What does China achieve from invading Taiwan?
-
Sorry tankie. If a bunch of people leave a country they shouldn't be considered property. Re-unification is Chinese propaganda. Most of Taiwan doesn't want that.
While i agree with you. Taiwan is none of the usa business and usa involvment is a security risk to china
-
While i agree with you. Taiwan is none of the usa business and usa involvment is a security risk to china
It's up to Taiwan to decide who they want to be allies with.
-
In what way..? Taiwan has been a part of all Chinese states for centuries.
So? Before Qing dynasty taiwan was not part of china and became part through conquests. Taiwan has the right to be a separate entity what they dfon't have right to is to becone the usa puppet and threten china security and the interests that they have right to
-
It's up to Taiwan to decide who they want to be allies with.
Not by threatening china security . Security concerns is the right of every single country. Isn't hypocrital that one side has the right to support allies unconditionally but the other side not?
-
I understand the historical significance since the nationalists retreated to Taiwan at the end of the Chinese Civil War.
Back then, and for perhaps the middle part of the 20th century, there was a threat of a government in exile claiming mainland China. Historically, then, there was your impetus for invasion.
However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.
Another reason people give: control the supply of chips. Yet, wouldn’t the Fabs, given their sensitive nature, be likely to be significantly destroyed in the process of an invasion?
Even still, China now has its own academia and engineering, and is larger than Taiwan. Hence, even without the corporate espionage mainland China is known for, wouldn’t investing in their burgeoning semiconductor industry make more sense, rather than spending that money on war?
People mention that taking Taiwan would be a breakout from the “containment” imposed by the ring of U.S. allies in the region.
Yet while taking Taiwan would mean access to deep-water ports, it’s not as though Taiwan would ever pose a threat to Chinese power projection—their stance is wholly defensive. If China decided to pull an “America” and send a carrier to the Middle East or something, no one would stop them and risk a war.
So what is it then? Is it just for national pride and glory? Is it to create a legacy for their leadership? The gamble just doesn’t really seem worth it.
Anyway, appreciate your opinions thanks!
wrote on last edited by [email protected]It's a staging area for the US that's very close to China, so there's that reason strategically. But really, there's not a lot of reason to which is why they haven't done so already. China is, as far as I'm aware, perfectly happy with the traditional US approach towards Taiwan, a policy of "strategic ambiguity" that doesn't officially recognize Taiwan as independent (while informally supporting them) and which has kept the peace for many decades. China does not gain much from provoking a military confrontation with the US, as things stand, China is winning the peace through economic development while the US is going all in on the military. By maintaining the status quo, China can leave the issue open and kick the can down the road, maintaining the possibility that someday in the future they may be in a strong enough position to press the issue.
Even still, China now has its own academia and engineering, and is larger than Taiwan. Hence, even without the corporate espionage mainland China is known for, wouldn’t investing in their burgeoning semiconductor industry make more sense, rather than spending that money on war?
That's exactly what they've been doing. That article mentions that they've actually recruited 3000 engineers from Taiwan's chip industry to help develop their own chips.
Yet while taking Taiwan would mean access to deep-water ports, it’s not as though Taiwan would ever pose a threat to Chinese power projection—their stance is wholly defensive. If China decided to pull an “America” and send a carrier to the Middle East or something, no one would stop them and risk a war.
Taiwan's stance is defensive, but the same isn't necessarily true of the US, which operates in Taiwan. The US has recently started throwing around rhetoric and shifting spending focuses towards treating a hot war with China as a serious possibility, insane as it may be. This is (hopefully) just bluster to justify defense spending, but I'm not at all convinced that if China sent a carrier to the Middle East, the US would not retaliate. If anything, they're looking for a reason.
-
I understand the historical significance since the nationalists retreated to Taiwan at the end of the Chinese Civil War.
Back then, and for perhaps the middle part of the 20th century, there was a threat of a government in exile claiming mainland China. Historically, then, there was your impetus for invasion.
However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.
Another reason people give: control the supply of chips. Yet, wouldn’t the Fabs, given their sensitive nature, be likely to be significantly destroyed in the process of an invasion?
Even still, China now has its own academia and engineering, and is larger than Taiwan. Hence, even without the corporate espionage mainland China is known for, wouldn’t investing in their burgeoning semiconductor industry make more sense, rather than spending that money on war?
People mention that taking Taiwan would be a breakout from the “containment” imposed by the ring of U.S. allies in the region.
Yet while taking Taiwan would mean access to deep-water ports, it’s not as though Taiwan would ever pose a threat to Chinese power projection—their stance is wholly defensive. If China decided to pull an “America” and send a carrier to the Middle East or something, no one would stop them and risk a war.
So what is it then? Is it just for national pride and glory? Is it to create a legacy for their leadership? The gamble just doesn’t really seem worth it.
Anyway, appreciate your opinions thanks!
wrote on last edited by [email protected]In 100 years, long after the United States has broken into Baltic states, there will be a reunification movement and people will ask "why do they want to invade Texas?". There will be politicians who's whole political careers will be built on the promise they can make the United States one country again. Understand this and you will understand China and Taiwan.
-
So? Before Qing dynasty taiwan was not part of china and became part through conquests. Taiwan has the right to be a separate entity what they dfon't have right to is to becone the usa puppet and threten china security and the interests that they have right to
Taiwan has been a part of China for far longer than the US has existed. Or that Hawaii has been part of the US. And there’s pretty good support for independence in Hawaii…
-
Literally since before the US was even a thing… so yes, all, for centuries.
-
Taiwan has been a part of China for far longer than the US has existed. Or that Hawaii has been part of the US. And there’s pretty good support for independence in Hawaii…
It doesn't matter. Polities reunify and separate all the time in history. The idea that a polity once becoming part of another can't separate again is so dumb
-
It doesn't matter. Polities reunify and separate all the time in history. The idea that a polity once becoming part of another can't separate again is so dumb
wrote on last edited by [email protected]So if a rebel army lost a civil war in the US, fled to Hawaii, set up a military dictatorship that exploits and genocides native Hawaiians, we should all just accept that as cool and fine? As long as 50 years have passed and the only people left are the children of the rebels and military dictators who support their “state”?
Edit: also while being supported by China and Russia and all the while having war games where they invade the US from Hawaii
-
So if a rebel army lost a civil war in the US, fled to Hawaii, set up a military dictatorship that exploits and genocides native Hawaiians, we should all just accept that as cool and fine? As long as 50 years have passed and the only people left are the children of the rebels and military dictators who support their “state”?
Edit: also while being supported by China and Russia and all the while having war games where they invade the US from Hawaii
What are you refering too?
-
I understand the historical significance since the nationalists retreated to Taiwan at the end of the Chinese Civil War.
Back then, and for perhaps the middle part of the 20th century, there was a threat of a government in exile claiming mainland China. Historically, then, there was your impetus for invasion.
However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.
Another reason people give: control the supply of chips. Yet, wouldn’t the Fabs, given their sensitive nature, be likely to be significantly destroyed in the process of an invasion?
Even still, China now has its own academia and engineering, and is larger than Taiwan. Hence, even without the corporate espionage mainland China is known for, wouldn’t investing in their burgeoning semiconductor industry make more sense, rather than spending that money on war?
People mention that taking Taiwan would be a breakout from the “containment” imposed by the ring of U.S. allies in the region.
Yet while taking Taiwan would mean access to deep-water ports, it’s not as though Taiwan would ever pose a threat to Chinese power projection—their stance is wholly defensive. If China decided to pull an “America” and send a carrier to the Middle East or something, no one would stop them and risk a war.
So what is it then? Is it just for national pride and glory? Is it to create a legacy for their leadership? The gamble just doesn’t really seem worth it.
Anyway, appreciate your opinions thanks!
wrote on last edited by [email protected]However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.
The thing that we call "Taiwan" is an island, not a country, the country is "Republic of China" (ROC). We call it mostly Taiwan, because there is the People's Republic of China (PRC) which is the mainland China. So you still have 2 countries, next to each other, both claiming to have the name "China".
You claim the name, you claim the country.
-
china is a bit like Yugoslavia before the end: lots of different ethnicities being forced to be together. letting a country made up of Chinese people exist in parallel to china keeps a flame of hope alight for those 51 non-Han Chinese ethnicities that were forced to be part of continental china. and China has struggled immensely with multitudes of local kingdoms and warlords throughout its history so it is afraid as its people are very aware of this past through historical dramas
Oh boy! i can imagine what are your opinions on "lots of ethnicities forced to be together"
-
I understand the historical significance since the nationalists retreated to Taiwan at the end of the Chinese Civil War.
Back then, and for perhaps the middle part of the 20th century, there was a threat of a government in exile claiming mainland China. Historically, then, there was your impetus for invasion.
However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.
Another reason people give: control the supply of chips. Yet, wouldn’t the Fabs, given their sensitive nature, be likely to be significantly destroyed in the process of an invasion?
Even still, China now has its own academia and engineering, and is larger than Taiwan. Hence, even without the corporate espionage mainland China is known for, wouldn’t investing in their burgeoning semiconductor industry make more sense, rather than spending that money on war?
People mention that taking Taiwan would be a breakout from the “containment” imposed by the ring of U.S. allies in the region.
Yet while taking Taiwan would mean access to deep-water ports, it’s not as though Taiwan would ever pose a threat to Chinese power projection—their stance is wholly defensive. If China decided to pull an “America” and send a carrier to the Middle East or something, no one would stop them and risk a war.
So what is it then? Is it just for national pride and glory? Is it to create a legacy for their leadership? The gamble just doesn’t really seem worth it.
Anyway, appreciate your opinions thanks!
That's a pretty good article explaining it. The funny thing is that the US media is always framing China as the aggressor. But one look at that map, like with your real eyes, not the crazy eyes, should show you the US is way out there on someone else's doorstep and who the aggressor is. That's just geography.
Personally I don't think China is going to invade Taiwan unless things escalate further. For example, the Russian perspective on the Ukraine is that the US supported the regime change through the NED, helped far right elements overthrow the democratically elected regime and then supported their stance to ban Russian language, oppress Russian speaking populations in Ukraine and supplied them with massive amounts of arms and intelligence. All of this is true historical fact. And in that situation even the chief of NATO Stoltenberg publicly said that Russia launched a "preemptive war" in response to this quasi-NATO membership right on their doorstep. If the US does the same with Taiwan, China might invade. That particular gabit is rather unlikely to succeed in Taiwan though, and Taiwan is far less dangerous to China than a hostile well supplied Ukraine is to Russia (only like 500 miles from Moskow). The smart play for China if that happens is to play rope-a-dope until the US gets tired. Kinda what Iran is doing about the numerous provocations and acts of war against them.
-
What are you refering too?
The history of China and Taiwan, but using the US and Hawaii as an example
-
I understand the historical significance since the nationalists retreated to Taiwan at the end of the Chinese Civil War.
Back then, and for perhaps the middle part of the 20th century, there was a threat of a government in exile claiming mainland China. Historically, then, there was your impetus for invasion.
However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.
Another reason people give: control the supply of chips. Yet, wouldn’t the Fabs, given their sensitive nature, be likely to be significantly destroyed in the process of an invasion?
Even still, China now has its own academia and engineering, and is larger than Taiwan. Hence, even without the corporate espionage mainland China is known for, wouldn’t investing in their burgeoning semiconductor industry make more sense, rather than spending that money on war?
People mention that taking Taiwan would be a breakout from the “containment” imposed by the ring of U.S. allies in the region.
Yet while taking Taiwan would mean access to deep-water ports, it’s not as though Taiwan would ever pose a threat to Chinese power projection—their stance is wholly defensive. If China decided to pull an “America” and send a carrier to the Middle East or something, no one would stop them and risk a war.
So what is it then? Is it just for national pride and glory? Is it to create a legacy for their leadership? The gamble just doesn’t really seem worth it.
Anyway, appreciate your opinions thanks!
From China's geopolitical standpoint:
Taiwan lies between China and the Pacific Ocean.
Taiwan is part of the First Island Chain (which includes Japan, Taiwan, Philippines) — many of these are U.S.-aligned or host U.S. bases.
Control over Taiwan would:
Give China greater military and surveillance reach into the Pacific.
Potentially allow it to break out of U.S.-aligned containment.
Give it more control over critical sea lanes and access to deeper waters (vital for its navy).
-
Taiwan does not claim that over China.
And just because somebody claims something it doesn't make it true.
Go read Taiwan's constitution, it's right there. The only reason why Taiwan doesn't talk about it publicly is because in international relations being the oppressed underdog gets you more diplomatic points.
In real terms, most countries don't recognise Taiwan's independence either, and that includes the EU and the US.
The US only pays lip service to Taiwan's independence because it's a free talking point in their broader "China Bad" propagan machine.
-
In 100 years, long after the United States has broken into Baltic states, there will be a reunification movement and people will ask "why do they want to invade Texas?". There will be politicians who's whole political careers will be built on the promise they can make the United States one country again. Understand this and you will understand China and Taiwan.
I get that however Taiwan the island wasn’t even part of China at the time that the ROC retreated/invaded it. So it would be sorta like Texas fleeing to Mexico then the US wanting to invade Mexico “to make the US into one country again”.
-
Oh boy! i can imagine what are your opinions on "lots of ethnicities forced to be together"
Well not in the melting pot way— but the you’re Han Chinese now way
-
That's a pretty good article explaining it. The funny thing is that the US media is always framing China as the aggressor. But one look at that map, like with your real eyes, not the crazy eyes, should show you the US is way out there on someone else's doorstep and who the aggressor is. That's just geography.
Personally I don't think China is going to invade Taiwan unless things escalate further. For example, the Russian perspective on the Ukraine is that the US supported the regime change through the NED, helped far right elements overthrow the democratically elected regime and then supported their stance to ban Russian language, oppress Russian speaking populations in Ukraine and supplied them with massive amounts of arms and intelligence. All of this is true historical fact. And in that situation even the chief of NATO Stoltenberg publicly said that Russia launched a "preemptive war" in response to this quasi-NATO membership right on their doorstep. If the US does the same with Taiwan, China might invade. That particular gabit is rather unlikely to succeed in Taiwan though, and Taiwan is far less dangerous to China than a hostile well supplied Ukraine is to Russia (only like 500 miles from Moskow). The smart play for China if that happens is to play rope-a-dope until the US gets tired. Kinda what Iran is doing about the numerous provocations and acts of war against them.
Classic .ml!
