The US is quietly arming Taiwan to the teeth

[Social Media]

 

When US President Joe Biden recently signed off on a $80m grant to Taiwan for the purchase of American military equipment, China said it "deplores and opposes" what Washington had done.

To the casual observer it didn't appear a steep sum. It was less than the cost of a single modern fighter jet. Taiwan already has on order more than $14bn worth of US military equipment. Does a miserly $80m more matter?

While fury is Beijing's default response to any military support for Taiwan, this time something was different.

The $80m is not a loan. It comes from American taxpayers. For the first time in more than 40 years, America is using its own money to send weapons to a place it officially doesn't recognise. This is happening under a programme called foreign military finance (FMF).

Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine last year, FMF has been used to send around $4bn of military aid to Kyiv. It has been used to send billions more to Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel and Egypt and so on. But until now it has only ever been given to countries or organisations recognised by the United Nations. Taiwan is not.

After the US switched diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China in 1979, it continued to sell weapons to the island under the terms of the Taiwan Relations Act. The key was to sell just enough weapons so Taiwan could defend itself against possible Chinese attack, but not so many that they would destabilise relations between Washington and Beijing. For decades, the US has relied on this so-called strategic ambiguity to do business with China, while remaining Taiwan's staunchest ally.

 

FULL STORY

 

[thaibeachlovers]

Well, at least they are doing something I agree with, for a change.

 

If China can't get to Taiwan, they can't invade it.

[tonbridgebrit]

And if Taiwan wants to buy £14 billion worth of military harware from Britain, well, I'd have no problems with using £80 million of British tax-payers money to give as aid to Taiwan.  

[RayC]

On 11/6/2023 at 8:04 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

Well, at least they are doing something I agree with, for a change.

 

If China can't get to Taiwan, they can't invade it.

 

You're in favour of the US giving aid to Taiwan but not to Ukraine. I accept that they are two separate conflicts with two totally different sets of circumstances but what iyo makes Taiwan deserving and not Ukraine?

[tonbridgebrit]

5 hours ago, RayC said:

 

You're in favour of the US giving aid to Taiwan but not to Ukraine. I accept that they are two separate conflicts with two totally different sets of circumstances but what iyo makes Taiwan deserving and not Ukraine?

I tried to ask something similar on a previous post.

Nobody here is in favour of US warships going to the Black Sea, and firing missiles at the Russians.  But there are people who reckon, that if China attacks Taiwan, then it would be good if US warships fire missiles at China.
 

Why the willingness to fight a war against China, but not against Russia ?

By the way, my own view is this. I'm against any US military action, in Ukraine or Taiwan. Giving weapons to them ?  Ukraine, I'm not sure, but not for Taiwan. Selling weapons to them ?  Ukraine yes. I don't actually support selling weapons to Taiwan. But if a giant profit is going to be made, well, we can't help it, it's got to be done.

[Morch]

9 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

I tried to ask something similar on a previous post.

Nobody here is in favour of US warships going to the Black Sea, and firing missiles at the Russians.  But there are people who reckon, that if China attacks Taiwan, then it would be good if US warships fire missiles at China.
 

Why the willingness to fight a war against China, but not against Russia ?

By the way, my own view is this. I'm against any US military action, in Ukraine or Taiwan. Giving weapons to them ?  Ukraine, I'm not sure, but not for Taiwan. Selling weapons to them ?  Ukraine yes. I don't actually support selling weapons to Taiwan. But if a giant profit is going to be made, well, we can't help it, it's got to be done.

 

Some people may 'reckon' you're pretty much in favor of anything favoring China.

[tonbridgebrit]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Some people may 'reckon' you're pretty much in favor of anything favoring China.

I don't want to see US warships in the Black Sea, firing missiles at Russia. And I don't want to see US warships in the South China Sea, firing missiles at China.  And this means I'm biased towards China ?  

Why do I not support US warships firing missiles at Russia ?  Because if that happens, World War Three breaks out, Britain (and the USA) will be nuked by Russia. And Russia will be nuked as well.
And I don't want America and China fighting a war. China has got nuclear sweapons. I don't want Britain getting nuked in a World War Three.

Getting nuked by Russia, or getting nuked because of China. What difference does it make ? In my opinion, not a lot. War against China will be just as disastrous and catastrophic as a war against Russia.

[Morch]

8 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

I don't want to see US warships in the Black Sea, firing missiles at Russia. And I don't want to see US warships in the South China Sea, firing missiles at China.  And this means I'm biased towards China ?  

Why do I not support US warships firing missiles at Russia ?  Because if that happens, World War Three breaks out, Britain (and the USA) will be nuked by Russia. And Russia will be nuked as well.
And I don't want America and China fighting a war. China has got nuclear sweapons. I don't want Britain getting nuked in a World War Three.

Getting nuked by Russia, or getting nuked because of China. What difference does it make ? In my opinion, not a lot. War against China will be just as disastrous and catastrophic as a war against Russia.

 

How about Chinese warships in the South China Sea, firing missiles at Taiwan, though?

How about a war against Taiwan?

[tonbridgebrit]

22 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

How about Chinese warships in the South China Sea, firing missiles at Taiwan, though?

How about a war against Taiwan?

If Peoples' Republic of China wants to re-start their civil war with Republic of China, Taiwan, well, how about let them do it ?  As long as nobody else is fighting as well, and nobody is sending their tax-payers money to give to either side, well, let them have their fight.  

[Morch]

1 minute ago, tonbridgebrit said:

If Peoples' Republic of China wants to re-start their civil war with Republic of China, Taiwan, well, how about let them do it ?  As long as nobody else is fighting as well, and nobody is sending their tax-payers money to give to either side, well, let them have their fight.  

 

Some people may 'reckon' you're pretty much in favor of anything favoring China.

[Tug]

9 hours ago, RayC said:

 

You're in favour of the US giving aid to Taiwan but not to Ukraine. I accept that they are two separate conflicts with two totally different sets of circumstances but what iyo makes Taiwan deserving and not Ukraine?

He’s from NZ he’s frightened of the Chinese otherwise he’s a Putin supporter 

[tonbridgebrit]

2 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Some people may 'reckon' you're pretty much in favor of anything favoring China.

Morch, can you stop repeating yourself ?

I don't want to see a war where Britain gets nuked, because of Russia or China.
If people in America want to see a war between America and China, well, I don't think that's good, but let them do it. America and China nuke each other. But I don't want Britain firing nukes at China, and I certainly don't want China firing nukes at Britain.

And right now, British warships are not firing missiles at the Russians. That's good, let's keep it that way. Why on earth have British warships in the South China Sea, firing missiles at Peoples' Republic of China ?  Or, why on earth have British warships in the South China Sea, firing missiles at Republic of China ?

[Morch]

1 hour ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Morch, can you stop repeating yourself ?

I don't want to see a war where Britain gets nuked, because of Russia or China.
If people in America want to see a war between America and China, well, I don't think that's good, but let them do it. America and China nuke each other. But I don't want Britain firing nukes at China, and I certainly don't want China firing nukes at Britain.

And right now, British warships are not firing missiles at the Russians. That's good, let's keep it that way. Why on earth have British warships in the South China Sea, firing missiles at Peoples' Republic of China ?  Or, why on earth have British warships in the South China Sea, firing missiles at Republic of China ?

 

Yeah, I get it your very worried about the UK getting nuked, but since the UK is not a major part of this, and Taiwan is....

[thaibeachlovers]

16 hours ago, RayC said:

 

You're in favour of the US giving aid to Taiwan but not to Ukraine. I accept that they are two separate conflicts with two totally different sets of circumstances but what iyo makes Taiwan deserving and not Ukraine?

I don't like Chinese expansion in the Pacific. I don't like what they are doing to Tibet. I don't like what they are doing to the Uighurs.

So, basically I'm not a fan of the CCP.

 

Ukraine didn't have to happen, so the only side I have in that conflict is the dead that didn't need to die.

[heybruce]

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I don't like Chinese expansion in the Pacific. I don't like what they are doing to Tibet. I don't like what they are doing to the Uighurs.

So, basically I'm not a fan of the CCP.

 

Ukraine didn't have to happen, so the only side I have in that conflict is the dead that didn't need to die.

But you're ok with Russia invading its neighbors, locking up all political opposition, sending assassination teams to other countries...

[heybruce]

12 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

If Peoples' Republic of China wants to re-start their civil war with Republic of China, Taiwan, well, how about let them do it ?  As long as nobody else is fighting as well, and nobody is sending their tax-payers money to give to either side, well, let them have their fight.  

So you're ok with wars of conquest, empire building, might makes right, etc.

 

I'm curious, is there any point at which aggressive, unchecked expansion by China would upset you?  Any countries you don't want to see taken by force?

[herfiehandbag]

11 hours ago, Tug said:

He’s from NZ he’s frightened of the Chinese otherwise he’s a Putin supporter 

And for good reason. They have stripped out their armed forces ( particularly air force and navy), so much that they are basically defenceless.

Edited November 10, 2023 by herfiehandbag

[Tug]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I don't like Chinese expansion in the Pacific. I don't like what they are doing to Tibet. I don't like what they are doing to the Uighurs.

So, basically I'm not a fan of the CCP.

 

Ukraine didn't have to happen, so the only side I have in that conflict is the dead that didn't need to die.

Sorry I’m not buying it for one second I’ve read your posts 

[tonbridgebrit]

10 hours ago, heybruce said:

So you're ok with wars of conquest, empire building, might makes right, etc.

 

I'm curious, is there any point at which aggressive, unchecked expansion by China would upset you?  Any countries you don't want to see taken by force?

No, I'm not okay with wars of conquest, empire building. etc, etc.

What if Russia attacks Poland ?  Poland is in NATO, it's not the same as Ukraine. If Russia or China attack Poland, then yes, fight a war against the attackers of Poland. Russia won't attack Poland, because they know it's in NATO. And I repeat, yes, fight a war against Russia if they attack Poland, or any other NATO country.

And China ?  Because Taiwan is a province in China, therefore, an attack on Taiwan by China is not a country attacking another country. Peoples' Republic of China having a fight with Republic of China, Taiwan, is a re-starting of the Chinese civil war that ended in 1949.  I don't accept Taiwan being a country, because there's no embassy from Republic of China in London, London being the capital of Britain.  And United Nations don't accept that Republic of China as a country, that's because Republic of China has not got a seat at the UN. They're not registered as a country.

Now Afghanistan and Vietnam, they are registered as countries at the UN. You talk about empire building. If China sends soldiers into Vietnam, and these Chinese soldiers are firing their bullets at Vietnamese people, then, the case for US military action is not the same. America sending soldiers to Vietnam, to kick out Chinese soldiers in Vietnam, that's not the same as kicking out Chinese soldiers in Taiwan.
And if China sends soldiers into Afghanistan, firing bullets at Afghan people, then what ? The case for US soldiers going into Afghanistan, to kick out the Chinese soldiers, that's not the same thing as kicking Chinese soldiers out of Taiwan.

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

No, I'm not okay with wars of conquest, empire building. etc, etc.

What if Russia attacks Poland ?  Poland is in NATO, it's not the same as Ukraine. If Russia or China attack Poland, then yes, fight a war against the attackers of Poland. Russia won't attack Poland, because they know it's in NATO. And I repeat, yes, fight a war against Russia if they attack Poland, or any other NATO country.

And China ?  Because Taiwan is a province in China, therefore, an attack on Taiwan by China is not a country attacking another country. Peoples' Republic of China having a fight with Republic of China, Taiwan, is a re-starting of the Chinese civil war that ended in 1949.  I don't accept Taiwan being a country, because there's no embassy from Republic of China in London, London being the capital of Britain.  And United Nations don't accept that Republic of China as a country, that's because Republic of China has not got a seat at the UN. They're not registered as a country.

Now Afghanistan and Vietnam, they are registered as countries at the UN. You talk about empire building. If China sends soldiers into Vietnam, and these Chinese soldiers are firing their bullets at Vietnamese people, then, the case for US military action is not the same. America sending soldiers to Vietnam, to kick out Chinese soldiers in Vietnam, that's not the same as kicking out Chinese soldiers in Taiwan.
And if China sends soldiers into Afghanistan, firing bullets at Afghan people, then what ? The case for US soldiers going into Afghanistan, to kick out the Chinese soldiers, that's not the same thing as kicking Chinese soldiers out of Taiwan.

 

 

The PRC mouthpiece have spoken.

[tonbridgebrit]

10 hours ago, heybruce said:

So you're ok with wars of conquest, empire building, might makes right, etc.

 

I'm curious, is there any point at which aggressive, unchecked expansion by China would upset you?  Any countries you don't want to see taken by force?

By the way, surely, you yourself are totally against US warships in the the Black Sea, firing missiles at the Russians. Off-course you are.  So we both agree on that.
And if Peoples' Republic of China fights a war against Republic of China, well, are you against US warships in the South China Sea, firing missiles at China/Chinese ? I don't think US warships should take such action.

[tonbridgebrit]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

 

The PRC mouthpiece have spoken.

Morch, I'ill do a deal with you. If China sends soldiers to Afghanistan, then what ?  I stand next to you, and we both demand that America will send soldiers to Afghanistan, to kick out the Chinese soldiers. Yes, Chinese soldiers firing their bullets in Afghanistan is an invasion of Afghanistan.
And, if Chinese soldiers are in Vietnam ? Yes, I stand next to you, and we demand US soldiers must go to Vietnam to kick out the Chinese soldiers. Yes, Chinese soldiers firing bullets in Vietnam is an invasion of Vietnam. But if Chinese warships are firing missiles at Vietnamese warships, and it's happening near the disputed islands involving Vietnam and China, well, I'm not in favour of getting US warships to fire missiles. US warships fire missiles at who ?  Chinese or Vietnamese ? Well, neither.

But Taiwan ?  Can we agree that US will not send soldiers or warships to fight, if it's in Taiwan ?   

[tonbridgebrit]

15 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

 

The PRC mouthpiece have spoken.

Yes, Morch, I'm trying to be a bit funny. But there is a serious side to this. Nobody wants to see war. I'm just trying to highlight the inconsistency and/or hypocrisy that lots of people do have.  

[Morch]

31 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

By the way, surely, you yourself are totally against US warships in the the Black Sea, firing missiles at the Russians. Off-course you are.  So we both agree on that.
And if Peoples' Republic of China fights a war against Republic of China, well, are you against US warships in the South China Sea, firing missiles at China/Chinese ? I don't think US warships should take such action.

 

I think you're dodging the question.

[Morch]

20 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Morch, I'ill do a deal with you. If China sends soldiers to Afghanistan, then what ?  I stand next to you, and we both demand that America will send soldiers to Afghanistan, to kick out the Chinese soldiers. Yes, Chinese soldiers firing their bullets in Afghanistan is an invasion of Afghanistan.
And, if Chinese soldiers are in Vietnam ? Yes, I stand next to you, and we demand US soldiers must go to Vietnam to kick out the Chinese soldiers. Yes, Chinese soldiers firing bullets in Vietnam is an invasion of Vietnam. But if Chinese warships are firing missiles at Vietnamese warships, and it's happening near the disputed islands involving Vietnam and China, well, I'm not in favour of getting US warships to fire missiles. US warships fire missiles at who ?  Chinese or Vietnamese ? Well, neither.

But Taiwan ?  Can we agree that US will not send soldiers or warships to fight, if it's in Taiwan ?   

 

Disregarding all of your contrived nonsense scenarios - you may 'demand' the USA to send troops. Me, I think it's up to the USA.

I would condemn China, though. Something which you would find hard to do.

 

The notion that the USA should step aside when it comes to matters related to China is amusing.

Same for claim that Taiwan is not country, or belongs to China.

The two lines above are PRC talking points.

 

Thanks for making my case.

 

[Morch]

21 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Yes, Morch, I'm trying to be a bit funny. But there is a serious side to this. Nobody wants to see war. I'm just trying to highlight the inconsistency and/or hypocrisy that lots of people do have.  

 

You seem alright with some potential wars, as long as they serve China's interests.

 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, tonbridgebrit said:

No, I'm not okay with wars of conquest, empire building. etc, etc.

What if Russia attacks Poland ?  Poland is in NATO, it's not the same as Ukraine. If Russia or China attack Poland, then yes, fight a war against the attackers of Poland. Russia won't attack Poland, because they know it's in NATO. And I repeat, yes, fight a war against Russia if they attack Poland, or any other NATO country.

And China ?  Because Taiwan is a province in China, therefore, an attack on Taiwan by China is not a country attacking another country. Peoples' Republic of China having a fight with Republic of China, Taiwan, is a re-starting of the Chinese civil war that ended in 1949.  I don't accept Taiwan being a country, because there's no embassy from Republic of China in London, London being the capital of Britain.  And United Nations don't accept that Republic of China as a country, that's because Republic of China has not got a seat at the UN. They're not registered as a country.

Now Afghanistan and Vietnam, they are registered as countries at the UN. You talk about empire building. If China sends soldiers into Vietnam, and these Chinese soldiers are firing their bullets at Vietnamese people, then, the case for US military action is not the same. America sending soldiers to Vietnam, to kick out Chinese soldiers in Vietnam, that's not the same as kicking out Chinese soldiers in Taiwan.
And if China sends soldiers into Afghanistan, firing bullets at Afghan people, then what ? The case for US soldiers going into Afghanistan, to kick out the Chinese soldiers, that's not the same thing as kicking Chinese soldiers out of Taiwan.

Summary:  You're not ok with wars of conquest but you don't want to get involved and you don't care if Russia has violated the 1994 Budapest Memorandum in which the US, Russia and other countries gave assurances to respect Ukraine's borders.

 

I assume you prefer to deal with wars of conquest using harsh language.  Or is that going too far?

 

I'm not concerned with the semantics of whether Taiwan technically qualifies as an independent nation, I'm concerned with what is right for Taiwan and the world.  Letting Russia and China bully and invade neighbors at will is not good for the world.

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, tonbridgebrit said:

By the way, surely, you yourself are totally against US warships in the the Black Sea, firing missiles at the Russians. Off-course you are.  So we both agree on that.
And if Peoples' Republic of China fights a war against Republic of China, well, are you against US warships in the South China Sea, firing missiles at China/Chinese ? I don't think US warships should take such action.

I'm against US warships in the Black Sea for tactical and practical reasons:  Getting there would be incredibly risky and unnecessary.

 

Whether US warships should fire on the PRC if it attacks Taiwan depends on how the situation unfolds.  The Taiwanese people don't want to go under Xi's rule, especially after seeing how Hong Kong has been treated.  If China goes in with guns blazing I would hope the US would help Taiwan blaze back.

 

There are also practical considerations; Taiwan is a critical part of the world economy.  A great deal of essential technology would fail without inputs from Taiwan, and that would make the supply issues caused by the pandemic and Russia's invasion of Ukraine look like a tea party.  I'm not commenting on the horrors of not getting a new phone every year, I'm talking about the horrors of people going hungry because distribution systems fail.

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

. But if Chinese warships are firing missiles at Vietnamese warships, and it's happening near the disputed islands involving Vietnam and China, well, I'm not in favour of getting US warships to fire missiles. US warships fire missiles at who ?  Chinese or Vietnamese ? Well, neither.   

"disputed islands"

That's China making a claim to pretty much everything in the South China Sea and getting into disputes with the Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Taiwan.  You call  China's sending troops and ships to occupy island and reefs or in some cases creating them mere disputes? A more accurate term would be military aggression. Disputes are the kind of issue that get settled in courts. Like the case the the Chinese lost to the Philippines. 

[placeholder]

Just a note. elsewhere tonbridgebrit has praised the foresight of the Chinese government for its pouring massive resources into real estate and infrastructure development. The result is huge empty cities and roads that see no traffic and airports that no planes land at.

Edited November 10, 2023 by placeholder