Let me in on the secret, I don't like having heartburn over the news if I'm that far off.

__________________
The last time I felt a warm fuzzy feeling, I was informed by my doctor that it was just gas.

Russia has a very full plate on its hands right now with its old satellite nations, I really don't think they could meaningfully get involved in China/Taiwan other than to be a voice in the choir. If China tries anything funny in Siberia, then the balance changes dramatically.

As concerned as I am about the prospect of a military action in this case, I'm almost absolutely certain it will not be nuclear unless something truly outrageous escalates it, that is, unless someone lobs a nuke at the invasion army. Remember, this is territory China considers its own, they want it back and subjugated, not completely uninhabitable.

__________________
The last time I felt a warm fuzzy feeling, I was informed by my doctor that it was just gas.

Think of the consequences of preventing the takeover of the Sudent and the consequences of preventing the takeover of Taiwan.

__________________
Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum,
þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.

That is, until more Weapons of Mass Destruction are found....err, pardon, alleged 8)

I'm sure the Brits had very similar self-reflections when they had their empire.
And why are people so trigger-happy on the nuclear, or should I say, nuKular, button? Relax, people, the US with its robot armies is here to defend freedom, liberty and justice for all, right? 8)

__________________
"Its full of stars!"

China is just posturing . For all their bluster, the Chinese are a basically a third-world country right now and are incapable of seizing Taiwan without going nuclear. Vietnam bloodied their noses back in the late 70's and it wasn't a fluke.We know Iraq never had WMD right? :^o The difference being, the Brits had an empire. The US of A isn't about to come tumbling down any time soon and last time I looked, nuclear weapons weren't used in combat since 1945.

Not really. Taiwanese history is actually quite interesting. Some anthropological evidence suggests that Taiwan's indigenous population come from the same basic groups that gave rise to the Burmans (not the Burmese), the Balinese and the Malayans. However, there are also strong linguistic links to the Polynesian Islands cultures and they apparently share many customs and cultural features with Polynesian groups such as tattooing, gerontocracy, spirit worship, and indoor burial.

The first really significant occupation was by Dutch and Spanish traders (who had a quiet little war in Formosa all to themselves that nobody ever hears about). In 1622, the Dutch East India Company established a military base on the Pescadores Islands but were forced out by the Chinese and moved to the much larger island of Taiwan in 1624, where they established a colonial capital and ruled for the next 38 years. Two years later, the Spanish also occupied northern Taiwan to counter-balance the Dutch expansion, building Keelung and Danshuei as their bases for trade and Christian missions, but were ousted by the Dutch in 1642. To increase the trade surplus, the Dutch induced the Chinese to migrate to Taiwan in the 1630s to grow sugarcane and rice.

This 1630s date is significant because it marks the first Chinese mainland population move to Formosa (the Portuguese name for the Island - meaning "beautiful island.) While the Dutch were colonizing Taiwan, China was in the middle of one of its endless series of civil wars, these being the ones that followed the Manchu invasion and eventually established the Ching dynasty. As part of the fighting the Manchu Navy (aka pirates) repeatedly ravaged coastal towns. The endless wars, famines, and robberies severely disturbed the Chinese peasantry (having your farm burned down, your wife raped and your children sold into slavery can ruin your whole day). Consequently, thousands of people, especially from the coastal provinces of Fuchien and Guangdong migrated across the Formosa Strait to Formosa in order to live under Dutch protection. About 40,000 Chinese were living in Taiwan in 1662

As Manchu troops poured into northern China, many Ming loyalists escaped to the south. One of the most celebrated was Jheng Cheng-gong who forced the Dutch out in 1662 and made Taiwan his base for counter-attacks on the Manchus until 1683. Jheng's son and grandson ruled Taiwan for 22 years before surrendering control of the island to the Manchus in 1683. Taiwan was then ruled by the Manchus for 212 years until 1895. During this period, Formosa's resources attracted international attention, and some countries even attempted to occupy Taiwan. Japan occupied southern Formosa for a short period in 1874, and the French attacked northern Formosa in 1884-85. This was about the same time as the brutal and unprovoked French attack on Vietnam, a coincidence that the Ching Dynasty did not see as coincidental. As a response to these incursions, the Ching dynasty made Taiwan its 22nd province. Formosa became Taiwan and was fully integrated into the Chinese empire, with numerous Taiwanese attending traditional academies and passing civil service examinations.

Taiwan was ceded to Japan in 1895 under the Treaty of Shimonoseki. During its 50-year rule of Taiwan, Japan basically structured Taiwan to act as a supply base for the Japanese empire, providing agricultural products, and creating demand for Japanese industrial goods. Taiwan also provided living space for emigrants from an increasingly overpopulated home country. The Chinese on Taiwan were forced to adopt Japanese names, wear Japanese-style clothing, eat Japanese food, and observe Japanese religious rites. Chinese dialects and customs were discouraged and Chinese language schools closed. People were taught to see themselves as Japanese instead of Chinese, and in fact, during the Second World War, tens of thousand joined the Japanese military. Liberation from colonial rule came only with the defeat of Japan in 1945 and Taiwan's return to China. In 1949, the central government of the Republic of China, on the Chinese mainland, lost its battle against the Chinese Communist, and relocated to Taiwan.

Do the Chinese have a real ability to invade Taiwan? Answer is no, their amphibious lift could put about 10,000 - 15,000 men on the shore (at the expense of gruesome casualties that would deny them the amphib lift needed to resupply and support them). The invasion beach would simply be a large PoW camp. It will be many years before China develops an invasion capability - if it ever does. There doesn't seem to be a major amphibious lift construction program at present; although they are building LSTs and LPDs and converting some old destroyers to transports, these are essentially replacing older units; the actual lift remains unchanged. Some of the Chinese amphib lift consists of old US Navy LSTs from the Second World War.

Although the Chinese have bought a fair amount of Russian equipment of late (2 + 2 destroyers, 4 + 8 submarines, numerous Su-27 and 30 aircraft etc) they have extreme problems keeping this stuff servicable, Qualitatively, they are far inferior to the Taiwan Air Force,

So what are the Chinese options and what are they up to. They can launch a nuclear assault on Taiwan and effectively turn the place into a parking lot. Problem is, they know very well that a few minutes later every major city in China would get the same treatment. They could bombard Taiwan with conventional missiles but that won't achieve very much. In fact, there isn't very much the Chinese can do to Taiwan that doesn't involve terrible risks. What they can do is try to inflict economic damage and I think that is their objective here. These threats and sabre-rattling escapades create an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty that acts against future investment. That puts a limiter on Taiwanese economic growth and their ability to maintain themselves as a quasi-independent country.

There's another factor; there is a very vocal element in the Taiwanese population (mostly the original Taiwanese who, as we have seen are not Chinese in any meaningful sense) who want independence and their own national state that they can occupy as Taiwanese. Every election sees their strength growing - most significantly with growing support from the Chinese-Taiwanese young who adopt original-Taiwanese ways as a means of asserting an identity. I think another mainland motivation is to discourage that abandonment of Chinese cultural norms in Taiwan.

In short, I don't think we're going to see a full-scale war out there yet unless somebody really makes a total pig's breakfast of the political gamesmanship. We may see a lot more brinksmanship though.

It's been simmering a long time, seems like it is always threatening to boil over. It's not just a tempest in a tea pot.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...na_legislature

Does this really change the current situation?

With its (usual) vague phraseology, it only sets the political background for a possible invasion; it inserts that directive into the party´s discourse and orthodoxy; it indicates a shift in the previous condescending attitude and legitimates future steps towards war.

__________________
What brings us together is stronger than what pulls us apart

Actually, Archie , you are aware that under closer scrutiny, the issue of WMD reveals itself to be irrelevant, right?

My observation/hypothesis was on what Brits were thinking during their empire days.
I never implied anything about the potential duration of the American empire .

used in combat?.....Oh, you mean when they were used to obliterate not one, but two cities?

.................................................. ./me runs and ducks 8-[


(stretches neck to say that: yes, all of this might be irrelevant to the topic of China posturing, but whenever somebody mentions nukeing, it sends shivers down my spine)

__________________
"Its full of stars!"

That was probably me talking about nukes. However, I'm not saying we should nuke china, or anyone, but I think we will nuke China PRC within ten years. Call it 80% probability, but I'm just guestimating. I can think of ways to avoid such a disaster that may yet play out.

__________________
"Oh no no no I'm a rocket man Rocket man burning out his fuse up here alone." -- Sir Elton John

J Pax

You brought it up. What's with the "Archie?"Where do you get "potential duration" from? My point is we don't have a empire like the Brits had. What's this have to do with China-Taiwan anyway?It was irrelevant. A shivering spine is no excuse to mention WMD in your context and your perceived correlations between the British Empire and this country.

If you don't have anything relevant to add here, don't add anything at all.

A little off topic.

But does anyone think China is on the brink of becoming a democracy anytime soon? I would think that with China's economy growing, and increased usage of the internet among citizens, it will become increasingly harder for the Chinese government to oppress the public.

I'm not well versed in world politics, but it's my understanding that most democracies are born through society becoming more educated, and media aware. Though the Chinese government keeps strict firewalls on what content can and can't be accessed on the internet, with its increased usage, this will become harder and harder to enforce. I also recall reading that one of the most searched for terms on Google in China is the word proxy. A proxy, or proxy server as many know, is a method used to circumvent firewalls, and/or hide ones identity on the internet by relaying your connection through a different server.

Of course, this is just my idea of things, and I'm sure it gets more complicated than this.

Please enlighten me.

__________________
Obedience brings victory
Victory is life
That is the order of things

I don't think a democratic revolution in China is out of the question, but I sure haven't seen any signs of one starting. And since the current leadership seems very determined to retain absolute power (even at the cost of abandoning communism), I don't see China becoming a democracy without a long and catastrophic civil war.

As long as the Chinese government is willing to mow down democracy supporters with tanks in the middle of the street while the world looks on and does nothing, the People's Republic of China will never be anything other than an inhuman dictatorship.

Those kids in Tiannamen Square thought much as you did, and a lot of them paid for their idealism with their lives.

__________________
The last time I felt a warm fuzzy feeling, I was informed by my doctor that it was just gas.

I actually thought China was ripe for change leading up to Tiannamen Square but obviously things didn't work out that way. For China to shake their quasi-third world status they have to change. They should worry about feeding their masses instead of obsessing over Taiwan. I actually support Taiwanese independence. Let's face it, they are independent in everything but name only and earned it IMO although now isn't the best time for them to make an official independence proclamation. For all of China's bluster, I do think they would respond if Taiwan did such a thing now. Hopefully China changes. I think part of China's reason for harping on Taiwan is they consider the island's economic success an embarrassment.

I'm not so sure that democracy in China would be a good thing. At least the authoritarian regime is mostly rational. If China PRC becomes an open and free democracy they may want to vote for themselves bread and circuses. The problem may erupt when they decide that since they are about 1/5 of humanity they should posess 20% of everything. Before you know it, they'll be after our bread and our circuses. The current regime is a limiting factor on Chinese commercialism and consumerism which is advantageous for us in many ways. Imagine the appetite of the US with the population and semi-homogeneity of China. The US is balanced by its varied immigrant population, but China would not have that setup. In fact, the regional differences in culture may create conflict in China not currently envisioned.

With a mild nuclear war in China PRC the reduction in population and industrial capacity might allow for a free and open democracy to develop in china without the pressures for dominance described above. It might take 20 years or more for China to reach parity by which time the rest of the world might be ready to accept them fully. The issue is getting China to start a nuclear war so that the rest of the world will not be blamed by the survivors allowing for full diplomatic integration after the prescribed interval.

Granted the above is not a pretty scenario, but it is better than global thermonuclear war after China reaches parity uncontested. I still believe that full integration could occur without any war, but I am not yet confident of that solution's execution.

__________________
"Oh no no no I'm a rocket man Rocket man burning out his fuse up here alone." -- Sir Elton John

J Pax

Ehm, I may not be a member of the PRC pep squad, but I wouldn't wish a nuclear civil war on them for all the tea they grow. The people aren't the problem, its the government. The only way I would ever want to see China brought down would be a method that isn't inherently destructive to the people.

The old cold war contain-and-bankrupt scenario worked nicely before without a mushroom cloud to its credit, and that's all I've ever suggested. Even a conventional war needs to be avoided at all costs. Why so? Simple, China wants normalized relations more than anything, their control is based on their ability to be incredibly productive thanks to trade with the rest of the world. Choke the money supply that empowers those in control and let them fall like the Soviets. Like the Soviets, their control comes from a well financed military, once those paychecks start bouncing, or they start getting paid in food and barterables, the polish of being a "productive member of the party" wears off fast. The Chinese aren't afraid of internal revolutions, they've done it before. What's hindering change now is the fact that the West seems more interested in maintaining the status quo and propping the government up with trade relations in spite of their record.

Therein lies the difference in the fate of the bear and the panda.

The Soviets had no trade relations with the West to prop them up. They lived by monopolized control of their satellite nations. The problem with that system is that it was extremely inefficient, and required intense levels of police control. You can only wring so much out of a population before there's nothing left to draw. Once military spending reached the critical threshold, they went bankrupt.

China has a fairly reliable, if stumbling, cash cow in the form of Hong Kong, along with most favored trade relations from the US. As a part of Nixon's wedge strategy in the 70's, the Chinese Communists gained a lifeline in the form of an open door policy with the largest superconsumer population on the planet. It served its purpose in stretching the link between Beijing and Moscow, but what was then a necessity is now a crippling liability. Its free life without any accountability for having it.

Beyond that, the question remains, does the PRC need to be 'brought down'? Do we even need to take those steps to strangle them?

I can only ask in return, what makes China different from the Soviet Union? Why is what they do more tolerable than what the Russians did?

I think that goes beyond the question of China/Taiwan, but how far we go to defend Taiwan or not also begs the question of how do we address the mainland.

__________________
The last time I felt a warm fuzzy feeling, I was informed by my doctor that it was just gas.

Rebel Scum!
I'm joking here, but we could go back to the Taiwanese-ROC-is-the-only-legitimate-Chinese-government position, re-labeling the mainland as insurgents.

I agree that the government is the current problem, but once they are dealt with the people may become a bigger problem. The west is notorious for fighting one battle without preparing for the next battle. The only thing more dangerous than a military dictatorship/oligarchy is a militant democracy. This is witnessed by the american desire for war after the events of both 9/11/2001 and 12/7/1945. Before WWII the US was a sleeping giant. The vast population of China may also be a sleeping giant. If we remove the authoritarian restraint of their current government we need to be prepared to restrain their population through our own means.

The difference with the current situation and the cold war was that Russia/USSR was expansionist but not expanding. Some believe that the Russian population was exaggerated and thus no real possibility of a war for Leibensraum. An unrestrained China would probably be not only expanding but also expansionist. This leads to war. This may be why we treat China differently. With Russia, we played chess, with China we will wrestle.

__________________
"Oh no no no I'm a rocket man Rocket man burning out his fuse up here alone." -- Sir Elton John

J Pax

*whistle* Dang, that would be a wicked policy shift. (Taiwan as the legitimate Chinese government, the Maoists as the rebels). Someone call Harry Turtledove STAT!!

As to the rest, I think you've tapped one of the biggest reasons why I think some kind of non-military solution to constraining the Chinese is needed. They have a very militant government, a steady undercurrent of pro-democracy activists, and a population that pretty much willing to do what the government demands, except in extremis.

If the toppling of the Chinese government comes in the form of a military disruption, you're going to have lingering resentments to the conquerers. Lets face it, its the most important lesson the US learned in Iraq. Yes, we may have done the "right" thing in toppling Saddam, but that doesn't mean that the violent disruption of Iraqi lives is going to be appreciated. Saddam made their world miserable, we all but up and destroyed it. Doing the wrong thing for the right reason is not doing a good thing.

When the Soviet government collapsed, it was not the west that did it. We created conditions that continually drained the Soviets of resources through indirect engagement, but it was they who destroyed themselves by convincing themselves they had to keep up. When the end came, the anger of the populace was aimed squarely at their government, not the west. It was the "right" way to do the "good" thing.

A war in China that starts over Taiwan could potentially kill millions, the fall of the Soviet Union came almost bloodlessly. Which was the right answer?

Note about the italics: I think I found a new siggy.

__________________
The last time I felt a warm fuzzy feeling, I was informed by my doctor that it was just gas.

What about an unrestrained India, as it currently is a democracy, and being the second most populated country in the world. They don't seem to be bent on expanding into other territory, and their economy is really starting to pick up as well. Maybe time will tell, but if we are to learn what may become of China, I think India will be a good example to learn from in the time to come. I also realize that most of India is still very much in poverty, much like the Chinese population.

__________________
Obedience brings victory
Victory is life
That is the order of things

India does have border troubles with Pakistan in Kashmir, and issues in Sri Lanka, although I don't know if these would be considered expansionist. Since India recently gained independence from the UK last century we may not have had enough time for extrapolation of future politics. India was under British rule for quite some time and may not think of themselves in a superior fashion since someone's boot was at their necks so recently. China, on the other hand, seems to have a tradition of superior self-imagery (possibly balanced by an inferiority complex) that has never been completely vanquished even by foreign incursions last century, but I'm not an expert on this. China has also illustrated expansionist policies with Mongolia and Tibet and continued posturing over Taiwan. But you are correct, we need to keep our eyes on India as well. There may be more potential for conflict between India and China. India is balanced by a nuclear Pakistan and a nuclear China. China is balanced by a nuclear India and a nuclear Russia. I'm not sure than the US is effectively balanced by anyone, but Stuart would know more about that than me.

__________________
"Oh no no no I'm a rocket man Rocket man burning out his fuse up here alone." -- Sir Elton John

J Pax

The Maoists have only been in China since the 50's, I believe. They're barely older in terms of independence than India.

__________________
The last time I felt a warm fuzzy feeling, I was informed by my doctor that it was just gas.

Yeah, I know they are new, but I was referring to their history more than the durations of their serial governments.

__________________
"Oh no no no I'm a rocket man Rocket man burning out his fuse up here alone." -- Sir Elton John

J Pax

So, lemme get this straight.....its not good for the rest of the world to be inspired to achieve the American standard of living, unless they live in America? Or, put it another way, 5% of the world population should have a unchallenged right to 20% (or whatever the number is) of world's wealth? Clearly, you see that this is not an equilibrium solution. Furthermore, if defended, this is and will be a source of conflicts in the future.
Or put yet another way, an American is worth how many Chinese? This echos of the past....


And this has stoped the US in bombing/invading exactly how many countries in the past?
A) So, China should be nuked for their own good?

So, assuming A), this implies that China should be nuked right now, since time is running out?

Considering the above, I would think Archer17, that my previous post had relevance to the topic.

__________________
"Its full of stars!"

I'll let Jpax respond to your cherry-picking of his posts but I don't think it's an oversight that you haven't even mentioned the problems between Taiwan and China. The fact is you could care less. All you brought to this thread is a pathetic attempt at anti-Americanism that violates the rules for this forum.No, your attempts to hijack a thread and turn it into a indictment against this country is not relevant.

kg034, You are confusing what I think will happen for what I want to happen. I stated more than once that I think there is a peaceful solution still possible. However, the human mind is amazing in its capacity for rationalizing the destruction of large numbers of innocent or guilty civilians. As for the rest of your post, it can be explained by "meus et tuus."

__________________
"Oh no no no I'm a rocket man Rocket man burning out his fuse up here alone." -- Sir Elton John

J Pax

Jpax2003, my statements are directed towards you inasmuch as you are the person predicting a certain scenario of events. All I want to do is to understand the motivation and assumptions why you think such a scenario will happen. I completely agree with you on the frightening, but true "rationalizing capability" commment, and am trying to understand why we'd even come to such a point.

Archer17, the US, along with other south-east Asian nations, is a factor in the China-Taiwan relationship. And a big factor at that.

__________________
"Its full of stars!"

Well, I have not come to such a point, but I suspect others can and will. I could give lots of potential reasons that may lead or be used to claim reason for an early nuking of China. However, the simpler explanation may be that a small nuking now will prevent a large nuking later. Once you reach that point it's simply a matter of numbers: sacrifice tens of millions to save billions. Taiwan will probably be used as a premier trigger, sooner or later.

__________________
"Oh no no no I'm a rocket man Rocket man burning out his fuse up here alone." -- Sir Elton John

J Pax

I disagree. Tell me how.

The US is currently obliged to defend Taiwan from Chinese invasion but the recent saber-rattling from Beijing and/or Taiwanese independence aspirations have nothing to do with the US or regional south Asian countries.

I also don't believe there will be military conflict between the two. As I've pointed out and Stuart elaborated on, China is militarily incapable of seizing Taiwan with conventional forces at this time and I don't think the Taiwanese need to officially declare independence right now anyway. They already are in everything but name only. The only way a China-Taiwan conflict could turn nuclear is if the Chinese initiate it, which I doubt they would.