The US is quietly arming Taiwan to the teeth

[thaibeachlovers]

17 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

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

That's correct, and thanks to governments since Helen Clark we apparently don't have a plane with a gun on it, and no anti air defenses I know of ( I did read somewhere that the last female PM _ I'm so happy she's gone I've forgotten her name- gave some sort of missiles to Ukraine, but they might not have worked very well anyway ). That leaves a few armored wheeled vehicles with a gun on them, and presumably some sort of artillery, and if they haven't all left because they don't get paid enough, some infantry.

I think we have some navy ships of various sorts, but I heard they can't find enough sailors to man them all at the same time.

 

I presume that the planned response to a Chinese ( or from a small Pacific island for that matter ) invasion is to hang out the "welcome to our new overlords" sign in the relevant language.

 

However, in true hypocrisy, despite not being willing to have anything resembling a proper military, NZ expects the Australians and the US to come to our rescue should the poo actually hit the proverbial fan. I don't know why they'd bother, to be honest.

 

BTW, I was a part of the NZ military back when we actually had a military, and weren't a glorified observer corps for the UN, so I have some interest in the state or unstate of the NZ military.

 

If there is anyone out there that can prove that NZ actually has a military capable of making a hostile nation think twice about invading, I'll be happy to admit that I'm wrong.

 

I just hope I don't have to dig out my old tin hat and jungle greens and head for the bush. That would be a bit fraught for an oldie like myself.

[tonbridgebrit]

15 hours ago, Morch said:

 

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, you want to say that my scenarios are contrived nonsense ?

There's people who are convinced that China is trying to build an empire. Build this empire where ?  China has a land border with Afghanistan, and Afghanistan does have mineral ores, yes, natural resources. What's so surprising about China trying to take-over Afghanistan ? China needs natural resources, in order to continue exporting the maufactured goods to America and most other countries, including Britain.
So, I'm willing to stand next to you, and demand US soldiers will go to Afghanistan, if Chinese soldiers enter Afghanistan and fire bullets at Afghan people.

What about Vietnam ? You do realise that China sent soldiers into Vietnam, back in 1979 ?  Look it up on wikipedia, if you don't believe me. Yes, we stand next to each other in demanding, US soldiers will go to Vietnam, to kick out Chinese soldiers, if Beijing/China sends soldiers to Vietnam.

Okay, we don't agree on Taiwan. But we agree on Afghanistan and Vietnam. Thanks.

[tonbridgebrit]

14 hours ago, heybruce said:

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.

 

14 hours ago, heybruce said:

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.

Semantics on whether Taiwan qualifies as a nation ?  Republic of China does not have a seat at the United Nations, it does not have an embassy in London or America. From that, it's not a nation. Bit like Kurdistan, or indeed Gaza. I don't think US soldiers should go into Kurdistan or Gaza, and start firing bullets is a good idea.

About US warships in the Black Sea, so, we agree, US warships must not fire missiles at the Russians, in the Black Sea. Getting there will be very risky ?  Well, if US warships sail there, and don't fire missiles, I think it will be okay and safe. But if they start firing missiles, yes, it will be disastrous and catastrophic.  What about US warships in the Atlantic, and firing missiles at the Russians ? In my opinion, that would be just as disastrous as US ships in the Black Sea firing missiles.

About Hong Kong. No, I don't think it's a good idea to send weapons to Hong Kong, to see people in Hong Kong fight against China. Washington hasn't sent weapons to Hong Kong, there is no armed fight in Hong Kong against China. I think that's a good thing.

And Taiwan being a critical part of the world's economy ?  We've been down this road before. Back in 1990,  Kuwait was invaded by Iraq, Kuwait has got oil. That's why America and other countries had to kick out the Iraqis. If Kuwait had no oil, if Kuwait only grew carrots, USA would not have sent soldiers to kick out the Iraqis.
So, you want to support Taiwan, because Taiwan's computers power the supply chains of planet earth ? Yes, you're right. China, Russia, USA, Europe, etc, etc needs Taiwan computers. So what's the solution ?  A four year plan, replace Taiwan with computers in California, Texas and Arizona. And once that's done, Taiwan will no longer be important. No need to defend Taiwan. No need for America to fight for economic reasons, great.

[Morch]

56 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Morch, you want to say that my scenarios are contrived nonsense ?

There's people who are convinced that China is trying to build an empire. Build this empire where ?  China has a land border with Afghanistan, and Afghanistan does have mineral ores, yes, natural resources. What's so surprising about China trying to take-over Afghanistan ? China needs natural resources, in order to continue exporting the maufactured goods to America and most other countries, including Britain.
So, I'm willing to stand next to you, and demand US soldiers will go to Afghanistan, if Chinese soldiers enter Afghanistan and fire bullets at Afghan people.

What about Vietnam ? You do realise that China sent soldiers into Vietnam, back in 1979 ?  Look it up on wikipedia, if you don't believe me. Yes, we stand next to each other in demanding, US soldiers will go to Vietnam, to kick out Chinese soldiers, if Beijing/China sends soldiers to Vietnam.

Okay, we don't agree on Taiwan. But we agree on Afghanistan and Vietnam. Thanks.

 

I didn't want to say, I said it.

 

You're just trying to deflect and derail the topic with you look-over-there nonsense comments, nothing new. Can't actually address questions raised or own up what you post.

 

I'm not demanding the USA send troops anywhere. You pretend you are. I may demand China not send soldiers anywhere, though - something which you try to dodge around.

 

I do not agree with your nonsense, don't twist my words.

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

 

Semantics on whether Taiwan qualifies as a nation ?  Republic of China does not have a seat at the United Nations, it does not have an embassy in London or America. From that, it's not a nation. Bit like Kurdistan, or indeed Gaza. I don't think US soldiers should go into Kurdistan or Gaza, and start firing bullets is a good idea.

About US warships in the Black Sea, so, we agree, US warships must not fire missiles at the Russians, in the Black Sea. Getting there will be very risky ?  Well, if US warships sail there, and don't fire missiles, I think it will be okay and safe. But if they start firing missiles, yes, it will be disastrous and catastrophic.  What about US warships in the Atlantic, and firing missiles at the Russians ? In my opinion, that would be just as disastrous as US ships in the Black Sea firing missiles.

About Hong Kong. No, I don't think it's a good idea to send weapons to Hong Kong, to see people in Hong Kong fight against China. Washington hasn't sent weapons to Hong Kong, there is no armed fight in Hong Kong against China. I think that's a good thing.

And Taiwan being a critical part of the world's economy ?  We've been down this road before. Back in 1990,  Kuwait was invaded by Iraq, Kuwait has got oil. That's why America and other countries had to kick out the Iraqis. If Kuwait had no oil, if Kuwait only grew carrots, USA would not have sent soldiers to kick out the Iraqis.
So, you want to support Taiwan, because Taiwan's computers power the supply chains of planet earth ? Yes, you're right. China, Russia, USA, Europe, etc, etc needs Taiwan computers. So what's the solution ?  A four year plan, replace Taiwan with computers in California, Texas and Arizona. And once that's done, Taiwan will no longer be important. No need to defend Taiwan. No need for America to fight for economic reasons, great.

You're still hung up on semantics.  Taiwan functions as an independent nation that does not want to be dominated by China.  The US supports Taiwan because it agrees that Taiwan should not be forced to be part of mainland China.  Why is this difficult for you to grasp?

 

Regarding your twisted reading of the rest of my post; the US is supporting Ukraine in its defense against Russia's invasion.  The US is not participating as a combatant.  If that changes so would the need for firing on Russia.  I never suggested sending weapons to Hong Kong, I pointed out that what China did to Hong Kong strengthened Taiwan's resolve to not be dominated by Xi. 

 

The US, Europe and China are playing a game of catch-up with Taiwan's chip manufacturing capability, but Taiwan is not standing still, it's getting better.  Taiwan will be critical for the world economy for the foreseeable future.

 

China can do what it wants, within reason, within its territory (which does not include all of the South China Sea).  When it starts using military force to expand outside of its territory it must be resisted.  I, and a lot of other people, don't regard Taiwan as being part of China's territory, regardless of what you think.

[anandra]

Guys, I am not asking the USA to get involved in any war conflict against ruzzia, but I am 1000% sure that such a coward like putin, will never use nukes as long as he is alive, even if America will send their troops to Ukraine, he is the coward and most faint-hearted person among all the leaders

[tonbridgebrit]

On 11/11/2023 at 5:03 AM, heybruce said:

You're still hung up on semantics.  Taiwan functions as an independent nation that does not want to be dominated by China.  The US supports Taiwan because it agrees that Taiwan should not be forced to be part of mainland China.  Why is this difficult for you to grasp?

 

Regarding your twisted reading of the rest of my post; the US is supporting Ukraine in its defense against Russia's invasion.  The US is not participating as a combatant.  If that changes so would the need for firing on Russia.  I never suggested sending weapons to Hong Kong, I pointed out that what China did to Hong Kong strengthened Taiwan's resolve to not be dominated by Xi. 

 

The US, Europe and China are playing a game of catch-up with Taiwan's chip manufacturing capability, but Taiwan is not standing still, it's getting better.  Taiwan will be critical for the world economy for the foreseeable future.

 

China can do what it wants, within reason, within its territory (which does not include all of the South China Sea).  When it starts using military force to expand outside of its territory it must be resisted.  I, and a lot of other people, don't regard Taiwan as being part of China's territory, regardless of what you think.

You want to raise the issue of finding stuff difficult to grasp ? I can very easily put the point back onto you.  Just because a group of people want their place to be recognised as a country, well, that don't mean to say that the United Nations will recognise them as a country. A load of people in whatever place in the Middle East, or anywhere in the world, they or you or anybody might want them to be a seperate country. But that makes no difference to whether the UN will grant them a seat at the UN.  And without a seat at the UN, any place on earth is not recognized as a country. Is this so difficult for you to grasp ?

And why will Republic of China never have a seat at the United Nations ?  Because the five big boys at the UN, that's USA, Britain, France, Russia, and China, the five big boys are the real power at the UN. They're permanent members of the Security Council, they have power of veto on any big vote at the UN. The Big Five earned their places there, because they won World War Two.  If Republic of China fights and plays a big part in winning World War Three, well then, and only then, will Republic of China be one of the Big Boys at the United Nations. And off-course, this means being recognised as a nation by having a seat at the UN.  Actually, as long as Peoples' Republic of China loses World War Three, then, Republic of China will be recognised as a country, with a seat at the UN.

Yes, whether I think Taiwan is part of China or not, well, it's irrelevant. What counts is what the UN thinks, having a seat at the UN means being recognised as a country.

You're also playing a second card, the Kuwait card. This is saying that Republic of China is vital to the world's economy, planet earth grinds to a halt without Republic of China. You're exaggerating the importance of Republic of China. But let's say you're right. You're playing the Kuwait card, as in, "if you're valuable you will be protected, if not, if you have no oil and no computer chips, we're not going to fight for you".  Let's hope China, Europe, or America, will catch up with Republic of China in these computer chips.
Kuwait with no oil is not worth fighting for, and if Republic of China is not so important for planet earth's distribution system, then it is also not worth fighting for.

Edited November 13, 2023 by tonbridgebrit

[Morch]

14 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

You want to raise the issue of finding stuff difficult to grasp ? I can very easily put the point back onto you.  Just because a group of people want their place to be recognised as a country, well, that don't mean to say that the United Nations will recognise them as a country. A load of people in whatever place in the Middle East, or anywhere in the world, they or you or anybody might want them to be a seperate country. But that makes no difference to whether the UN will grant them a seat at the UN.  And without a seat at the UN, any place on earth is not recognized as a country. Is this so difficult for you to grasp ?

And why will Republic of China never have a seat at the United Nations ?  Because the five big boys at the UN, that's USA, Britain, France, Russia, and China, the five big boys are the real power at the UN. They're permanent members of the Security Council, they have power of veto on any big vote at the UN. The Big Five earned their places there, because they won World War Two.  If Republic of China fights and plays a big part in winning World War Three, well then, and only then, will Republic of China be one of the Big Boys at the United Nations. And off-course, this means being recognised as a nation by having a seat at the UN.  Actually, as long as Peoples' Republic of China loses World War Three, then, Republic of China will be recognised as a country, with a seat at the UN.

Yes, whether I think Taiwan is part of China or not, well, it's irrelevant. What counts is what the UN thinks, having a seat at the UN means being recognised as a country.

You're also playing a second card, the Kuwait card. This is saying that Republic of China is vital to the world's economy, planet earth grinds to a halt without Republic of China. You're exaggerating the importance of Republic of China. But let's say you're right. You're playing the Kuwait card, as in, "if you're valuable you will be protected, if not, if you have no oil and no computer chips, we're not going to fight for you".  Let's hope China, Europe, or America, will catch up with Republic of China in these computer chips.
Kuwait with no oil is not worth fighting for, and if Republic of China is not so important for planet earth's distribution system, then it is also not worth fighting for.

 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1311328-the-us-is-quietly-arming-taiwan-to-the-teeth/#comment-18491786

[heybruce]

9 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

You want to raise the issue of finding stuff difficult to grasp ? I can very easily put the point back onto you.  Just because a group of people want their place to be recognised as a country, well, that don't mean to say that the United Nations will recognise them as a country. A load of people in whatever place in the Middle East, or anywhere in the world, they or you or anybody might want them to be a seperate country. But that makes no difference to whether the UN will grant them a seat at the UN.  And without a seat at the UN, any place on earth is not recognized as a country. Is this so difficult for you to grasp ?

And why will Republic of China never have a seat at the United Nations ?  Because the five big boys at the UN, that's USA, Britain, France, Russia, and China, the five big boys are the real power at the UN. They're permanent members of the Security Council, they have power of veto on any big vote at the UN. The Big Five earned their places there, because they won World War Two.  If Republic of China fights and plays a big part in winning World War Three, well then, and only then, will Republic of China be one of the Big Boys at the United Nations. And off-course, this means being recognised as a nation by having a seat at the UN.  Actually, as long as Peoples' Republic of China loses World War Three, then, Republic of China will be recognised as a country, with a seat at the UN.

Yes, whether I think Taiwan is part of China or not, well, it's irrelevant. What counts is what the UN thinks, having a seat at the UN means being recognised as a country.

You're also playing a second card, the Kuwait card. This is saying that Republic of China is vital to the world's economy, planet earth grinds to a halt without Republic of China. You're exaggerating the importance of Republic of China. But let's say you're right. You're playing the Kuwait card, as in, "if you're valuable you will be protected, if not, if you have no oil and no computer chips, we're not going to fight for you".  Let's hope China, Europe, or America, will catch up with Republic of China in these computer chips.
Kuwait with no oil is not worth fighting for, and if Republic of China is not so important for planet earth's distribution system, then it is also not worth fighting for.

You're really hung up on the UN.  Are you under the impression that wars can not begin without UN approval?  Or that brutal suppression of an independent people is acceptable if they don't have a seat at the UN is acceptable?

 

I have no idea what you are talking about regarding Kuwait.  I assume it's just deflection and obfuscation.