Battle for Taiwan.

[Bigduke6]

Juan,

Why, because of U.S. "credibility". Of course. The U.S. has told the world a free and democratic Taiwan is an important part of U.S. foreign policy. The U.S. has supported this position for decades. I am not sure if there is a hard military security pace - I think there is but I am not sure - but for the U.S. to waffle its way out of opposing a Chinese invasion would be disastrous for existing security relationships with Thailand, Australia, and so forth. Besides there's the "domino" effect to worry about; if Taiwan goes, can Chinese incorporation of North Korea and Laos, for example, be that far behind?

None of which makes any sense if the U.S. is pursuing a foreign policy based on U.S. public interest. As you rightly point out, it is senseless to fight China over Taiwan at the present or in the near future. But unless the U.S. is willing to throw decades of commitments to its allies out the window, it doesn't have that option if China decides to take over the island and Taiwan doesn't want it.

As to distance, the U.S. has a pretty sorry record of picking fights about as far away from its homeland as you can get.

[Peter Cairns]

Bigduke6,

i tend to agree credibility would be a big factor in the uS decision making process. In Kosovo Tony Blair made one of the reasons for taking action, "Nato's Credibility", in that it didn't act people would question it's resolve.

This lead to the bizarre situation of an alliance established to protect it's members territory by collective response from external attack, attacking an external territory to prove it was defensive.....

However going back to 1 to 5, the issue isn't whether you think there will be a conflict ( which I agree is unlikely), but what you think it would be like, and what would make the best game.

I'd like to here Steves view, but I can understand that he might think it would be seen as some kind of committment of BF's part.

Peter.

[Sixxkiller]

Hi guys, cant believe I missed this topic.

I only read the first two pages but if China does indeed move to reunify, and ties up the 7th Fleet for any length of time, you can bet that it will lead to destablization on the Korean Pennisula which would be far more disasterous than losing Taiwan as an ally.

I think the North Koreans will certainly take advantage of the clear skies and launch a major offensive, especially if the US keeps its plans to shift most of the 37k troops to other theatres. The South Koreans wouldnt last more than a week even if we were able to land an airborne division inside of 18 hours.

Now I do not think anything will happen until after the 2008 Olympics, but I think China is trying to build up its forces so its bite matches its bark.

-Ray

[Neutrino 123]

South Korea has a very competent military. They could certainly hold even without any U.S. assistance.

Also, Taiwan is not traditionally part of China by any reasonable standard. Just because China says something doesn't make it true.

[Sixxkiller]

Well I spent 4 years in South Korea training ROK troops and I beg to differ. Certain groups the ROK have are competent but they would have a major problem with any large scale invasion especially with the large size of what lies on the other side of the border.

Also you are looking at a fanatical enemy invading a country where many do not wish to fight but to reunify. I think many people underestimate the North Koreans because of how silly thier leader looks to the outside world.

-Ray

[Peter Cairns]

Neutrino 123,

According to the CIA world book Taiwan was Chinese before 1895 when Japan occupied it, but China got it back in 1945.

Wikipedia states that it's been Chinese more or less constantly since before the 15th century, so i don't know how you can't claim it as traditionallly part of China.

Wikipedia taiwan

[Peter Cairns]

Meanwhile back on Taiwan...

BBC News 8th Feb 2006.

Peter.

[lucero1148]

Missed a couple of days here and things seem to have kooled down bit.

Re. Kool-aid drinkers the term was coined when the followers of an American religious cult based in Guiana drank kool-aid laced with cyanide. I forget how many died but it was around 100 including entire familes with their children.

If China should ever invade Taiwan the US is comitted by treaty to defend Taiwan and I believe it will include incremental buildups of defensive force. First is the use of air and sea power to repulse an invasion. Second if that fails and Taiwan is invaded with ground troops then a MEF wuld be sent in with the army to follow.

If war broke out Japan I think would sit on the sidelines as actively neutral inthat they wouldn't get into the fight but would be a conduit of supplies and materials for the US into Taiwan.

S Korea would be dragged in only if the north invaded in turn. Sixkiller you make some valid points there but I think an invasion might changed the current social values of the "peaceniks" in the south to put some steel into their backbone. Still it's all hypothetical and an interesting one at that.

[Abbott]

Originally posted by lucero1148:

Missed a couple of days here and things seem to have kooled down bit.

Re. Kool-aid drinkers the term was coined when the followers of an American religious cult based in Guiana drank kool-aid laced with cyanide. I forget how many died but it was around 100 including entire familes with their children.

In 1978, 913 followers of Jim Jones and the Peoples Temple committed a mass suicide by drinking Kool-aid laced with cyanide.

[John Kettler]

Actually, it was punch, those involved were forced to drink it, and those that escaped to the jungle to avoid enforced poisoning were hunted down by SpecOps and elite units from the U.S. and U.K. One greatly disturbed participant in this brutal cover up of an operational, large scale CIA mind control experiment that was compromised was working on/wrote a book about it, taking as his title the concluding radio message: "The last n*****'s dead!"

Sources confirming this horrific scenario include the highly decorated Lt. Col., Ret., James "Bo" Gritz (former commander U.S. Special Forces Central and South America), his buddies in the community, various independent researchers, and an internal briefing on U.S. mind control operations given to black project researcher Norio Hayakawa by pro Constitution groups in the Intel Community and found as an appendix to his UFOS, THE GRAND DECEPTION, AND THE NEW WORLD ORDER.

While it may make for a certain political wit, the referenced term is NOT based on the facts, rather, a carefully cultivated, disinformation based public perception.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Beastttt]

I think it is more that it denies China(stops communism)

the US would rather see democracy spread than communism(far easier to deal with someone who's values are closer to your own)

also it is a step closer to japan if china deicided it wanted to add japan to the fold or avenge the past(some people cannot get past or over what has happened in the past)

Originally posted by juan_gigante:

Explain for me, Tagwyn (or anyone), how defending Taiwan is crucial to the US's international security. Please show how China reunifing with a tiny island that traditionally is a part of mainland China and is far from US shores or US interests will lead to harm to the US, or anyone anywhere. Tell me why a single American soldier should die to maintain an independant Taiwan.

[Neutrino 123]

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

Neutrino 123,

According to the CIA world book Taiwan was Chinese before 1895 when Japan occupied it, but China got it back in 1945.

Wikipedia states that it's been Chinese more or less constantly since before the 15th century, so i don't know how you can't claim it as traditionallly part of China.

Wikipedia taiwan

In the history section, the first paragraph says that the Chinese may have known about it in the Han dynasty, and that the explorer Zheng He visited in the early 1400s. So far, this certainly does not count as ownership. Up to this point, the entire population is composed of ethnically distinct peoples.

The dutch then colonized Taiwan, and brought in some Chinese laborers, who mixed with the local population. Cheng Cheng-Kung defeated the Dutch, but he was considered a pirate to the Chinese, since he was a Ming loyalist, and the Chings had taken over.

In the late 1600s the Chinese took the island back, and expelled most of the Chinese people living there. However, over the next two centuries, many Chinese migrated to Taiwan. The area was, however, outside of governemnt control. The Manchus tried to assert control, but the natives resisted fiercly (I think some immigrants did too, since they mixed with the native population in the western areas). The Taiwanese did alot of pirating, so China was forced to say that they had no control over Taiwan when some Western nations complained.

Finally, in 1887, the Manchus declared Taiwan to be one of their provinces, but were kicked out eight years later, permantly ceding Taiwan to the Japanese.

Thus, at this point, China gave up its recent claim to the island. The population of the island is alot like today, composed of mixed people of Chinese and native decent (considered ethnic Taiwanese) (though there are a portion of ethnic Chinese too due to the Chinese Nationalist conquest of the island). I really don't see how China could use any of the history to this point to claim Taiwan as their territory. At least, not anymore then European countries claiming their former colonies (especially Spain and Portugal in the Americas).

Originally posted by Sixxkiller:

Well I spent 4 years in South Korea training ROK troops and I beg to differ. Certain groups the ROK have are competent but they would have a major problem with any large scale invasion especially with the large size of what lies on the other side of the border.

Also you are looking at a fanatical enemy invading a country where many do not wish to fight but to reunify. I think many people underestimate the North Koreans because of how silly thier leader looks to the outside world.

-Ray

You say the South Koreans are not always very good, but is this compared to the U.S., or North Korea? I would think that, though the North Koreans are indoctrinated to be fanatical, their troop quality would be inferior to the south due to their economy combined with the size of their military. Remember also, the South Koreans want to unify, but not under the north! Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the general opinion of the south is assuming that the north would eventually join them, not the other way around.

The south spends thrice the amount the north does on the military, and they have access to better equipment too. Meanwhile, in terms of numbers, the army of the north does not outnumber the South Korean army by even 2:1. The terrain in South Korea is also fairly rugged, making for good defense.

[Sixxkiller]

Nuetrino,

Well that sounds good the spending that the ROK spends on its national defense, but even with even double what they spend now I would absolutely state that among "civilized" nstions they have to be the worst man for man standing army in the world.

Also thier whole defensive structure is based on a joint defensive system with the US, they are already outmanned 2-1 by DPRK and about 3-1 in reserves. So techological advantages will not make much of a difference especially with the DPRK having by far the largest special operations force thought to be over 100 thousand or more. Thats more than double the US' capability in peace time, not to mention the levels being under deployment at any given time.

What i think the largest disadvantage for the ROK is that the heart and soul of Korea has and always will be Seoul. That being said, the DPKR has the first strike option of using artillery strikes that could number a few hundred thousand shells per hour and could be sustained for a few hours. While the ROK has excellent evacuation options, the fleeing populace on the roadways would severely limit reinforcement for the first 2-3 days.

Its actually pretty sobering to think about this. Hope we never have to see if this comes about.

-Ray

[Peter Cairns]

My moneys on the south, in the fifty years since the last korean conflict weapons and tactics have moved on hugely, but the norths tactics haven't.

If you had a the best troop s from the American civil war and five to one advantage in 1914, they'd still be wiped out by HMG's in no mans land.

A cluster bomb will kill or maim everyone exposed in it's dispersal zone, and if thats a platoon of US troops it will be fifty, and if it's a Battalion of North Korean it will be five hundred.

Peter.

[xerxes]

Your wrong Peter.

Look at it this way. The north koreans are advancing towards women, food, money, high speed Internet, cold beer and hot kim chi.

The south doesn't stand a chance unless they strategically pull back and wait for their decadent culture to assimilate the attacking hordes.

[Sergei]

South Korea would win. At least if their Protoss and Zerg allies arrive on time.

[lucero1148]

Hot kim-chee? It's not served hot but at room temperture. It is always spicy hot though.

Aside from that considering the South and the US Forces have a sophisticated network of electronics to detect and return counter battery fire acurately and within minutes or down to seconds it is quite possible that the North would have their own artillery systematically taken apart.

A first strike by the north would have to take out

both air forces and the artillery within the first hour to give them an edge for any kind of advance.

That's not a sure thing but supposing your estimates are right and the ROK troops are no better than conscripts that still leaves the US troops on the trip wire. How fast would the US troops (2nd Armor?) fold? Would it be a return to the 1st Korean invasion?

[Peter Cairns]

My experience of the Souths troops tends to be from the few I've met and with people who were in Vietnam who saw them ( probably less than a dozen all tolled).

Generally people said they were pretty damned good, so I don't think that you can judge a whole army by the quality of conscripts in basic tarining, any more than you can right off the US Marine Corp, by watching Idaho National Guardsmen on there first excercise.

As to thye fanatical North, sure like the Russains, and indeed the Iraqi's, they put on a good parade, and those set piece military excercises look impressive, but that doesn't mean they can fight a modern integrated combined arms battle.

If they try ( as they seem to be geared towards) too defeat the south with the tactics of the last korean conflict, then the Souths defences which are designed to deal with exactly that will make mince meat of them.

Peter.

[FAI]

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

...

If they try ( as they seem to be geared towards) too defeat the south with the tactics of the last korean conflict, then the Souths defences which are designed to deal with exactly that will make mince meat of them.

Peter.

I too believe that ROK's military is up to Western standards. But the problem is we don't know much about DPRK's actual military capabilities. Anyone has the North's OOB?

[Peter Cairns]

FAI,

this is a pretty good over view, wouldn't treat it as gospel, but not much seems to be at odds with what you'd find elsewhere, though why I am putting in to my own Taiwan thread I don't know....

Global Security, North Korea.

Anyway what are your swers to 1 to 5.

Peter.

[FAI]

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

FAI,

this is a pretty good over view, wouldn't treat it as gospel, but not much seems to be at odds with what you'd find elsewhere, though why I am putting in to my own Taiwan thread I don't know....

Global Security, North Korea.

Anyway what are your swers to 1 to 5.

Peter.

B, China isn't ready yet to take Taiwan with their own initiative, but will likely to snatch the opportunity if it arises regardless of their readiness

A, the people is split, so I guess so is the Army

B, but elements of the Army will put up a fight, at least the loyalist

B, Indonesia, Korea and Japan are not in a position to challenge China's might, better stay neutral (formally)

B, though am not so sure, the US will be initially hesitant to commit ground troops, probably mostly due to insufficient number available on short notice.

[Peter Cairns]

Okay so the count so far is,

B,B,A,B,B 3votes.

B,A,B,B,B 1 vote.

Peter.

[Dogface]

kettler you crack me up.

[Peter Cairns]

Dogface,

Don't say that about kettler you fool, you'll be tracked down and killed by elite Units of the US and UK military. I critcised them a while back and they tracked me down and killed me.

Iif it hadn't been for Alien Genetic Re-animation I wouldn't be here today....

But I am not supposed to be talking about this so keep it quiet.

There I go messing up my own thread again.

Peter.

[Dogface]

Ahh not to worry there Peter, I have my own contacts in the super secret squirrel society and have already put out a contract on the contractors of the contract that is now on my head. or somefink. Either that or I'm already dead and just dont know it yet.

oh and I answer

B A B R A