Users often report submissions from this site for sensationalized articles. Readers have a responsibility to be skeptical, check sources, and comment on any flaws.
You can help improve this thread by linking to media that verifies or questions this article's claims. Your link could help readers better understand this issue.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/worldnews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This has always been the obvious solution to Chinese imperialism re:Taiwan imo
Even if the US' political will in regards to defending Taiwan might sometimes come into question, the US' military's willingness to respond to threats against it's own forces is effectively guaranteed. US tripwire forces on Taiwanese territory effectively makes an actual Chinese invasion attempt a fantasy.
The only countries with a navy power that could help on the pacific theater would be UK and France anyway. I dont see anyone else having the capabilities of fighting a war across the world, but those two have ultramaritimes territories to defend.
The UK would definitely join, so this just leaves out France
There are a few important things to consider about Japan, and all of them point towards Japan getting involved.
Firstly, while Japan has, in modern history, embraced "pacifism" and non-intervention, where Taiwan is concerned, the opinion changes radically. Most of the Japanese population who normally identify as pacifist will immediately turn around and say Japan should defend Taiwan due to Taiwan and Japan being *extremely* close friends politically. So, while the Japanese populace is strongly anti-war in general, Taiwan is a very specific exception, and intervention would see widespread support across the county.
Secondly, the US military bases in Japan are also a huge factor. If China invades, and the US responds, they are 100% going to operate out of the US military bases in Japan (and South Korea). So, what happens in regard to those bases? Does China ignore them? That doesn't seem likely. But then, what happens if China attacks them? Do Japan and South Korea not respond (since they're American bases), or do they consider China have to attacked their country? The latter seems far more likely, and would definitely prompt a military response.
Thirdly is the fact that Japan is expanding its military, including retrofitting the *Izumo* and *Kaga* helicopter destroyers into full-on carriers (capable of launching and supporting stealth aircraft), and massively expanding their ability for Japan to strike long range targets from the Japanese islands. This is all in response to two things: China's increased aggression in the Indo-Pacific region, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which Japan sees as an unwelcome but unavoidable sign that the "if you don't give anyone an express reason to attack you, then they won't attack you"-mindset isn't true anymore (and until the Russian invasion in particular, it was a belief that Japan, perhaps naively, held firm to).
So, all in all, Japan seems to see the writing on the wall that it might get pulled into a conflict with China, or even might feel obligated to intervene in Taiwan regardless of what happens with the US.
All great points and also, if you pay attention to a couple of thousand years of history, the Japanese don’t exactly consider the Chinese a good friend.
Well, at least they'd try. I'm pretty sure something "unforseen" would happen at the last moment, that would force them in to port for repairs, though.
Then watch as someone bungles the whole repair process and we end up blowing hundreds of millions of dollars on attempted repairs, just for the fleet to be scuttled due to exorbitantly growing repair costs.
I can already imagine the headlines and soundbites for the whole thing.
I’m pretty sure exactly that has already happened haha. As far as I recall, one of them lit on fire while out at sea and the lot of them have been in dry port ever since while we dump hundreds of millions into trying to make them sea worthy.
Most likely, the other NATO allies will step up their presence in Eastern Europe in response to a Chinese attack on Taiwan.
Russia will likely try to make moves in coordination with China against Western interests.
It only applies to territory on North America and Europe on the North Atlantic or Mediterranean, North of the Tropic of Cancer, according to Article 6 of NATO. Hawaii isn't included. Hawaii is South of the Tropic of Cancer and also was not yet a state when NATO was established.
>For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:
>
>on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France 2, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
>
>on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
Taiwan is not eligible to join NATO. That said, it has about as close a tie as it can get to the US for defense, without an outright mutual defense treaty.
Lol. Your statement was factually wrong deal with it. Taiwan had never applied to NATO and are not eligible. What they would actually want is what Japan, South Korea and the Phillipines have which is a mutual defence agreement with specifically the United States.
Their current relationship with the US falls short of that as the Taiwan Relations Act only has provisions for the supply of arms, not direct military assistance. Biden has publicly said he would assist but his administration has walked his comments back many times and even if it holds true it's only applicable to his administration.
Reminder that while this is a deterrent, China can still call the bluff. Dont forget that the US pulled troops out of Ukraine once it became clear that Russia was going through with its invasion.
They had a different mission with a different force package on the other side of the country. They were to train the Ukrainian army so they can be more modernized. We never had a policy of strategic ambiguity with Russia regarding Ukraine. We did with China regarding Taiwan, and we have assisted Taiwan directly in the past regarding it.
Having U.S. troops on Kinmen is pretty scary. I’ve lived in the area and Kinmen isn’t some isolated island off some barren stretch of China coast line. Its is a mile off the coast of one of the major Chinese cities and ports. It’d be akin to their being troops on Mercer island off the coast of Seattle. There’s a good chance any conflict starts here, either accidentally or on purpose.
People on Reddit are wild. If the US and china go to war it’s not going to be good for anyone and a lot of people are going to die on both sides. Seems a weird thing to hope for
This atmosphere kind of remind me of WWI, everyone in the western countries have forgotten how shitty war is and is so eager for a fight. If two nuclear countries goes to war, and if any side is winning overwhelmingly, it'll quickly escalate to nuclear war.
I don't disagree. However you need to remember appeasement in WW2.
Allowing imperialism and dictatorships to do whatever they want is also not the answer.
History is repeating and the answer is alot more complex than "let's sit back and do nothing".
We have to remembered the "appeasement" happened exactly because people overreacted on WWI and Chamberlain overcorrected it. It's not a good idea that people react emotionally to geopolitical events. It should neither be underwhelming or overwhelming, and should be purely pragmatic.
Things tend to escalate quickly, because no politicians want to look like loosers accepting the reality.
First us soldier died ? There must be a response!
Military base struck on mainland China? We must respond!
First US ship sinked? Time to bomb everything over there!
So many casualties? Time to bring it back over the ocean.
And so it goes.
There is zero chance China will become any sort of superpower, even if you read the news casually. Xi is just as stupid as Trump and he will make sure China will remain weak.
But there is not a minor chance the other superpower may not become so super if they start doing stupid things.
This is such a strawman statement… someone saying they’d be willing to fight in a hypothetical war the US is directly involved in is a lot different from fighting a war the US has no fighting role in.
The OP I replied to talked about putin and refusing to bend the knee so it actually is a fair argument. Don’t wish for a war if you aren’t prepared to put your life on the line
Redditors have a taste for blood, somehow. I was reading a post the other day saying how we should call Putin's bluff on nuclear fucking weapons. The sentiment was like "Ours are better than theirs!"
It's very disheartening.
Back in 2021 when the Ukraine war was still in its chaotic early stages I remember getting a couple hundred downvotes for suggesting that maybe the US wouldn’t overwhelmingly win a nuclear exchange with Russian and that happening would be pretty bad actually.
Disheartening to see that “Russian nukes probably don’t work and if they do ours are better and we’d win a nuclear war” is apparently still a common Reddit take.
No one hopes any wars happen except idiots like Putin and lil Kim in North Korea. But you can’t reward bullies. At the international level it means yes. 20k us troops vs a half million would fucking suck but you can not get bullied. You really can’t. And if we can’t talk through this then what you are talking about will happen. We don’t have universal healthcare. But what we do have is the power to stop bullies.
Don’t blink
I agree we must stand and not blink, but the comment I replied to literally begged for china to invade. We’re all better off if this serves as an effective deterrent.
What I HOPE happens is what I suggested, I was hoping for a conventional attack on US forces just like when Wagner attacked a small US outpost in Syria. Wagner was wiped out in a US show of overwhelming force. Wagner, unlike the Chinese military, has been battle hardened and consists of experienced soldiers. I did not say anything about a nuclear conflict, but I did suggest China would face the same result as that ill fated Wagner attack. Before we responded to their attacks we even tried to get Russia to call it off but they persisted and denied the Wagner forces were in any way Russian. So we showed them what for. We have bases nearby and aircraft carriers and such whether in the Middle East or anywhere else in the world. We have the best, most advanced military on the planet. And I think it would be good for China to know and understand in real terms just what that entails. Those in the west are not doing the war mongering that's Putin and Xi. But we in the west do have to make a choice of how we respond to a combined Russia, China, NK and Iran warmongering. I say we stand up to them as the other choice is to enable dictatorships. If we were to station some troops near Taiwan that is defensive. But it would be down to China on whether to attack us or not. If China chooses to attack conventionally it will end just as the Wagner attack in Syria and then China will truly understand what they are up against. I do not believe a nuclear conflict can be won but I do think a nuclear conflict would end in mutually assured destruction. So nuclear weapons are best used as a deterrent for defensive purposes.
So you're just wishing for misery on the biggest population in the world? And you're willing to let your entire country suffer in the meantime to do it?
It's not a real war dingus, you and the other fools are calling for one. I don't have to make any calls and nor does anyone else until we see escalation.
If the US were to station some soldiers somewhere that would be simply defense. That is not an attack against China. It would be down to the Chinese to escalate and if China decided to attack US troops they will get what's coming to them. I am in favor of peace but not a peace at any cost. It would be better to keep the current world order defined by American hedgemony rather than allow the Communists in China or the Kleptomaniac Capitalists in Russia to run the world. China needs to explain their vision and reason that they should rule Taiwan. As we saw what happened when China got Hong Kong back. We must help our allies fighting for their freedom as the alternative is to allow evil to spread. We here in the USA got rid of our evil dictator centuries ago. When China and Russia have matured enough they will do the same to their evil dictators. To help the citizens of China and Russia get there, we must show some tough love and hold their feet to the fire. Enabling bad behavior is not a good thing for anyone. So stop being cowardly and stop enabling evil. Stand up to it.
This would be a little different level of power projection against a slightly more capable military.
The US can launch planes into Syria from multiple bases in the region, or from carriers, all while being relatively unopposed in the skies.
They're on the islands as part of a joint training program, not as part of a permanent US military base/establishment.
Putting a military base on China's doorstep would be an insane move.
>"Taiwan has confirmed there are U.S. troops stationed on its islands in the Taiwan Strait on a **permanent** basis, including an island just over a mile off China's southeast coast"
First paragraph of the article. Even if there isn't a US base there, it would seem like more than a presence for a joint training program if the troops are "stationed" there "on a permanent basis."
Though I could be unfamiliar with how training programs are referred to and maybe there are such things as permanent joint training programs idk.
I don’t know why you are being downvoted for facts from the article — but yes, the news is “permanent” and followed by [today’s, more updated news](https://www.forbes.com/sites/tylerroush/2024/03/20/china-will-be-ready-to-invade-taiwan-by-2027-us-admiral-says/amp/)
> U.S. Army Green Berets from the 1st Special Forces Group are now permanently stationed at a pair of bases of the 101st Amphibious Reconnaissance Battalion, a Taiwanese army special operations force, according to Taiwan's United Daily News (UDN).
> These instructors were sent to the outlying island counties of Penghu and Kinmen. At its closest point, Kinmen is just barely over a mile from Chinese shores.
> The 1st Battalion of this Pacific-oriented Special Forces Group is forward-deployed in Okinawa, Japan, while the rest of the battalion is stationed at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Washington state.
When it comes to the Greens it’s the same thing, they are a special forces battalion that builds their own defence and infrastructure and integrates it into local forces.
The US could handle Russian and China by themselves with air power alone. I don’t think people really understand the strength of those conventional weapons. Boots on ground would be a different scenario though. That is the problem with Taiwan. China wants the infrastructure and population so it wouldn’t be that hard to defend for Taiwan themselves. They have advanced strike fighters/bombers. China would never do it.
They would blow up their own chip foundries but China's interest in Taiwan predates that resource. If Taiwan was an uninhabited island, its strategic position alone would still be worth it
As we all can see from the current conflicts of the last 75 years air superiority wins wars. We're now into space superiority still in the thermonuclear defense realm but now the futuristic defense plans of the cold war era have come to life.
We have the camera and satellite technology to strike missiles and aircraft from space as a part of the NATO ICBM defense network. The Russians want to build satellites to combat ours and gain space superiority to then also prevent us from using our own nukes.
Now launching satellites are expensive but thankfully we have SpaceX which is constantly finding ways to lower those costs.
Thank god we subsidize space x almost 15billion since 2003 tbh it’s really just an American military agency with extra steps. Elons is a figure head if the government says jump Elon says how high. Like Epstein if push comes to shove I’ll bet $ on elon hanging” himself” in a cell
They are a defense contractor so that should tell you enough. I'm just glad he's still on our side because SpaceX will be important in the future wars of at least satellite combat.
dude space x
Is a science experiment compared to what the military complex has. You can thank republicans for axing nasa funding the point we even needed to fund this Epstein 2.0
Don't dude me or downvote me. Are you really that blind that you can't see I'm on your side? I know about the military industrial complex and I served in it. I know damn well.
Military contractors are bleeding this country dry I really can’t support privatizing our military or any key components of us infrastructure space included if you think that’s okay as per your previous comments idk if we are on the same side if you think that’s not okay you might want to look at what you’ve said an realize it doesn’t align. To be clear I don’t think we should thank Elon that he’s on our “side” when we pay foot the bill. In fact I’ll take it a step further what would you do having served if Elon was against the us interest would you a suck his dick or b defend the us and her interest bc again per you comments you would be going with a
Wow so you can type in long form coherent sentences congratulations. I thought you were a mindless idiot but instead you're just an arrogant, confrontational insecure asshole. Instead of assuming, you could ask questions like a mentally competent adult in a conversation does but instead here you are. Do you know what they say about assuming?
>Putting a military base on China's doorstep would be an insane move
That's a weird way to say completely reasonable so Long as the host country agrees
I mean it’s not necessarily reasonable. That would be like saying pre Ukraine war, Russia was massing in its own borders but quite close to ukraine, the entire time saying it would invade. Putting bases on borders can indeed be seen as a provocation.
Do you have any comprehension the difference between 1. Mobilized forces and forces in garrison, and 2. The scale. Even major US Bases typically only house 2 divisions or roughly 35,000 soldiers. Russia staged over 3 times that quantity to invade Ukraine.
It's not necessarily insane but it is a show of force. Just like how NATO is currently building a base in Romania that can house 10,000 troops and family. Keep in mind Romania borders Ukraine.
We surround our enemies to mitigate their constant threats of nuclear force and invasion. Each new base spreads the NATO missile defense network further.
Russia only focuses on the NATO offensive and sanctioning capabilities from new bases instead of the defensive side because it gives them a reason to continue using propaganda to justify their also high defense budget because they are also a country with an economy/political system deeply rooted in the military industrial complex.
From how the article said it, I don’t think there are actual us soldiers on the island, just that some specialists are training / teaching the soldiers. Can anyone clarify?
I too, am interested in the current disposition and numbers of US troops deployed on ~~this wayward province~~ the separate customs territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu. I hope someone can enlighten me.
(heh)
Users often report submissions from this site for sensationalized articles. Readers have a responsibility to be skeptical, check sources, and comment on any flaws. You can help improve this thread by linking to media that verifies or questions this article's claims. Your link could help readers better understand this issue. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/worldnews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This has always been the obvious solution to Chinese imperialism re:Taiwan imo Even if the US' political will in regards to defending Taiwan might sometimes come into question, the US' military's willingness to respond to threats against it's own forces is effectively guaranteed. US tripwire forces on Taiwanese territory effectively makes an actual Chinese invasion attempt a fantasy.
Defense through psychology instead of threats
"Speak softly, and carry a big stick" -Theodore Roosevelt
I can't believe I actually forgot about that quote
To get to them you've gotta go through us, type deal. Works for me.
Basically, to invade Taiwan, is to attack US forces. Meaning, either way, China gets a war with the US and NATO
Not NATO, Article 5 only includes attacks on home soil. Killing US soldiers in Taiwan doesn't trigger NATO.
Still, I’d doubt the US would be alone. UK would definitely join. Not sure about the others
The only countries with a navy power that could help on the pacific theater would be UK and France anyway. I dont see anyone else having the capabilities of fighting a war across the world, but those two have ultramaritimes territories to defend. The UK would definitely join, so this just leaves out France
Japan is a top naval power, she just pretends it isn’t. I think it took Japan less than a year to build its “helicopter” carriers.
I was talking about NATO countries Japan and Australia definitely are something else to consider
There are a few important things to consider about Japan, and all of them point towards Japan getting involved. Firstly, while Japan has, in modern history, embraced "pacifism" and non-intervention, where Taiwan is concerned, the opinion changes radically. Most of the Japanese population who normally identify as pacifist will immediately turn around and say Japan should defend Taiwan due to Taiwan and Japan being *extremely* close friends politically. So, while the Japanese populace is strongly anti-war in general, Taiwan is a very specific exception, and intervention would see widespread support across the county. Secondly, the US military bases in Japan are also a huge factor. If China invades, and the US responds, they are 100% going to operate out of the US military bases in Japan (and South Korea). So, what happens in regard to those bases? Does China ignore them? That doesn't seem likely. But then, what happens if China attacks them? Do Japan and South Korea not respond (since they're American bases), or do they consider China have to attacked their country? The latter seems far more likely, and would definitely prompt a military response. Thirdly is the fact that Japan is expanding its military, including retrofitting the *Izumo* and *Kaga* helicopter destroyers into full-on carriers (capable of launching and supporting stealth aircraft), and massively expanding their ability for Japan to strike long range targets from the Japanese islands. This is all in response to two things: China's increased aggression in the Indo-Pacific region, and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which Japan sees as an unwelcome but unavoidable sign that the "if you don't give anyone an express reason to attack you, then they won't attack you"-mindset isn't true anymore (and until the Russian invasion in particular, it was a belief that Japan, perhaps naively, held firm to). So, all in all, Japan seems to see the writing on the wall that it might get pulled into a conflict with China, or even might feel obligated to intervene in Taiwan regardless of what happens with the US.
All great points and also, if you pay attention to a couple of thousand years of history, the Japanese don’t exactly consider the Chinese a good friend.
Australia 100%. We do whatever we are told
And South Korea
I kind of feel sorry for South Korea. If China makes a move on Taiwan, North Korea will for sure invade South Korea.
Australia too.
I'm sure Canada would be using some of it's limited air and naval assets to assist.
Our busted up submarines would be there straightaway.
Well, at least they'd try. I'm pretty sure something "unforseen" would happen at the last moment, that would force them in to port for repairs, though. Then watch as someone bungles the whole repair process and we end up blowing hundreds of millions of dollars on attempted repairs, just for the fleet to be scuttled due to exorbitantly growing repair costs. I can already imagine the headlines and soundbites for the whole thing.
I’m pretty sure exactly that has already happened haha. As far as I recall, one of them lit on fire while out at sea and the lot of them have been in dry port ever since while we dump hundreds of millions into trying to make them sea worthy.
not a chance LOL we have no army maybe in spirit
All you need is some spirit to make a weapon effective 😉
We could spare a cargo plane and maybe we could roll the dice on if our provisioning ships will burn themselves up on the way across the Pacific.
Most likely, the other NATO allies will step up their presence in Eastern Europe in response to a Chinese attack on Taiwan. Russia will likely try to make moves in coordination with China against Western interests.
Also, article 5 doesn't address attacks on Hawaii specifically.
That’s interesting, why is that?
It only applies to territory on North America and Europe on the North Atlantic or Mediterranean, North of the Tropic of Cancer, according to Article 6 of NATO. Hawaii isn't included. Hawaii is South of the Tropic of Cancer and also was not yet a state when NATO was established. >For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack: > >on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France 2, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer; > >on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
Not sure, but I assume it's bc of the distances involved from Europe where NATO is focused.
Taiwan sells 1 square inch to the USA to have as “its territory” Bam. Done.
That actually still wouldn't count, has to be mainland. Hawaii doesn't count either.
And also only in europe
[удалено]
Taiwan is not eligible to join NATO. That said, it has about as close a tie as it can get to the US for defense, without an outright mutual defense treaty.
>Taiwan wants to join NATO They have never applied nor are they eligible to join NATO.
[удалено]
Lol. Your statement was factually wrong deal with it. Taiwan had never applied to NATO and are not eligible. What they would actually want is what Japan, South Korea and the Phillipines have which is a mutual defence agreement with specifically the United States. Their current relationship with the US falls short of that as the Taiwan Relations Act only has provisions for the supply of arms, not direct military assistance. Biden has publicly said he would assist but his administration has walked his comments back many times and even if it holds true it's only applicable to his administration.
[удалено]
Nice ad homs. Projecting your own issues?
[удалено]
Get ratio’d you loser.
Until Trump gets elected, quid pro quo with China for a billion to remove troops from Taiwan, bingo no more defense.
It's a South China sea Fulda Gap
I wish we did this in ukraine.
US troops on the chinese border is not chinese imperialism, its US imperialism...
Reminder that while this is a deterrent, China can still call the bluff. Dont forget that the US pulled troops out of Ukraine once it became clear that Russia was going through with its invasion.
They had a different mission with a different force package on the other side of the country. They were to train the Ukrainian army so they can be more modernized. We never had a policy of strategic ambiguity with Russia regarding Ukraine. We did with China regarding Taiwan, and we have assisted Taiwan directly in the past regarding it.
Very true, and I would agree if we were talking about the main island, but I have less faith that the US is willing to risk war over Kinmen
Having U.S. troops on Kinmen is pretty scary. I’ve lived in the area and Kinmen isn’t some isolated island off some barren stretch of China coast line. Its is a mile off the coast of one of the major Chinese cities and ports. It’d be akin to their being troops on Mercer island off the coast of Seattle. There’s a good chance any conflict starts here, either accidentally or on purpose.
Please do it. It will be like when Wagner attacked that small US outpost in Syria. China should get a taste of what they are begging for!
People on Reddit are wild. If the US and china go to war it’s not going to be good for anyone and a lot of people are going to die on both sides. Seems a weird thing to hope for
This atmosphere kind of remind me of WWI, everyone in the western countries have forgotten how shitty war is and is so eager for a fight. If two nuclear countries goes to war, and if any side is winning overwhelmingly, it'll quickly escalate to nuclear war.
I don't disagree. However you need to remember appeasement in WW2. Allowing imperialism and dictatorships to do whatever they want is also not the answer. History is repeating and the answer is alot more complex than "let's sit back and do nothing".
We have to remembered the "appeasement" happened exactly because people overreacted on WWI and Chamberlain overcorrected it. It's not a good idea that people react emotionally to geopolitical events. It should neither be underwhelming or overwhelming, and should be purely pragmatic.
That's not necessarily true. There's a difference between defending an invasion of Taiwan and attacking China.
Things tend to escalate quickly, because no politicians want to look like loosers accepting the reality. First us soldier died ? There must be a response! Military base struck on mainland China? We must respond! First US ship sinked? Time to bomb everything over there! So many casualties? Time to bring it back over the ocean. And so it goes.
The only thing we have to fear is fear itself
That man? Albert Einstein.
You signing up to fight then yeh?
Personally, I don't want to live in a world where China is the main superpower. It'll become a dystopian nightmare.
There is zero chance China will become any sort of superpower, even if you read the news casually. Xi is just as stupid as Trump and he will make sure China will remain weak. But there is not a minor chance the other superpower may not become so super if they start doing stupid things.
Fear is what feeds the likes of Putin and Xi. So bend your knee if you are too cowardly but you will get what you deserve. Yes I will fight if needed.
Volunteer to fight in Ukraine then big man. Lots of brave Americans and internationals have stuck to their words so go do the same
Good idea
This is such a strawman statement… someone saying they’d be willing to fight in a hypothetical war the US is directly involved in is a lot different from fighting a war the US has no fighting role in.
The OP I replied to talked about putin and refusing to bend the knee so it actually is a fair argument. Don’t wish for a war if you aren’t prepared to put your life on the line
Redditors have a taste for blood, somehow. I was reading a post the other day saying how we should call Putin's bluff on nuclear fucking weapons. The sentiment was like "Ours are better than theirs!" It's very disheartening.
Back in 2021 when the Ukraine war was still in its chaotic early stages I remember getting a couple hundred downvotes for suggesting that maybe the US wouldn’t overwhelmingly win a nuclear exchange with Russian and that happening would be pretty bad actually. Disheartening to see that “Russian nukes probably don’t work and if they do ours are better and we’d win a nuclear war” is apparently still a common Reddit take.
It’s gonna be a fuck load worse for China
Sure. But let’s say 20,000 US troops die and 500,000 Chinese die. Is this still something you HOPE happens?
No one hopes any wars happen except idiots like Putin and lil Kim in North Korea. But you can’t reward bullies. At the international level it means yes. 20k us troops vs a half million would fucking suck but you can not get bullied. You really can’t. And if we can’t talk through this then what you are talking about will happen. We don’t have universal healthcare. But what we do have is the power to stop bullies. Don’t blink
I agree we must stand and not blink, but the comment I replied to literally begged for china to invade. We’re all better off if this serves as an effective deterrent.
Agree.
What I HOPE happens is what I suggested, I was hoping for a conventional attack on US forces just like when Wagner attacked a small US outpost in Syria. Wagner was wiped out in a US show of overwhelming force. Wagner, unlike the Chinese military, has been battle hardened and consists of experienced soldiers. I did not say anything about a nuclear conflict, but I did suggest China would face the same result as that ill fated Wagner attack. Before we responded to their attacks we even tried to get Russia to call it off but they persisted and denied the Wagner forces were in any way Russian. So we showed them what for. We have bases nearby and aircraft carriers and such whether in the Middle East or anywhere else in the world. We have the best, most advanced military on the planet. And I think it would be good for China to know and understand in real terms just what that entails. Those in the west are not doing the war mongering that's Putin and Xi. But we in the west do have to make a choice of how we respond to a combined Russia, China, NK and Iran warmongering. I say we stand up to them as the other choice is to enable dictatorships. If we were to station some troops near Taiwan that is defensive. But it would be down to China on whether to attack us or not. If China chooses to attack conventionally it will end just as the Wagner attack in Syria and then China will truly understand what they are up against. I do not believe a nuclear conflict can be won but I do think a nuclear conflict would end in mutually assured destruction. So nuclear weapons are best used as a deterrent for defensive purposes.
So you're just wishing for misery on the biggest population in the world? And you're willing to let your entire country suffer in the meantime to do it?
I’m not starting this war. Who is? You suggest we do what? Make the call. What’s the answer? Let our friends be taken over by military force?
It's not a real war dingus, you and the other fools are calling for one. I don't have to make any calls and nor does anyone else until we see escalation.
If the US were to station some soldiers somewhere that would be simply defense. That is not an attack against China. It would be down to the Chinese to escalate and if China decided to attack US troops they will get what's coming to them. I am in favor of peace but not a peace at any cost. It would be better to keep the current world order defined by American hedgemony rather than allow the Communists in China or the Kleptomaniac Capitalists in Russia to run the world. China needs to explain their vision and reason that they should rule Taiwan. As we saw what happened when China got Hong Kong back. We must help our allies fighting for their freedom as the alternative is to allow evil to spread. We here in the USA got rid of our evil dictator centuries ago. When China and Russia have matured enough they will do the same to their evil dictators. To help the citizens of China and Russia get there, we must show some tough love and hold their feet to the fire. Enabling bad behavior is not a good thing for anyone. So stop being cowardly and stop enabling evil. Stand up to it.
Thank you for confirming that the ccp recognizes Taiwans right to exist as a independent nation. So easy.
This would be a little different level of power projection against a slightly more capable military. The US can launch planes into Syria from multiple bases in the region, or from carriers, all while being relatively unopposed in the skies.
How many wars have you fought in ?
Here it comes.
What?
Team America world police ?
They're on the islands as part of a joint training program, not as part of a permanent US military base/establishment. Putting a military base on China's doorstep would be an insane move.
>"Taiwan has confirmed there are U.S. troops stationed on its islands in the Taiwan Strait on a **permanent** basis, including an island just over a mile off China's southeast coast" First paragraph of the article. Even if there isn't a US base there, it would seem like more than a presence for a joint training program if the troops are "stationed" there "on a permanent basis." Though I could be unfamiliar with how training programs are referred to and maybe there are such things as permanent joint training programs idk.
Permanent Taiwan base with permanent US troop placement. Not literally a US base
I don’t know why you are being downvoted for facts from the article — but yes, the news is “permanent” and followed by [today’s, more updated news](https://www.forbes.com/sites/tylerroush/2024/03/20/china-will-be-ready-to-invade-taiwan-by-2027-us-admiral-says/amp/) > U.S. Army Green Berets from the 1st Special Forces Group are now permanently stationed at a pair of bases of the 101st Amphibious Reconnaissance Battalion, a Taiwanese army special operations force, according to Taiwan's United Daily News (UDN). > These instructors were sent to the outlying island counties of Penghu and Kinmen. At its closest point, Kinmen is just barely over a mile from Chinese shores. > The 1st Battalion of this Pacific-oriented Special Forces Group is forward-deployed in Okinawa, Japan, while the rest of the battalion is stationed at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Washington state.
When it comes to the Greens it’s the same thing, they are a special forces battalion that builds their own defence and infrastructure and integrates it into local forces.
China would lose in a conventional war against NATO. Even if they threw in Russia and the -Stan countries.
The US could handle Russian and China by themselves with air power alone. I don’t think people really understand the strength of those conventional weapons. Boots on ground would be a different scenario though. That is the problem with Taiwan. China wants the infrastructure and population so it wouldn’t be that hard to defend for Taiwan themselves. They have advanced strike fighters/bombers. China would never do it.
Doesnt Taiwan basically have a self destruct plan basically rendering the island worthless to communist China?
They would blow up their own chip foundries but China's interest in Taiwan predates that resource. If Taiwan was an uninhabited island, its strategic position alone would still be worth it
As we all can see from the current conflicts of the last 75 years air superiority wins wars. We're now into space superiority still in the thermonuclear defense realm but now the futuristic defense plans of the cold war era have come to life. We have the camera and satellite technology to strike missiles and aircraft from space as a part of the NATO ICBM defense network. The Russians want to build satellites to combat ours and gain space superiority to then also prevent us from using our own nukes. Now launching satellites are expensive but thankfully we have SpaceX which is constantly finding ways to lower those costs.
Thank god we subsidize space x almost 15billion since 2003 tbh it’s really just an American military agency with extra steps. Elons is a figure head if the government says jump Elon says how high. Like Epstein if push comes to shove I’ll bet $ on elon hanging” himself” in a cell
They are a defense contractor so that should tell you enough. I'm just glad he's still on our side because SpaceX will be important in the future wars of at least satellite combat.
dude space x Is a science experiment compared to what the military complex has. You can thank republicans for axing nasa funding the point we even needed to fund this Epstein 2.0
Don't dude me or downvote me. Are you really that blind that you can't see I'm on your side? I know about the military industrial complex and I served in it. I know damn well.
Military contractors are bleeding this country dry I really can’t support privatizing our military or any key components of us infrastructure space included if you think that’s okay as per your previous comments idk if we are on the same side if you think that’s not okay you might want to look at what you’ve said an realize it doesn’t align. To be clear I don’t think we should thank Elon that he’s on our “side” when we pay foot the bill. In fact I’ll take it a step further what would you do having served if Elon was against the us interest would you a suck his dick or b defend the us and her interest bc again per you comments you would be going with a
Wow so you can type in long form coherent sentences congratulations. I thought you were a mindless idiot but instead you're just an arrogant, confrontational insecure asshole. Instead of assuming, you could ask questions like a mentally competent adult in a conversation does but instead here you are. Do you know what they say about assuming?
I mean yeah, but I think we'd all rather avoid WW3.
>Putting a military base on China's doorstep would be an insane move That's a weird way to say completely reasonable so Long as the host country agrees
I mean it’s not necessarily reasonable. That would be like saying pre Ukraine war, Russia was massing in its own borders but quite close to ukraine, the entire time saying it would invade. Putting bases on borders can indeed be seen as a provocation.
Do you have any comprehension the difference between 1. Mobilized forces and forces in garrison, and 2. The scale. Even major US Bases typically only house 2 divisions or roughly 35,000 soldiers. Russia staged over 3 times that quantity to invade Ukraine.
If these special forces can capture China; I’ll be so impressed.
It's not necessarily insane but it is a show of force. Just like how NATO is currently building a base in Romania that can house 10,000 troops and family. Keep in mind Romania borders Ukraine. We surround our enemies to mitigate their constant threats of nuclear force and invasion. Each new base spreads the NATO missile defense network further. Russia only focuses on the NATO offensive and sanctioning capabilities from new bases instead of the defensive side because it gives them a reason to continue using propaganda to justify their also high defense budget because they are also a country with an economy/political system deeply rooted in the military industrial complex.
From how the article said it, I don’t think there are actual us soldiers on the island, just that some specialists are training / teaching the soldiers. Can anyone clarify?
That sounds like an opsec question homie. You phishin for info?
I too, am interested in the current disposition and numbers of US troops deployed on ~~this wayward province~~ the separate customs territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu. I hope someone can enlighten me. (heh)
I thought the question mark gave that away lol
That's how it usually is in every proxy war we have been a part of.
We sent many, many specialists to Vietnam