Uh Oh (Free Taiwan!)

College Confidential Community
1

<p>
[quote]
China Law Authorizes Force Against Taiwan
<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=516&u=/ap/20050314/ap_on_re_as/china_legislature&printer=1%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=516&u=/ap/20050314/ap_on_re_as/china_legislature&printer=1&lt;/a>
38 minutes ago</p>

<p>By CHRISTOPHER BODEEN, Associated Press Writer</p>

<p>BEIJING - China's parliament enacted a law Monday authorizing force to stop rival Taiwan from pursuing formal independence, sparking outrage on the self-governing island and warnings that the measure would fuel regional tensions.</p>

<p>The ceremonial National People's Congress passed the law despite U.S. appeals for restraint. It came a day after President Hu Jintao called on China's military to be ready for war and followed a 12.6 percent increase in the country's defense budget for 2005.</p>

<p>Premier Wen Jiabao said the mainland still wants to unite peacefully with the island and doesn't want to disrupt the status quo.</p>

<p>"It is not targeted at the people of Taiwan, nor is it a war bill," Wen said at a news conference. But he also warned outsiders not to get involved: "We do not wish to see foreign interference."</p>

<p>A Taiwanese government spokesman rejected the measure as a "serious provocation."</p>

<p>"It also brought emotional pain to the Taiwanese people, restricts Taiwan's freedom and democracy, and has a serious impact on security in the East-Asia region," said Joseph Wu, chairman of the island's Mainland Affairs Council, which handles policy toward Beijing.</p>

<p>In a session broadcast on national television, the Chinese delegates burst into applause after the law was approved by a 2,896 to 0 vote, with two abstentions. The body usually votes overwhelmingly for Communist Party policies, but the emphatic result was meant to send a message of the intensity of Beijing's sentiment on the issue.</p>

<p>Taiwan and China split in 1949. Beijing has threatened repeatedly to attack if it tries to make its de facto independence permanent. The United States is Taiwan's biggest arms supplier and could be drawn into any conflict over the island.</p>

<p>A leading Taiwanese lawmaker criticized the measure as a "savage law."</p>

<p>It shows that China "feels futile and doesn't know how to deal with Taiwan's democracy and freedom," said Chen Chin-jun, a member of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party.</p>

<p>"We can clearly see that Taiwan and China ... are not one China. They are two Chinas or one country on each side," Chen said in Taipei. "Whatever law they passed, Taiwan has its own sovereignty, government, country and democracy."</p>

<p>The law says China would "employ nonpeaceful means and other necessary measures to protect China's sovereignty and territorial integrity." It said such steps could be taken if Taiwan declared formal independence, if "major incidents" occurred causing Taiwan to separate permanently from China, or if "possibilities for a peaceful reunification should be completely exhausted."</p>

<p>The law doesn't give details of what specific developments might trigger an attack. It adds no new threats or conditions, but it codifies the measures for authorizing military action.</p>

<p>Legislators said the law would send a message that Beijing's patience was wearing thin.</p>

<p>"For us in the armed forces, this gives us a legal foundation on which to make our preparations to maintain our sovereignty and territorial integrity," said Lt. Zhang Shantong, a delegate from the People's Liberation Army.</p>

<p>Japan warned that the law could increase regional tensions.</p>

<p>"We are concerned about negative effects of the bill on the peace and stability in the Taiwan Straits and the relationship between the two sides, which had been improving," said Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroyuki Hosoda.</p>

<p>Tokyo and Washington issued a joint statement in February listing for the first time the peaceful resolution of the Taiwan issue as a joint strategic objective.</p>

<p>China has spent heavily in recent years to modernize the PLA, focusing on adding high-tech weapons to extend its reach and back up threats to attack Taiwan.</p>

<p>"We shall step up preparations for possible military struggle and enhance our capabilities to cope with crises, safeguard peace, prevent wars and win the wars if any," Hu said Sunday, according to the official Xinhua News Agency.</p>

<p>Many Chinese are strongly nationalistic and support unification with Taiwan. But because China allows no opposition politicians or free press, it was difficult to gauge the level of genuine support for the law.</p>

<p>On a Beijing street, a migrant from the poor inland province of Anhui who was selling pirated DVDs showed little interest in the government's statements about Taiwan.</p>

<p>"We're ordinary people," said the man, who would give only his surname, Ye. "We worry about what to eat, what to wear."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I am normally not in support of revolutions, but this outright oppression of Taiwan's desire for independence .. and to add the fact that China is willing to use military force to achieve its goals .. this is just.. arrgh, there's no word in the English dictionary for what I want to say!</p>

<p>It's a damned civil war that's still brewing on, although neither side probably wants to admit it. What will it take for China to realize that under geopolitical ideology, Taiwan is a nation separate to its own cause?</p>

<p>Jeez.</p>

2

<p>I don't think I would call it a civil war, since the "de facto independence" of Taiwan is readily apparent. It will be interesting, to say the least, to see how this is resolved and how Bush will react to it and apply his "doctrine." Dare he threaten China with explicit military support (ie - go beyond simply supplying arms) of Taiwan? We shall have to wait and see...</p>

3

<p>Augh... I hope somebody intervenes. Taiwan deserves to be free and independent.</p>

4

<p>if they have any sense at all, china wont do anything if taiwan declares independence. they may have a strong army, but our navy and air force are worlds better than theirs, and obviously invading an island involves the use of a navy. since the US policy is that taiwan be left alone, and recently bombers were moved into striking range when china was threatening action a couple of years ago, they would have to expect massive US air and naval retaliation. as the air force and navy are not overextended (the army and marines are), and theres no way china can put their massive army to use against us if we dont "pound the ground," the only logical conclusion is that they are just making more rhetoric and putting more political grist into the mill.</p>

<p>or i could be wrong and WW3 might be a couple of years away.</p>

5

<p>Though I support a peaceful resolution and keeping the status quo just because I think war needs to be avoided... keep the history in mind.</p>

<p>During the communist revolution, the established (nationalist) government was defeated and removed from the mainland, and now occupies the island of Taiwan. Since then, the communist government, The People's Republic, has become established and recognized as the legitimate government of China. So, the PRC legally is the legitimate government of China INCLUDING Taiwan, which is now considered a "rogue province" because basically, the nationalist government is a rebel government now that it has been overthrown from its former place as the legitimate government of China.</p>

<p>This is somewhat similar to the way Lincoln refused to even acknowledge that the Confederacy was a seperate nation-- de facto, it was practically a new and independent country with a government. However, he treated it as an insurgency (well, at least in writing and in words. Practical issues sometimes got him into trouble with this mindset) and argued: if these states break away, democracy will have failed, our nation will have failed.</p>

<p>How to apply this to the China problem? Well, you can figure out how to translate "democracy"-speak into "communism"-speak... though these days even the PRC is looking increasingly "democratic".</p>

<p>I SERIOUSLY hope that ww3 does not come and that this crisis, if it becomes one, can be defused by diplomacy.</p>

<p>A problem with the ww3 possibility is that it would be incredibly hard to sever ties with China and go to war with it--America is heavy, HEAVILY interdependent with China and the two are very intertwined with investments and whatnot. I also doubt that war with China would be popular here, especially considering the massive casualties that America suffered in previous engagements (Korea, Vietnam). Added to that is the fact that, well, China will obviously be dragging its allies with it into the fray--possibly even Russia. Who do you think is closer to Russia? The US, Russia's former archnemesis or China, its former little brother, who it has been supplying with weapons for over half a century? Think about that. I hear the Russians got some nice airplanes.
China will also be bringing North Korea, some of Southeast Asia, and India into the war as well. If a third world war erupts, I'm not so sure whether the US, even with help from Europe, can beat them.</p>

<p>I already registered with the Selective Service (sidenote, interesting... SS.. poor choice of first letters ;p)
for the FAFSA. Heh. I seriously hope nothing bad happens.</p>

6

<p>i dont think anything at all will happen. taiwans complete lack of status is the only thing keeping anyone from playing cards theyd rather not play. as long as taiwan doesnt declare independence, and china lets them be in the meantime, theres no war, we (the US) get to trade with both, and everythings hunky-dory. the situation- tenuous though it is- is as good as it can get without major policy changes by the involved parties.</p>

<p>i dont think china would bring anyone excepy POSSIBLY vietnam and north korea with them (and u never know what NK will do- their leader is nuts). russia will stay out and let the two big dogs slug it out with the hope both of us gets knocked out of power so it can pull itself back into power. india is somewhat allied with the US and it would have a hard time, as the worlds largest democracy, jumping in on the side of a communist government trying to destroy a democratic "nation" and fighting the most powerful democracy. the US would probably pull only Great Britain and a few other minor allies into it. no matter what happens though, it would be a big one, and lets hope it doesnt come to pass.</p>

7

<p>Though I support a peaceful resolution and keeping the status quo just because I think war needs to be avoided... keep the history in mind.</p>

<p>During the communist revolution, the established (nationalist) government was defeated and removed from the mainland, and now occupies the island of Taiwan. Since then, the communist government, The People's Republic, has become established and recognized as the legitimate government of China. So, the PRC legally is the legitimate government of China INCLUDING Taiwan, which is now considered a "rogue province" because basically, the nationalist government is a rebel government now that it has been overthrown from its former place as the legitimate government of China.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Nope. According to the standards of civil war, when an ideological party commits an act of aggression against the mainstream government, the land is split into geopolitical boundaries. Since neither side has declared a formal surrender in this civil war -- civil war technically is still going on, the Kuomintang battered and beaten, but they still have their stronghold in Taiwan.</p>

<p>
[quote]
This is somewhat similar to the way Lincoln refused to even acknowledge that the Confederacy was a seperate nation-- de facto, it was practically a new and independent country with a government. However, he treated it as an insurgency (well, at least in writing and in words. Practical issues sometimes got him into trouble with this mindset) and argued: if these states break away, democracy will have failed, our nation will have failed.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It doesn't matter who thinks who is what, all that matters is that civil war there broke the United States into geopolitical factions -- and thus the borders weren't quite clear. Oftentimes you'd see a shift or change in the front line very rapidly thanks to various successes and failures of both armies. If the Confederates had captured D.C., would you have said that D.C., was not in Confederate territory then, no?</p>

<p>
[quote]
How to apply this to the China problem? Well, you can figure out how to translate "democracy"-speak into "communism"-speak... though these days even the PRC is looking increasingly "democratic".

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Pish-posh. Malarkey. China's just becoming more oligarchic, that is all.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I SERIOUSLY hope that ww3 does not come and that this crisis, if it becomes one, can be defused by diplomacy.</p>

<p>A problem with the ww3 possibility is that it would be incredibly hard to sever ties with China and go to war with it--America is heavy, HEAVILY interdependent with China and the two are very intertwined with investments and whatnot. I also doubt that war with China would be popular here, especially considering the massive casualties that America suffered in previous engagements (Korea, Vietnam). Added to that is the fact that, well, China will obviously be dragging its allies with it into the fray--possibly even Russia. Who do you think is closer to Russia? The US, Russia's former archnemesis or China, its former little brother, who it has been supplying with weapons for over half a century? Think about that. I hear the Russians got some nice airplanes.
China will also be bringing North Korea, some of Southeast Asia, and India into the war as well. If a third world war erupts, I'm not so sure whether the US, even with help from Europe, can beat them.</p>

<p>I already registered with the Selective Service (sidenote, interesting... SS.. poor choice of first letters ;p)
for the FAFSA. Heh. I seriously hope nothing bad happens.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You are a) overthinking this situation and b) failing to understand that this situation can ** easily ** be defused by China handing Taiwan over to the independents. What does China stand to lose?</p>

8

<p>1) China said if USA helps Taiwan, China will nuke Pasific coast of US.</p>

<p>2) The only solution is to attack China with nucleus weapons, divide it to many little countries and to escape from Chinese yoke forever.</p>

9

<p>However you want to look at it--okay, if you'd like, we can say that the civil war is still going on--the point is that this is a domestic issue involving a new government finishing the job of taking over the entire country, which includes this little island.</p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
It doesn't matter who thinks who is what, all that matters is that civil war there broke the United States into geopolitical factions -- and thus the borders weren't quite clear. Oftentimes you'd see a shift or change in the front line very rapidly thanks to various successes and failures of both armies. If the Confederates had captured D.C., would you have said that D.C., was not in Confederate territory then, no?

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>Yes, the country is broken into factions. What does this have to do with anything? The point is, no matter how you look at it, this is an -internal- matter that foreign powers have no right to meddle with. Whether Taiwan belongs to the PRC or whether it is considered occupied by one faction which is at war with another faction, the the civil war must end and the country must be reunited.</p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
You are a) overthinking this situation and b) failing to understand that this situation can easily be defused by China handing Taiwan over to the independents. What does China stand to lose?

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>Well gee, pretty much every war can be fixed this way, can't it?
We can easily defuse this crisis, let's just give up, what have we got to lose? The PRC can just as easily forget about that island as the nationalists can surrender and restore the territorial integrity of the country as the US can mind its own business.</p>

10

<p>And what idealistic political science textbook are you reading out of?</p>

<p>
[quote]

Yes, the country is broken into factions. What does this have to do with anything? The point is, no matter how you look at it, this is an -internal- matter that foreign powers have no right to meddle with. Whether Taiwan belongs to the PRC or whether it is considered occupied by one faction which is at war with another faction, the the civil war must end and the country must be reunited.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>According to who? North and South Korea are ** still ** in civil war, and neither country has been reunited with the other. They're split by ideological differences -- and despite the fact that there have been calls for unity -- it cannot really be achieved, because of the ideological schism at hand.</p>

<p>So tell me, why can't Taiwan and China be the same? Let Taiwan be its separate nation.</p>

<p>
[quote]

Well gee, pretty much every war can be fixed this way, can't it?
We can easily defuse this crisis, let's just give up, what have we got to lose? The PRC can just as easily forget about that island as the nationalists can surrender and restore the territorial integrity of the country as the US can mind its own business.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The United States has an obscure, antiquated but I believe still-active treaty with the Kuomintang established during World War II. Not only the ideological justification for the further pursuit of democracy, but our past alliance with the Kuomintang justifies our presence there. Furthermore, I wouldn't talk about the States minding its' own business; remember the Korean War and China? Right. Chinese soldiers marching through North Korea -- what business did it have there? Absolutely none. But of course, China went in anyway.</p>

<p>Don't you dare use that "mind its own business" argument on me. China has no respect for internal affairs even more so than the United States. When the entire world watches one minor "internal conflict" called China vs. Taiwan, it is no longer internal -- the eyes of the world are watching. Just like Tianamen was just "internal" -- right?</p>

11

<p>Ok, some of us obviously do not know a lot about the state of the affair between mainland and Taiwain here.</p>

<p>People who inhabited Taiwain came from mainland, they eat the same food, speak the same language, and it wasn't until 40 years ago was these two regions separated.</p>

<p>Recently, the president of Taiwain purposed to let Taiwain become an independent country, or even better, become a part of Japan. (he thinks Japan is better than Mainland).</p>

<p>Needless to say, people from mainland are heavily stereotyped in Taiwain media. We were being called as criminals and prostitutes, and worst of all, the Taiwainese president has a habit of threatening China by USING the USA's power.</p>

<p>look, it's not USA wants to help Taiwain, TAIWAIN IS TRYING TO MANIPULATING USA TO FIGHT THEIR WAR.</p>

<p>Bush repeatly called the Taiwainese president "son of a *****" or "bastard" for putting him in default situation, and he condemned, repeatly, Taiwain's aggression.</p>

<p>About that law, let me make a scenanio. Say Texas wants to get away from the USA, will Washington pass a law against it?</p>

<p>Also, because Taiwain is legally a part of China, China has the right to claim it by force. Additionally, Chinese can even designate taiwain as a target in missile execise.(all of those are quoted from the Chinese military forum)</p>

<p>Militarily, with the "AWAC 2000" early airborne warning plane, higher numbers of Su27/30/J10 armed with BVR missiles, mainland may gain airsuperiority of the entire insland in hours, disable taiwain's few patriot batteries with defense suppression missiles, hunt down their AWACs with interceptors, etc.</p>

<p>Personally, USA does not need to fight with one of its ally of the war on terror, who also happened to possess nuclear weapon and a large number of Suhoki fighters (mind you, F15 was recently defeated by Indian su30mki, and US carrier aircrafts aren't as good as F15).</p>

<p>If US is to get involved in this war, it may well lose a carrier.</p>

<p>of course, we can launch all our nukes and kill all the chinese and get millions of people killed by their 093/094, but what's the point?</p>

<p>Do you want to watch your loved one, your sons, or maybe even yourself die under the mushroom clouds of WWIII, just because one moron "president" of a region wants to become a part of Japan?</p>

<p>Americans cannot afford another war front. With our econonmy doing bad already and our military engaged in 2 different wars, fighting against China may kill our economy. </p>

<p>China is not some low tech country where you can take off at ease. It's a country with relatively strong military, and think about vietnam war, can we afford another war?</p>

<p>NO.</p>

<p>**As an Asian American, I dislike war. I came here to escape war. I believe that you wouldn't want to see war, against a rapidly industralizing country, who also has nuclear weapons. NMD is currently not operational, and US nuclear arsenal cannot ensure first wave destruction of Chinese nuclear capablity. </p>

<p>I sincerely hope that, no one will see this war fought in my life time. There is no point. American cannot AFFORD another front"</p>

12

<p>Its not about Taiwan. I seriously doubt that China really cares about the benefits of allying Taiwan. Taiwan is battleground. China is a growing strength, a growing threat to the US if I may say it. In threatening Taiwan, China is merely flexing its muscles and testing the world's reaction. If the US and the rest of the world fail the test and allow China to invade Taiwan, then we can watch China gradually take control over all of Eastern Asia.</p>

13

<p>Oh, soo much like Hitler, except Hitler tried to take over another country while China is trying to reunite with a rogue region?</p>

<p>I sincerely hope US military command is not staffed by people like you, or our economy would have been crashed by constant warfare (hint, soviet Union)</p>

14

<p>And I hope our government is not full of people like the administration during the 1930s that watched passively as Hitler took over territory. </p>

<p>Your biased towards China. Obviously you don't care about Taiwan's independence. Actually, I couldn't care less about Taiwan's independence too, but, like I said, I feel that China is testing the waters. I see an unavoidable clash between the US and China somewhere down the road. But the US should delay that through force and an unwillingness to back down. </p>

<p>P.S. Your reference to the Soviet Union is completely wrong. The USSR did not have a bad economy because of constant warfare (there was no warfare between WWII and Afghanistan). The USSR had a bad economy because its centralized government, in supressing free trade and taking away the incentives offered through competition and open markets, failed to effectively develop the vast natural resources of the country. And those that it did develop, it allocated to the military.</p>

15

<p>bigjake, learn more about history before you come back</p>

<p>war in afghanistan killed soviet union</p>

<p>and arm race with the US too.</p>

<p>look at the soviets, they have like 10 different fighters, USA has like 4 or 5.</p>

<p>their Tu22 worth more than gold at the same weight (50 something ton if i remembered correctly)</p>

<p>why did USA has good economy?</p>

<p>because a war was never fought on its soil. it never had to reconstruct.</p>

16

<p>I'm too tired to comment on all of this but it is an exceptionally complicated issue on all fronts... I'm in a Eastern History class at the moment and we've spent a lot of time looking at China and Tiawan and it's problems. In another class (Comparitive Governments) I had a project recently where I had to read The People's Daily (China's paper) for a month, very interesting! I encourage all of you guys to read up on it though, since it could have big effects on the future of the world!</p>

<p>As far as the people of Tiawan, as others have said they come from mainland China. When Mao Tse-Tung (small history lesson about to start!) and the CCP took over in 1949, the Kuomintang (KMT) behind Chiang K'ai-shek (who was actually quiet the fascist, and even set up something very much like the Nazi SS), left the mainland and established the Republic of China on the island of Taiwan.</p>

17

<p>
[quote]
Ok, some of us obviously do not know a lot about the state of the affair between mainland and Taiwain here.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And some of us seem to be brainwashed about the affairs of the mainland.</p>

<p>
[quote]
People who inhabited Taiwain came from mainland, they eat the same food, speak the same language, and it wasn't until 40 years ago was these two regions separated.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Gee, that sounds a lot like. ** gasp ** Korea! The reference I just mentioned! Don't brush it off just because you don't know how to adequately defend against proper rhetorical arguments.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Recently, the president of Taiwain purposed to let Taiwain become an independent country, or even better, become a part of Japan. (he thinks Japan is better than Mainland).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>In many aspects, I don't blame him.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Needless to say, people from mainland are heavily stereotyped in Taiwain media. We were being called as criminals and prostitutes, and worst of all, the Taiwainese president has a habit of threatening China by USING the USA's power.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, there goes your sense of unbiasedness. And in civil war, it's a war for survival -- and I wouldn't be surprised if some of the members of the Chinese oligarchy were criminals.</p>

<p>
[quote]
look, it's not USA wants to help Taiwain, TAIWAIN IS TRYING TO MANIPULATING USA TO FIGHT THEIR WAR.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And the United States can fight any war they please -- as long as it is a justified one. This one, at least in my book, is justified.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Bush repeatly called the Taiwainese president "son of a *****" or "bastard" for putting him in default situation, and he condemned, repeatly, Taiwain's aggression.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And Condoleeza Rice, President Bush's Secretary of State and trusted aide de camp, has declared that China's action will lead to unnecessary aggression, and it "worries" the United States. </p>

<p>
[quote]
About that law, let me make a scenanio. Say Texas wants to get away from the USA, will Washington pass a law against it?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Both parties will have secession votes. If one of the two parties do not agree to the secession vote, then secession fails. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Also, because Taiwain is legally a part of China, China has the right to claim it by force. Additionally, Chinese can even designate taiwain as a target in missile execise.(all of those are quoted from the Chinese military forum)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Which just goes to show how inhumane the Chinese politburo and the governing bodies of China can be. I can think of five oxymoronic things wrong with the term "People's Republic of China" anyway -- Communist China has no legal claim to Taiwan -- the Kuomintang does. Why don't you get off your propaganda and go read some real foreign affairs books?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Militarily, with the "AWAC 2000" early airborne warning plane, higher numbers of Su27/30/J10 armed with BVR missiles, mainland may gain airsuperiority of the entire insland in hours, disable taiwain's few patriot batteries with defense suppression missiles, hunt down their AWACs with interceptors, etc.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So, you show you have big guns. Great, like we care! China won't dare ** use ** any of those missiles -- and if it does, tell China to go get itself ready. Even the former Superpower of Soviet Russia was able to loosen its grip on its satellite countries -- why can't China? It's one friggin' island. What part of that does it not understand?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Personally, USA does not need to fight with one of its ally of the war on terror, who also happened to possess nuclear weapon and a large number of Suhoki fighters (mind you, F15 was recently defeated by Indian su30mki, and US carrier aircrafts aren't as good as F15).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hrm. Ever heard of the F-21? Or the F-22? Or even the new prototype fighters that the general public rarely hears about? Of course not. If we were to show the true state of our military forces -- that'd be a kick in the butt, right?</p>

<p>If China dares wage open war against democracy, you can kiss the mainland goodbye.</p>

<p>
[quote]
If US is to get involved in this war, it may well lose a carrier.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And if China gets involved in this war, it will definitely lose hundreds of thousands, if not ** millions ** of unnecessary casualties.</p>

<p>
[quote]
of course, we can launch all our nukes and kill all the chinese and get millions of people killed by their 093/094, but what's the point?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Trust me. American superiority of firepower surpasses that of China.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Do you want to watch your loved one, your sons, or maybe even yourself die under the mushroom clouds of WWIII, just because one moron "president" of a region wants to become a part of Japan?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Do you want to watch YOUR loved one, your sons, or maybe even yourself die under the mushroom clouds of WWIII, just because SEVERAL morons called the Chinese Military Commission and several THOUSAND morons called the Chinese Assembly and SELECT morons named the Politburo hate to lose? Because that even seems stupider than the idea that Taiwan wants independence, dontcha think? Personal ambition will be the destruction of your country.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Americans cannot afford another war front. With our econonmy doing bad already and our military engaged in 2 different wars, fighting against China may kill our economy.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh-huh. Don't try to play both cards, why don't you stick to ** one ** side of the anti/pro-democracy campaign...</p>

<p>
[quote]
China is not some low tech country where you can take off at ease. It's a country with relatively strong military, and think about vietnam war, can we afford another war?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And America is definitely not a low-tech country where you can take off with ease. It's a country with the strongest military in the world. </p>

<p>
[quote]
NO.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Sure we can.</p>

<p>
[quote]
As an Asian American, I dislike war. I came here to escape war. I believe that you wouldn't want to see war, against a rapidly industralizing country, who also has nuclear weapons. NMD is currently not operational, and US nuclear arsenal cannot ensure first wave destruction of Chinese nuclear capablity.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Why don't you cut the "I'm an Asian" argument? I'm a Korean American; my parents and grandparents saw the brunt of the Korean War -- we got our butts handed to us by the Japanese just like China did -- and trust me, don't you dare speak about what the US nuclear arsenal can do -- you're not a member of the Joint Chiefs or USAF personnel -- so unless you can chunk out actual numbers, why don't we quit the "China is all-powerful, America can't defeat it in one strike" argument?</p>

<p>
[quote]
I sincerely hope that, no one will see this war fought in my life time. There is no point. American cannot AFFORD another front"

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No one wants to see war. And on the same note, China can't fight another front -- its economy and environment are on the brink of implosion. Gee, a nice future to have, right?</p>

18

<p>It depends who is teaching the class. I find many Junior College Classes and introductory classes have severe bias in them on the China/Taiwan issue (at least the Comparative Government classes I've surveyed at CC, and trust me, I've been going to a JC concurrently in High School for 2 years..) Every professor I've had takes one side or the other.</p>

<p>And I've read the People's Daily. Not in Chinese of course, but in English -- online. I find it funny that something published probably from the Ministry of Propaganda (of course, it's not going to be ** called ** that.. but..) is called "news" .. especially with articles with titles such as: "Anti-secession Law to benefit cross-Straits ties"</p>

19

<p>
[quote]
bigjake, learn more about history before you come back

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Why don't you go learn more about history (and I mean, the untainted kind) -- instead of relying on obscure information?</p>

<p>
[quote]
war in afghanistan killed soviet union

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, a dilapidated economy, a centralized economy, and state-induced corruption of the "system" killed the Soviet Union, not the war in Afghanistan.</p>

<p>
[quote]
and arm race with the US too.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes. As you can see, the centralized economy failed to properly maintain the weapons in the arsenal of the Soviet Union, unlike our arsenal.</p>

<p>
[quote]
look at the soviets, they have like 10 different fighters, USA has like 4 or 5.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Do you mean TYPES of fighters? Because I'm pretty sure that the United States has more than FIVE fighters.</p>

<p>
[quote]
their Tu22 worth more than gold at the same weight (50 something ton if i remembered correctly)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Point being?</p>

<p>
[quote]
why did USA has good economy? </p>

<p>because a war was never fought on its soil. it never had to reconstruct.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Granted, we're never going to be invaded by Canada or by Mexico -- but then we are constantly reconstructing -- we are in a perpetual state of reconstruction, because we are a progressive nation. Unlike China, whose rapid growth will eventually implode on itself.</p>

20

<p>The People's Daily (which I also read in English) is a really interesting Newspaper to read! It's interesting to see how China views their own government, and how they consider everything to be a threat to their national soverignty.</p>