnam war....

And it was the Chinese who wrote the book on un-conventional warfare... Sun Tzu's - Art of War... And if you think that they couldn't use this to destroy America from within just think which country has the most nationals over seas?

Your answer would be China

EDIT:
All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must seem inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near. Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him.
-- Sun Tzu, the Art of War

[edit on 7-3-2005 by ghostsoldier]

Originally posted by RedHare

Originally posted by Odium
True...it could starve America! Or it could stop selling oil to America? Or stop selling anythign to America?

Also, remember Main Land China, keeps moving people to Taiwan so come next election a 'certain', party might just win and this problem could be avoided.

And China wouldn't attack like most people think. It'd send every one of those missiles it has pointed at Taiwan and destroy most the defence of the Island before invading.

They'd not just blindely fly over the Island with its SAMs still operational.

What do you mean keep sending people to Taiwan? Even if they are those people can't vote.

As matter of fact, after the last presidential election more and more people are disappointed by the result and thinking about moving to other countries which would in turn ensure "certain" party stay in power. I know this because I am one of those people who got out of the country.

What I mean by ‘weight’ the vote, is by my understanding - a lot of Taiwan is Han Chinese? So, firstly once their family, friends, etc move over they can actually vote (if they get citizenship and see one election), which is why China moved them over now and also it can sway the vote. Your family, never seeing you again or you seeing them is a big insentive to join back with the mainland for some people. As is the fear your famiyl might be targetted.

I mean, how many Taiwanese know that China supplies them with power, goods etc, etc, etc? Once that was cut, China could starve them into submission, with a simple blockade.

Originally posted by RedHare

Originally posted by zakattack
US would not loose to china first off US has Way bigger navy with Much better Technology And US has the Largest and Best Airforce while china has alot of airplanes they only have a handful of 3rd and 4th generation fighters that are combat ready, and plus not to mention that while our focus is on Terrorism That if a country does something to Unite the US they best be gettin the # out of the way, not only does the US fight but so do our allies all of the US and all allies would be 20,000+ fighters and bombers not uncluding Navy planes or any planes in reserves 80,000+ tanks and armored Vehicles and about 7.5 million well trained troops, china has alot to loose by pikin a fight with the US however I am in no support of Going to war with anyone.

Your allies? The only allies you have are those with the same bad table manners and those you bullied into submission.

What is the last body count of US casualities in Iraq? If that number happened in one afternoon would the American public still support the war? I mean, there is a chance that America will lose the war simply due to civil riots, dont you agree? No politician wants to get on people's bad side right?

I think you also had a bigger navy, airforce and more vehicles plus better tech not to mention more cans of spam in Korea war and Vietnam war....

Alot of things can affect the outcome of a war and force is the least effective of all...

In the first Korean War, China had No Navy, No Air Force, limited supple of weapons, No artillary, No tanks. They actually had to steal what they could while they were in battle and they still did a devastating amount of damage to the Americans.

Originally posted by ghostsoldier
And it was the Chinese who wrote the book on un-conventional warfare... Sun Tzu's - Art of War... And if you think that they couldn't use this to destroy America from within just think which country has the most nationals over seas?

Your answer would be China

Never thought of that point. If America take the wrong stand and try to dipict Chinese as animals, savages, etc...well...they'd have a damn bigger problem then they do from doing the same to Arabs.

as posted by Odium
In the first Korean War, China had No Navy, No Air Force, limited supple of weapons, No artillary, No tanks. They actually had to steal what they could while they were in battle and they still did a devastating amount of damage to the Americans.

Huh? What are you? A sheep disguised as a wolf or vice versa?
Have you even talked to any Korean Vets, cause I think if you had, you would find tales of Chinese human wave attacks and US gunners running out of ammo. Yeah, I suppose in that applied case, the Chinese did "devastating" damage? Apparently you have not seen the KIA reports from both sides? 33,000+ US KIA, 400,000+ North Koreans KIA, and nearly 900,000+ Chinese KIA. (Source: A Dictionary of Military History, Andre Corvisier, 1988, ISBN: 0-631-16848-6)

Please define "devastating," in relation to how you have used it, maybe?




seekerof

[edit on 7-3-2005 by Seekerof]

dictionary.reference.com...

To overwhelm; confound; stun.

That’s the context I was using it in. Also, the statistics the U.N. and America give out for “Killed in Action” are very jaded. The P.V.A. didn’t even have over 700,000 members as far as the Chinese government will say - so how did they kill 900,000? (although, sometimes they go as high as 2million in the Army but after the revolution, I highly doubt this.)

Just like Vietnam the American Administration (Truman) counted civilians in the death total, during some ‘battles’, so that it looked like their “Human Rights” and “The Geneva Convention” (they just signed but not ratified) record would be ‘good’, so they could ‘make out’ that they were sticking to these new ‘international laws’.

If you look at the Chinese records, it tells a different story. Between 390,000 and 450,000 were killed. Where as, they say the whole United Nations force totalled over 1million deaths. (Although, this is the China war - on the Eastern front, not the statistics for Western Korean front.)

Yes, I’ve spoken to Korean Vets. We do for part of my History course, at College. It is also the area of study my teacher holds her Masters in. (The Forgotten Wars.) And I ran through what I posted to her several days ago and she ratified it as being ‘fairly accurate’. After all, the American Administration of the time only gave out ones they lost in Korea not on the Eastern Front as part of the U.N. forces.

Once I’m back in College (Thursday) I’ll grab a few book titles, that validate my statistics.

Since I am working at a college, I can and did validate what I have said.
As such, the source of merely one was given.
IF you wish to compare sources, we can, but in no way does that validate your assertion of "devastating," in regards to the Chinese.




seekerof

[edit on 7-3-2005 by Seekerof]

Like most wars, the statistics we both get will vary. The ones at Oxford, give a different interpretation of events then the ones at your College.

Also, I used devastating in this context: "To overwhelm; confound; stun."

You yourself admitted they "overwhelmed" them:"Have you even talked to any Korean Vets, cause I think if you had, you would find tales of Chinese human wave attacks and US gunners running out of ammo."

Yeah, the Chinese most definitely used wave attacks on U.S. forces in the Korean War. That one Marine Corps division, I forget which, literally gunned down 10 Chinese divisions and seriously wounded 2 others. It was crazy over there.

Originally posted by Odium
“Current Russian fighters are already on par with America’s best fighter, the F-15.

WOW! Wonder what the F-16 & F-18 are ?? Must be figments of my imagination!!
Also this particular rant is discussed in many threads on ATS and in all of them it has been established that the current Russian fighters are NOT on par with Americas best. ( I don't have the patience to look it up for you ! ) As for China at the same level as that of the Russians, duh! they already copied all the designs of current Russian aircraft and those which they couldn’t bother they manufacture them under license.

Originally posted by Odium
So America doesn’t actually have ‘best airforce’ as you put it, till the F-22 Raptor is in service and they have how many of those?

Who has the best airforce then, pray tell! No wait it is the chinese isn't it!

Originally posted by Odium
Also, why would attacking Taiwan ‘Unite the U.S’ it would still have as many people not wanting to go to war as say Iraq. That united the U.S. didn’t it?

You have never spoken to a single American have you, your entire perception of America is misinformed! SAD!
Ok, this is how it works in America! The 'significant ' ruckus on Iraq was due to the government not able to deliver the WMD that it claimed Iraq had and went to war on that pretext, also the public doesn't have to be united to go to war in America, this is a free country and many people have different opinions everybody can't agree on everything( you'd know this if you lived in a democratic nation! ) . If you had access to TV during the US elections you would have learnt that the MAJORITY voted for BUSH and believed that the war in Iraq is justified.[go look up any opinion poll]
In the case of Taiwan, you forget that the western world has quiet a bit of investment in Taiwan and any attack on it would be financially very bad but more than that it would be more of a matter of Justice in the American public, a bigger more powerful country attacks an ally of the united states with US interests in the country. The American public is paranoid, this would just incite that paranoia to dangerous levels, support you ask their will be an uprising against china. It would be compared to the Gulf War or Bosnia or maybe even WW2!

Originally posted by Odium
well France, Germany, Russia wouldn’t - they love the money they’ll now be earning because of China and the E.U’s lifting of the Arms Embargo on the PRoC.

It isn't all about money!!Get that out of your system, that they have invested money so they'll spare China because they won't !It will be one of the most just causes America has gone to war for in a long time- Protecting freedom and defending Democracy. Maybe Russia, France will act indifferent just to peeve the US but the rest of the world will be on USA's side and if your are wondering about the Security councils veto you can forget that, as Bush has succeeded in side-lining the UN and its petty politics.

Originally posted by Odium
And it doesn’t matter how good you think their Navy is, it’d be foolish for America to move to many ships to that part of the world. All it would take, would be the sinking of their aircraft carriers and the invasions ruined. Not hard with the new Type 094.

Sinking of Aircraft carriers?? Have you any idea what you are ranting about ?? They won't just float by into the Shanghai harbor and more over once you attack a USN carrier you have already lost the war, no matter how many soldiers are there in your 'peoples' army! An attack on a USN carrier strike group will warrant a full scale nuclear assault, what do you think china is going to do next attack pearl harbor again?? Your misinformed about china's capabilities and the US capabilities, for an individual claiming to study in Oxford and taking political science you seem to have serious gaps in your knowledge along with many preconceived notions, an open mind would do you good![NO OFFENCE meant ]

Originally posted by Odium
The best they could do, would be to do bombing runs on ‘Mainland China’ and who honestly thinks that China won’t have a lot more SAM sites up and running before they attack Taiwan? (Probably S-400) which will not have a problem taking out frontline U.S. fighters and possible B-2’s.

SAM's hitting a b-2 !?? This is what I mean ! I give up! I guess everyone is entitled to their own 'beliefs' .

[edit on 7-3-2005 by IAF101]

[edit on 7-3-2005 by IAF101]

Originally posted by Odium
“Current Russian fighters are already on par with America’s best fighter, the F-15.

Originally posted by IAF101
WOW! Wonder what the F-16 & F-18 are ??

Must be figments of my imagination!!

Also this particular rant is discussed in many threads on ATS and in all of them it has been established that the current Russian fighters are NOT on par with Americas best. ( I don't have the patience to look it up for you ! ) As for China at the same level as that of the Russians, duh! they already copied all the designs of current Russian aircraft and those which they couldn’t bother they manufacture them under license.

www.fa22raptor.com... “Current Russian fighters are already on par with America’s best fighter, the F-15” - taken from that site. Not my own view. Although, I doubt Russia would be making planes that are lesser then the F-15, since they’d be easily able to get a hold of one. Pakistan has them, doesn’t it? (Not 100% sure on that.)

I also think the Raptor will secure Air Dominance, for the next ten to fifteen years - but not for forty, like they claim.

Originally posted by Odium
So America doesn’t actually have ‘best airforce’ as you put it, till the F-22 Raptor is in service and they have how many of those?

Originally posted by IAF101
Who has the best airforce then, pray tell! No wait it is the chinese isn't it!

China doesn’t have the best Air Force, not for a few years - depending on how well the J-XX does compared to the F-22. I’d say it’s a toss up between Russia and America. With it in American’s favour due to poor Russian training.

Originally posted by Odium
Also, why would attacking Taiwan ‘Unite the U.S’ it would still have as many people not wanting to go to war as say Iraq. That united the U.S. didn’t it?

Originally posted by IAF101
You have never spoken to a single American have you, your entire perception of America is misinformed! SAD!

Ok, this is how it works in America! The 'significant ' ruckus on Iraq was due to the government not able to deliver the WMD that it claimed Iraq had and went to war on that pretext, also the public doesn't have to be united to go to war in America, this is a free country and many people have different opinions everybody can't agree on everything( you'd know this if you lived in a democratic nation!

) . If you had access to TV during the US elections you would have learnt that the MAJORITY voted for BUSH and believed that the war in Iraq is justified.[go look up any opinion poll]
In the case of Taiwan, you forget that the western world has quiet a bit of investment in Taiwan and any attack on it would be financially very bad but more than that it would be more of a matter of Justice in the American public, a bigger more powerful country attacks an ally of the united states with US interests in the country. The American public is paranoid, this would just incite that paranoia to dangerous levels, support you ask their will be an uprising against china. It would be compared to the Gulf War or Bosnia or maybe even WW2!

I spent most of my life in England, grown up in England. Do you notice how you have to belittle my statement by claiming I’m not from a ‘democratic’ nation? Also, China has actually had a lot of protests against various things - an example would be the Three Gorges Dam, a lot of people complained about that on a National and Regional level.

I also watched the election results come in. The majority did vote for Bush, but it was damn close. (In my view Bush was the better choice as well, as is Blair this election and come May the 5th I’ll be voting labour.)

Odd if America’s so interested in Taiwan’s independence “Late last year, then secretary of state Colin Powell warned Taiwan not to seek independence and said that US policy favored its "peaceful reunification" with China." Interesting quote.. www.lanuevacuba.com... (Hong Kong, still democratic as it hasn’t been fully handed over to China and it also has its own private Parliament to the Chinese one.)

Also maybe it’s just what I’ve seen, but aren’t more and more people getting annoyed with the fact America gets on its high horse of ‘democracy’, when it is willing to trade with nations who are far from democratic? How they are willing to fund terrorism, genocide, etc, till their needs are meant? You might of not noticed this, but the way America’s portrayed in the media of the U.K. it’s not this beacon of democracy loving people.

Originally posted by Odium
As for ‘All of America’s Allies Fighting China’ who? I live in Britain,

Originally posted by IAF101
Thats what you claim! But who knows?......... You sound like you work for the communist party in china!

Out of context, again. And no, I don’t work for the Chinese but I’ve been to China, America, Russia, enough of Europe, Australia, Japan, etc on holiday with my family and friends before and well…I know which Nations I prefer. The ones with the lower crime rate, increased safety, etc. (Although, I can see problems that have Nation has, including some that China does have.)

Originally posted by Odium
well France, Germany, Russia wouldn’t - they love the money they’ll now be earning because of China and the E.U’s lifting of the Arms Embargo on the PRoC.

Originally posted by IAF101
It isn't all about money!!Get that out of your system, that they have invested money so they'll spare China because they won't !It will be one of the most just causes America has gone to war for in a long time- Protecting freedom and defending Democracy. Maybe Russia, France will act indifferent just to peeve the US but the rest of the world will be on USA's side and if your are wondering about the Security councils veto you can forget that, as Bush has succeeded in side-lining the UN and its petty politics.

Actually, a lot of things are about the money. Remember America blocking French goods during the Iraq War? Changing the name of things such as “French Fries” to “Freedom Fries” money is one of the key elements to the World.

Originally posted by Odium
And it doesn’t matter how good you think their Navy is, it’d be foolish for America to move to many ships to that part of the world. All it would take, would be the sinking of their aircraft carriers and the invasions ruined. Not hard with the new Type 094.

Originally posted by IAF101
Sinking of Aircraft carriers?? Have you any idea what you are ranting about ?? They won't just float by into the Shanghai harbor and more over once you attack a USN carrier you have already lost the war, no matter how many soldiers are there in your 'peoples' army! An attack on a USN carrier strike group will warrant a full scale nuclear assault, what do you think china is going to do next attack pearl harbor again?? Your misinformed about china's capabilities and the US capabilities, for an individual claiming to study in Oxford and taking political science you seem to have serious gaps in your knowledge along with many preconceived notions, an open mind would do you good![NO OFFENCE meant

]

Actually, China wouldn’t attack unless America attacked them first. (You seem to be taking things out of context, maybe you should invest in an open mind? How many times have you been to China, Russia, Europe, etc to see their way of life?)

Originally posted by Odium
The best they could do, would be to do bombing runs on ‘Mainland China’ and who honestly thinks that China won’t have a lot more SAM sites up and running before they attack Taiwan? (Probably S-400) which will not have a problem taking out frontline U.S. fighters and possible B-2’s.

Originally posted by IAF101
SAM's hitting a b-2 !??

This is what I mean ! I give up! I guess everyone is entitled to their own 'beliefs'

.

If the Yugoslavian Air Defence can shoot one down, why couldn’t a SAM site? After all the YAD was a guy with a rapier? Or something similar to that. Or didn’t you know about that happening? The B-2’s damn good, best bomber by far but can be shot down. (might have been the F-117A that got shot down, not the B-2 can't remember off of the top of my head.)

Two quick questions: Why do you have to belittle my statements and comments by retorting with insults or asinine assumptions? It only does more harm to your ‘agenda’ by making exceptionally facetious comments. Also, why do you act like communism is some fascinous diseases? Especially since the world has never seen a truly socialist nation nor a Marxist Nation.

Originally posted by Odium
Odd if America’s so interested in Taiwan’s independence “Late last year, then secretary of state Colin Powell warned Taiwan not to seek independence and said that US policy favored its "peaceful reunification" with China." Interesting quote.. www.lanuevacuba.com... (Hong Kong, still democratic as it hasn’t been fully handed over to China and it also has its own private Parliament to the Chinese one.)

Answers:
1. USA doesn't want problems in the region and Taiwan repeatedly declaring freedom would just rile the chinese who might do something impulsive
2. The Hong Kong parliment is just a show put up to satisfy the hongkongers (isn't that what they are called isn't it ??) and more than half of the members are appointed by China.

Originally posted by Odium
Also maybe it’s just what I’ve seen, but aren’t more and more people getting annoyed with the fact America gets on its high horse of ‘democracy’, when it is willing to trade with nations who are far from democratic? How they are willing to fund terrorism, genocide, etc, till their needs are meant? You might of not noticed this, but the way America’s portrayed in the media of the U.K. it’s not this beacon of democracy loving people.

The interests of the greater good are always taken into consideration like in afganistan - support to the taliban was given so they could drive the soviets out of that geopoliticaly important region, pakistan- support is given to mushraff because he is one of the most liberal figures in pakistan and with him gone it would fall into the hands of fundamentalists.

Originally posted by Odium
Actually, a lot of things are about the money. Remember America blocking French goods during the Iraq War? Changing the name of things such as “French Fries” to “Freedom Fries” money is one of the key elements to the World.

Come now! do you really believe that ?! How much does Iraq contribute to France's exports?? Almost insignificant! They were worried that French weapons may be smuggled into iraq as the french were suppling high tech weapon to Saddam, [ATS has a thread on this look it up] inexchange for oil.French Connection


[edit on 7-3-2005 by IAF101]

Originally posted by IAF101
2. The Hong Kong parliment is just a show put up to satisfy the hongkongers (isn't that what they are called isn't it ??

) and more than half of the members are appointed by China.

No, they are called Honkeys. (I'm serious)

And though Half the members are appointed by China, no one in the HK parliament is from outside Hong Kong. Hong Kong is still governed by Honkeys, appointed or not.

Deng Xiao Ping has said before that if Taiwan were willing to rejoin China, China will allow them to keep they own institutions including the military and not send any Mainland troops or beaurucrats (spelling).

However, foreign policy will be controlled by the Mainland.

What I mean by ‘weight’ the vote, is by my understanding - a lot of Taiwan is Han Chinese? So, firstly once their family, friends, etc move over they can actually vote (if they get citizenship and see one election), which is why China moved them over now and also it can sway the vote. Your family, never seeing you again or you seeing them is a big insentive to join back with the mainland for some people. As is the fear your famiyl might be targetted.

I mean, how many Taiwanese know that China supplies them with power, goods etc, etc, etc? Once that was cut, China could starve them into submission, with a simple blockade.

There are, in my own knowledge, 3 ways for the Chinese government to send people over to Taiwan - smuggling, tourism, and marriage (no immigration). You cant not be registered to vote if you get in through the first two and it takes 14 years, if I remember correctlly, for the partner in marriage to get citizenship in Taiwan in order to vote. It used to be 7 years, but they changed that law to 14 and it applies only to people from China. Isnt that an act of discrimination toward a particular group of people by the government? I wonder how that false president Chen, Shui-Bien got the international peace award...? not by bribery I hope...

Yes, the majority of people (above 90%) in Taiwan are Han, but the current government is denying it even though their members who came to Taiwan from Fu-Jian (spelling) province, Mainland 3 hundreds years ago. Only a minority part of the population who came to Taiwan with the army or as refugees have relatives in China.

All those international peace awards, nobel peace awards arn't really worth the material they printed on. It's all very politically motivated.

-------

I think that Chen Sui Bien is ethnic Taiwanese?

Though, Lee Teng Hui has his ancestors buried in mainland.

If Taiwan really wanted to become independant; I think the most logically strategic time to do so would be during the Beijing Olympics. I dont think China would start a war during their Olympics, this would give Taiwan basically 2 weeks to fortify themselves to hell and back, similtaneosly allowing US Airforce and Navy to position themselves defencively ready for an attack...

Comments/discussion?

I think this way a war could be avoided... OR... It would be World War 3
Depending wether China thinks its really worth it or not...

Na, declaring in the Olympics is stupid idea for Taiwan.

It would drive World opinion against them, it will be seen as way too much of a deliberate provocation.

As for 2 week build-up, they can always build up first then declare independence.

Originally posted by rapier28
It would drive World opinion against them, it will be seen as way too much of a deliberate provocation.

It all depends I could see them on CNN using "over-inflated" words like: Freedom and Democracy, and spinning a huge sad story. And I think people would by into it, because CNN is HUGELY biast against anything "un-american" and America would support it 100%

Originally posted by rapier28
As for 2 week build-up, they can always build up first then declare independence.

... Good point *scratches head*...

Originally posted by IAF101
WOW! Wonder what the F-16 & F-18 are ??

Must be figments of my imagination!!

Also this particular rant is discussed in many threads on ATS and in all of them it has been established that the current Russian fighters are NOT on par with Americas best. ( I don't have the patience to look it up for you ! ) [/quote

Its kind of debated quite a bit. Latest version Su-30s are probably on par with F-15s.

Sinking of Aircraft carriers?? Have you any idea what you are ranting about ?? They won't just float by into the Shanghai harbor and more over once you attack a USN carrier you have already lost the war, no matter how many soldiers are there in your 'peoples' army! An attack on a USN carrier strike group will warrant a full scale nuclear assault, what do you think china is going to do next attack pearl harbor again?? Your misinformed about china's capabilities and the US capabilities, for an individual claiming to study in Oxford and taking political science you seem to have serious gaps in your knowledge along with many preconceived notions, an open mind would do you good![NO OFFENCE meant

]

Look,if a war happens among a scale this large, the moment 1 carrier group starts shooting at a Chinese plane,I believe it would lead to the end of the world. Simply put,war will not happen without nukes,bio & chemical weapons.

SAM's hitting a b-2 !??

This is what I mean ! I give up! I guess everyone is entitled to their own 'beliefs'

.

How much hard data do you have? The performance of the B-2 has only been ESTIMATED so far. For all you know,the B-2 might be able of flying at mach 20 (exaggeration :@@

. For the S-300, it might be able to shoot down a B-2 . All this are also just your 'beliefs' too,you know?

Who thinks the US should get involved?

I personally dont think they should, for the reason w4rL0rd mentioned:

if a war happens among a scale this large, the moment 1 carrier group starts shooting at a Chinese plane,I believe it would lead to the end of the world. Simply put,war will not happen without nukes,bio & chemical weapons.

But I think if the US did not get involved World War 3 may be postponed...