• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is the Republic of China (Taiwan) worth protecting?

G

George VI

Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
146
Reaction score
22
Location
Auckland, New Zealand
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Scenario: The ROC makes an attempt at formally declaring independence, the PRC gets pissed and sends missiles into Taiwan as warning shots. Taiwan goes ahead and formally declares independence anyway, the PRC invades.

Now what? Current ROC military doctrine is to hold out as long as they can before the US can arrive. What if the US doesn't arrive? Is the ROC worth protecting?

The US could be ready to protect the ROC in as little as 30 days, the US bases in Japan would provide an excellent base of operations.

What do you guys think?
 
George VI said:
Scenario: The ROC makes an attempt at formally declaring independence, the PRC gets pissed and sends missiles into Taiwan as warning shots. Taiwan goes ahead and formally declares independence anyway, the PRC invades.

Now what? Current ROC military doctrine is to hold out as long as they can before the US can arrive. What if the US doesn't arrive? Is the ROC worth protecting?

The US could be ready to protect the ROC in as little as 30 days, the US bases in Japan would provide an excellent base of operations.

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

Now what? Nothing. It's none of our business.
 
George VI said:
Now what? Current ROC military doctrine is to hold out as long as they can before the US can arrive. What if the US doesn't arrive? Is the ROC worth protecting?
Click to expand...
No.

(Ten characters.)
 
No, at most even if the PRC was to retake it, it would just be a fully autonomous region like Hong Kong is.
 
We should negotiate autonomy on it's behalf, just as what is seen in Hong Kong. Hell, at this point it appears that Taiwan is drawing closer to China anyway.
 
Not an easy call. The economic damage to say from such a war would be utterly disastrous for the U.S. and it would take forever to recover. On the other hand, a China crazy enough to try it is a real world threat and needs to be stopped. Taiwan alone probably isn't worth the damage, but neither was the Sudetenand and we should seek a fight in a terrain advantageous to us.
 
George VI said:
Scenario: The ROC makes an attempt at formally declaring independence, the PRC gets pissed and sends missiles into Taiwan as warning shots. Taiwan goes ahead and formally declares independence anyway, the PRC invades.

Now what? Current ROC military doctrine is to hold out as long as they can before the US can arrive. What if the US doesn't arrive? Is the ROC worth protecting?

The US could be ready to protect the ROC in as little as 30 days, the US bases in Japan would provide an excellent base of operations.

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...
I think that once a great superpower thought it could buy peace in its time by allowing the Sudetenland to be annexed by its aggressive neighbor, and so the great power abandoned its defensive obligations to Czechoslovakia, and tens of millions of people died needlessly as a result.
 
stekim said:
Now what? Nothing. It's none of our business.
Click to expand...
It might have been in another set of circumstances, but we have made commitments, and the Taiwanese have acted according to them. Thus by our own acts, it has indeed become our business. Responsibility is burdensome.
 
Last edited:
rathi said:
Not an easy call. The economic damage to say from such a war would be utterly disastrous for the U.S. and it would take forever to recover. On the other hand, a China crazy enough to try it is a real world threat and needs to be stopped. Taiwan alone probably isn't worth the damage, but neither was the Sudetenand and we should seek a fight in a terrain advantageous to us.
Click to expand...

China doesn't have a history of empire building though. They basically want what they think is historically theirs (Taiwan, Tibet), but that doesn't mean the next step for them would be India and Japan.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
China doesn't have a history of empire building though. They basically want what they think is historically theirs (Taiwan, Tibet), but that doesn't mean the next step for them would be India and Japan.
Click to expand...

:roll: You mean the Tibetian and Ughurs joined by choice?

As far as Empire China, it has a deep history of Hegemons and Empires going back to before Western Europe even existed as a center of power.
 
OxymoronP said:
:roll: You mean the Tibetian and Ughurs joined by choice?

As far as Empire China, it has a deep history of Hegemons and Empires going back to before Western Europe even existed as a center of power.
Click to expand...

Of course they didn't. However, China considers Tibet and Xinjiang to be historically part of China. Basically, what they want is what they consider to be historically, right or wrong, theirs.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
China doesn't have a history of empire building though. They basically want what they think is historically theirs (Taiwan, Tibet), but that doesn't mean the next step for them would be India and Japan.
Click to expand...

China is an empire, many millennia ago it was built; otherwise this region would be fractionized as Europe is.
But now, they seem to be a peaceful, non-aggressive nation.. Tibet aside.
 
rathi said:
Not an easy call. The economic damage to say from such a war would be utterly disastrous for the U.S. and it would take forever to recover. On the other hand, a China crazy enough to try it is a real world threat and needs to be stopped. Taiwan alone probably isn't worth the damage, but neither was the Sudetenand and we should seek a fight in a terrain advantageous to us.
Click to expand...

Sweet, so I'm guessing it's the United State's job to "stop them"?

Who's gonna pay for that if it happens?
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Of course they didn't. However, China considers Tibet and Xinjiang to be historically part of China. Basically, what they want is what they consider to be historically, right or wrong, theirs.
Click to expand...

All Empires think the same way more or less, that was the thinking of the Germans and their reasons for war with Poland, their annexation of Austria, the Rhineland, etc etc. To say China doesnt have history of Empire building is not based on the facts of their history.
 
China doesn't have a history of empire building though. They basically want what they think is historically theirs (Taiwan, Tibet), but that doesn't mean the next step for them would be India and Japan.
Click to expand...

Invading Norway or the Soviet Union didn't really fit in Hitlers goal of Lebensraum, yet he did it anyways. A China crazy enough to try an amphibious invasion considering the power of our navy cannot be trusted to follow such a predictable path. We have every advantage in the air and on the sea, we are at a severe disadvantage fighting a land war thousands of miles away. Better to stop them early when the circumstances are more favorable.
----------------------------------------------------------
Sweet, so I'm guessing it's the United State's job to "stop them"?

Who's gonna pay for that if it happens?
Click to expand...

We do. Make no mistake, it will be expensive and cost many lives. We probably would be able to garner allies, but we would shoulder the primary burden of the fighting.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
China doesn't have a history of empire building though. . ..
Click to expand...
Huh? Do you know why there are so many languages spoken in China? Because they conquered so many lesser nations, that's why.

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Imperial_China]Early Imperial China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Mid-Imperial China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Imperial_China]Late Imperial China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
 
That said, pushing for Taiwan to become an autonomous zone is probably a useful goal. The U.S. doesn't have that much vested interest in keeping Taiwan utterly separated from the mainland. A smooth legitimate transfer of power than doesn't violate any of the agreements we made would probably be the most optimal solution.
 
rathi said:
Invading Norway or the Soviet Union didn't really fit in Hitlers goal of Lebensraum, yet he did it anyways. A China crazy enough to try an amphibious invasion considering the power of our navy cannot be trusted to follow such a predictable path. We have every advantage in the air and on the sea, we are at a severe disadvantage fighting a land war thousands of miles away. Better to stop them early when the circumstances are more favorable.
----------------------------------------------------------


We do. Make no mistake, it will be expensive and cost many lives. We probably would be able to garner allies, but we would shoulder the primary burden of the fighting.
Click to expand...

Why must the United States do this?
 
Oftencold said:
It might have been in another set of circumstances, but we have made commitments, and the Taiwanese have acted according to them. Thus by our own acts, it has indeed become our business. Responsibility is burdensome.
Click to expand...
Perhaps we should extract ourselves from those commitments.
 
Coronado said:
Perhaps we should extract ourselves from those commitments.
Click to expand...
This may well be true. But there would be favorable ways to do so, and destructive ways. Myself, I favor the creation of an empire, but then I'm something of an antiquarian, and pine for the old days.
 
Oftencold said:
Huh? Do you know why there are so many languages spoken in China? Because they conquered so many lesser nations, that's why.

Early Imperial China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mid-Imperial China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Late Imperial China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Yes, I realize that. However, they essentially established the borders of their nation hundreds of years ago. By that definition, every nation is an empire including the United States.

My point is that in the contemporary history of China, they don't exactly have a pattern of wanting to extend their borders beyond what has historically been part of China. Granted, Mao had maniacal dreams of establishing worldwide Maoism, but it never was put to any real action other than proxy influence. Its not as though China has colonies around the world or anything.
 
Coronado said:
That was then, this is now. Two totally different ballgames.

Also, it has a lot to do with the fact that the Chinese written language is not phonetic.
Click to expand...

Exactly. There have always been hundreds of local dialects in China. Written language has always tied them together more than spoken language. Its only been recently that Mandarin has became the default language in China.
 
Why must the United States do this?
Click to expand...

The U.S. is currently the foremost power in the world, thus we benefit from world stability. Letting a China run by crazies go around invading people is not in our long term interests. We may not be the worlds policeman, but we would be foolish to ignore serious threats when they arise. Preventing an invasion of Taiwan is really for our sake not theirs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom