China improving its military potence rapidly

Originally Posted by Ducimus

I have no idea what your rambling about. I suspect your barking up the wrong tree.

It was not addressed to you in specific, its just a some sort of connection between what you sad and behavior of some individuals here (jajaja boys and so on) you know. Tree is ours now, have a good day

[MH]

Originally Posted by Dimitrius07

It was not addressed to you in specific, its just a some sort of connection between what you sad and behavior of some individuals here (jajaja boys and so on) you know. Tree is ours now, have a good day

Take it easy man.

[Ducimus]

>>ts just a some sort of connection between what you sad and behavior of some individuals here (jajaja boys and so on) you know.

Well, i still don't get what your driving at. I just happen to have isolationist tendencies that developed sometime when i got out of the military. I just don't express it very often. .

[MH]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

They'd hate us anyway for not getting the "hand outs" they're accustomed to.

World owes a lot to USA when looking at history.
Israel too.
Middle East and Iraq-sorry logic doesn't work here.
If USA declared ho;;y jihad on Iraq it might work but it would not be civilized.

As for Taiwan i guess if you want to be a super power(which is beneficial in all ways)economically and politically you have to have as much friends or dependent countries as you can.

Still world is a global jungle as it seems so showing a weakness is not a good thing to do.
Better to be international policeman and keep trouble away from home.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

How many Taiwanese lives is China worth? If we don't protect them, the answer is all of them. The Chinese Communist party will steal everything the Taiwanese have worked so hard to achieve over the past half-century.

Or they will treat it like Hong Kong and keep the money rolling in? The Chinese are many things but stupid they aint. The Chinese would have nothing to gain by "stealing everything" and everything to gain buy allowing business as usual and the PRC skims off a healthy slice of profits.

I don't particularly care about Taiwan because I'm a practical person who doesn't believe that the US has any business or real ability to enforce its will upon the world other than being a haven for the poor and disenfranchised, but can you accept responsibility for the fate of Taiwan?

I don't accept any responsibility for Taiwan. Not my problem, not even a US problem. As far as I am concerned this is between China and Japan

Will you vote to protect Taiwan? Will you fight for her? Will you do nothing to save all those people?

Since you asked

no
no
yes

Before we all get maudlin about "saving" Taiwan, we need to be clear on what exactly we are "saving" them from. Please realize that it has only been relatively recent that they have had "free" elections (free with a very large *). The KMT, which is in power again, does not have clean hands.

In analyzing this issue, it is folly to presume that one side is the white hatted "good guys" and the other side the black hatted "bad guys". Both sides are wearing very very dark gray hats.

Here is a question for you. Can you look a military member in the eyes and say, "you need to sacrifice your life for Taiwan. Your life is not as valuable as a trade agreement?" I sure couldn't.

I am pretty stingy about throwing away American lives these days. American lives are pretty valuable to me. I have not seen anything in Taiwan that would be worth American's dying over.

Just one old guy's worthless opinion.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Ypou mean the third Vietnam war when chinese intervention stopped the march of the vietnamese? The losses were high on both sides, but Vietnam took a nasty beating, being stopped and pushed back to their own land. They went a long way since then, milutarily. Today, they probably would decide a war with Vietnam much more decisively.

It is a story that tells everybody in the West that the Chinese do not shy away from conflict even if that means losses much higher than western nation's people would tolerate.

However, chinese history also shows that china does not favour military aggression for expansion beyond its borders. They use Ferengi diplomacy, not Klingon confrontation. Taiwan they set their eyes on not to conquer something foreign, but because they live by the honest belief that it legitimately is part of One-China.

From what I read the PRC failed its objective of kicking Vietnam out of Cambodia. But your right both sides lost a lot of troops and material, the PLA got it worse but they of course could absorb the loss.

As for not favoring military aggression for expansion, ask Tibet! However that was done during the rule of Mao and I think the PRC has come a ways since then.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

From what I read the PRC failed its objective of kicking Vietnam out of Cambodia. But your right both sides lost a lot of troops and material, the PLA got it worse but they of course could absorb the loss.

As for not favoring military aggression for expansion, ask Tibet! However that was done during the rule of Mao and I think the PRC has come a ways since then.

Like Taiwan they see Tibet as historically belonging to China. We in the West must understand that our views differ massively from theirs, over Tibet. For us it always is Tibetan buddhist and the Dalai Lama. But most Chinese do not even know of - or do not care for - the Dalai Lama. For them they have a national problem of more than 50 different regional subgroups claiming independence from China, which would mean major breakup uf China as the national entity that it is. Tibet just runs as one amongst these other 50 regional incursions.

You will not find examples for a trdition of military conquest beyond the borders of the Chinese empire(s) that equals to that of the European kingdoms, the ancient Greek, Rome, the British or the American ampire. They had plenty of military clashes - but internally between rivalling kingdoms, or when being invaded from the outside.

the traditional way to expand their influence, is clever trading and forming economic bionds, even tricking others into economic or financial dependiencies. For that reason, historically Chinese traders are admired for their skill but are feared and often despised at the same time. But militarioly, there empire's history is rlateively harmless, compared to modern America, Britain or European colonialism.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Like Taiwan they see Tibet as historically belonging to China. We in the West must understand that our views differ massively from theirs, over Tibet. For us it always is Tibetan buddhist and the Dalai Lama. But most Chinese do not even know of - or do not care for - the Dalai Lama. For them they have a national problem of more than 50 different regional subgroups claiming independence from China, which would mean major breakup uf China as the national entity that it is. Tibet just runs as one amongst these other 50 regional incursions.

Ahh they see it as part of China because a Chinese Empire conquered it in the past... albeit after Tibet invaded them and took their capital.

You will not find examples for a trdition of military conquest beyond the borders of the Chinese empire(s) that equals to that of the European kingdoms, the ancient Greek, Rome, the British or the American ampire. They had plenty of military clashes - but internally between rivalling kingdoms, or when being invaded from the outside.

Rivaling Kingdoms in China? So its not military conquest when its in the same geographic region? Must be the geographic region since some of those empires had no political or ethnic ties to the Han Chinese. The Han Chinese (the PRC's "dominate" ethnic group) effectively doubled their territory between 610 and 1800 and brought in many different ethnic and religious groups in to what is now the PRC. In 1200 years no Chinese empire gained or tried to gain territory though military might?

Considering the current PRC controls territory bigger or equal to all of Europe I would say they certainly have been just as effective in military conquest as Europeans or Americans.

Very interesting discussion Skybird.

[Skybird]

As was ndicated in the Gaza thread, at one point in time you simply have to give up to make constant claims for ancient gepgraphic condtions from a long time ago, else oyu end up with Indians demanding the white man to leave, Aborigines kicking out the Brits, italians forming up the roman empire, or, like in that other thread, Palestinians wanting Israel being deleted and clocks set back by two generations. Not to mention Germany demanding back it'S now Polish and Czech territories, and South America being freed from Spanish influence. And... and... and... You get the argument, I'm sure!

The first Chinese dynasties formed up almost 4000 years ago, and the first territorial configuration that - separated into various rivaling Chinese kingdoms - covered most of modern China's territory today, roughly matches the middle time of the Roman empire (I know I know, it is a very short summary of history only, ignoring plenty of details on various dynasties). Different to Rome, the Chinese are still there today, after almost 4 thousand years.

I do not know of any serious, large-scaled military aggression and attempt of conquest beyond this roughly outlined territorial border. In fact China repeatedly fell victim to foreign aggression, namely the Mongoles, and Japanese, and also the West that exploited it's long-lasting stagnation. To what degree the Koreans (somewhat relatives of the japanese) also could be listed as invaders, I am not fully aware of. However, China expanded by trade influence, and also demograohic prerssure. The chinese migration movement into the Russia's (demographically emptying) south-eastern regions near China makes the Russian being able to sing a worried song about that. the vacuum the shrinking Russian population there has created, gets filled with Chinese. And again, it is the traders forming the spearhead.

In the end, the Great Wall was no offensive, but defensive measurement, different to the Roman Hadrian's wall which was build to defend conquests made by the Romans, the chinese wall was build on chinese territory that was with China since long.

[TLAM Strike]

However, China expanded by trade influence, and also demograohic prerssure. The chinese migration movement into the Russia's (demographically emptying) south-eastern regions near China makes the Russian being able to sing a worried song about that. the vacuum the shrinking Russian population there has created, gets filled with Chinese. And again, it is the traders forming the spearhead.

At least according to Heinlein all wars are fought over demographic pressures. Whom I consider my source for all knowledge.

Interesting the "Traders" going in to Siberia now, lots of illegal logging going on according to a BBC report I saw a few months ago. All done by Chinese corporations.

The question is does an "Empty" area claimed as a territory truly belong to the claimer. Or to those who go in and take it as their own.

After some more research I will have to coincide to you, on your point on wars of conquest in relation to China.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by Platapus

Or they will treat it like Hong Kong and keep the money rolling in? The Chinese are many things but stupid they aint. The Chinese would have nothing to gain by "stealing everything" and everything to gain buy allowing business as usual and the PRC skims off a healthy slice of profits.

That's my hope, but I'm not sure they will treat it the same way as Hong Kong. Taiwan is the last refuge of the Chinese Nationalist Party, and I expect there will be some purges.

I don't accept any responsibility for Taiwan. Not my problem, not even a US problem. As far as I am concerned this is between China and Japan

I tend to agree, but it isn't a popular persepctive.

Since you asked

no
no
yes

What will you do to save them or help them?

Before we all get maudlin about "saving" Taiwan, we need to be clear on what exactly we are "saving" them from. Please realize that it has only been relatively recent that they have had "free" elections (free with a very large *). The KMT, which is in power again, does not have clean hands.

I wouldn't call the idea of helping Taiwan "maudlin" at all, just as I would not dismiss the fate of Israel without serious thought. The KMT may not have clean hands, but it beats the hell out of the Communist party, and the standard of living in Taiwan is a lot higher than it is the Western part of China.

In analyzing this issue, it is folly to presume that one side is the white hatted "good guys" and the other side the black hatted "bad guys". Both sides are wearing very very dark gray hats.

I don't presume that one side is good and the other is bad, but I apologize if I led you to believe that. What I believe is that communism or any strong state is harmful to prosperity. That's why I always go off on those libertarian rants about our own government.

Here is a question for you. Can you look a military member in the eyes and say, "you need to sacrifice your life for Taiwan. Your life is not as valuable as a trade agreement?" I sure couldn't.

I can, and I wouldn't feel bad about it at all. I didn't fight in Iraq because I honestly thought they had WMDs and the delivery systems they needed. I fought for the Kurds and for the fact that America stood to benefit from conrtrol of the Iraqi oil supply. Those reasons are more than enough excuse for me to put my life in jepoardy. Those reasons cost the lives of many of my comrades, but they all died honorably, knowing that they had put their lives at risk for people they didn't know. Yes, I will risk my life so you can pay ten cents less at the pump. That's what it means to me to be a soldier.

I see the welfare of my nation and the welfare of oppressed peoples the world over as being a cause worth fighting and dying for.

I am pretty stingy about throwing away American lives these days. American lives are pretty valuable to me. I have not seen anything in Taiwan that would be worth American's dying over.

Then why fight for anyone? Why not let genocides continue unabated? Would you simply let them die? I wouldn't, which is why I have fought.

Just one old guy's worthless opinion.

Don't be like that. I respect your opinions and so do a lot of other subsimmers. I just don't understand why you would willingly consign a nation of millions to their fate at the hands of a government that we know will kill people just to save the lives of Americans who are willing to fight and die for their cause. We knew what we signed up for, and if we signed up for something else then we don't belong in the ranks. That's just one young guy's worthless opinion

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

The question is does an "Empty" area claimed as a territory truly belong to the claimer. Or to those who go in and take it as their own.

I did not wish to imply that. I just wanted to say that there is big migration movement going on, coupled with a historically established tradition to not so much militarily conquer new places, but gaining influence over them by settling peacecully after according "preparation" by trading with the place first.

Big migration movements have formed all of history. Such movements formed empires, and brought other empires to fall. Sometimes such migration started with the intention to conquer new living space, sometimes it just was the result of existential pressure, often it was a mixture of both.

In the present, we have mass migration patterns taking place periodically. We call it summer holidays.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Skybird

I did not wish to imply that. I just wanted to say that there is big migration movement going on, coupled with a historically established tradition to not so much militarily conquer new places, but gaining influence over them by settling peacecully after according "preparation" by trading with the place first.

Big migration movements have formed all of history. Such movements formed empires, and brought other empires to fall. Sometimes such migration started with the intention to conquer new living space, sometimes it just was the result of existential pressure, often it was a mixture of both.

In the present, we have mass migration patterns taking place periodically. We call it summer holidays.

Kinda reminds me of a Russian joke about the Chinese:

"During the Damansky Island incident the Chinese military developed three main strategies: The Great Offensive, The Small Retreat, and Infiltration by Small Groups of One to Two Million Across the Border."

I guess the PRC is current engaging in the 3rd strategy right now... I guess Mexico is too!

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Kinda reminds me of a Russian joke about the Chinese:

Good one!