- Joined
- May 7, 2010
- Messages
- 5,095
- Reaction score
- 1,544
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Taiwan is ever vigilant in watching. If there really were an attack coming, they would get the planes up.
Your comments on this cause me to believe you have no understanding of military strategy whatsoever. Having all planes in the air is a feat in itself, never mind having all planes in the air at exactly the right moment. It simply would not be doable for Taiwan. China would not build up its force and strike the moment it was ready since that would make defensive planning way too easy for Taiwan. Either they would attack suddenly with those forces in theater that can be used immediately for just such a purpose or build up their forces and keep them on standby for a given time period. In both cases Taiwan would have no real way to avoid a scenario where a substantial number of their aircraft are caught on the ground.
Also, China can't destroy all of the highways with its missiles.
Not every stretch of highway would be suitable for use as an airstrip if that is what you are suggesting. There are certain requirements regarding the dimensions of the highway and its path. Curved highways do not make good airstrips for obvious reasons. You also have to have infrastructure in place for it to be a viable airstrip. China would first go after those highway strips that have specifically been designed and intended for use as an airstrip and then target the most viable alternatives. This would not insure that there are no places for a plane to touch down, that would just be an absurd expectation. However, China would not have to act on the expectation that no plane in the air could land. Instead, it would be looking to cause enough logistical difficulties to seriously impede Taiwan's ability to wage a continued air war. Even if a plane is able to land successfully it still needs to be resupplied and have a viable takeoff route.
Many Western countries allow successionist parties.
"Many"? Does that not also mean to say "not all"? Also, if you note, I specifically mentioned not allowing such a party to hold political power. This would not impede the ability of groups or individuals to express this view in Taiwan.
Taiwan is far higher political rights
Like I said, that is an automatic result of its political system. Because of limitations on public elections Hong Kong is regarded as partly free despite the level of actual political freedom in Hong Kong.
Freedom House ranks Taiwan as free with a score of 24 (a score that has dropped slightly during the KMT administration) and Hong Kong as Partly free with a score of 33. And if you read through the RSF (Reporters Without Borders) site, it is clear that Taiwan has better press freedoms than Hong Kong has.
I saw that about press freedom. I also saw the part where South Korea has the same rating on press freedom.
Except that there is no record of this with the Chinese government. The fact is that Taiwan has rights under international law. We have an open, free-wheeling political process here that Hong Kong does not have. Comparing political freedom between Hong Kong and Taiwan is an utter joke. Of course Taiwan is more free. And we like it that way.
The difference is that Hong Kong had not been under such a process before being handed over to Chinese rule.
Given the military build up of China currently and in the future, Taiwan without external support would lose (perhaps not today, but within 10 years ).
Oh no, Taiwan without external support would lose in any military scenario under the present circumstances even if China attacked this very moment. Taiwan's leaders are well aware of this fact and so they make all their military plans under the assumption that they only need to hold off China long enough to allow foreign support to arrive. Any scenario that does not include foreign support leads to China's rapid victory.