keshto patel

I am aware of the jessica lynch hype.

ZFBoxcar

China has about 20 ICBMs. Its reasonable to assume China will not attack Taiwan for some time now (since they are not prepared for a conventional invasion). By the time they do attack, odds are the US missile-defense system, both on land and at sea, will be functioning. That reduces the risk of defending Taiwan. Doesn't eliminate it, of course, but reduces it. And it would not be safe for the US to abandon Taiwan. I don't mean to get all "domino effect" here, but then what happens decades down the line when the Chinese navy is powerful enough to challenge Japan, or maybe the Chinese decide to unite Korea under the Northern banner? Besides, letting a democracy fall to save a city...I wouldn't want to make that decision, but if I had to I would save Taiwan (sorry Gio).

lwarmonger

Hmmm. Saddam bet on America being weak too during the first Gulf War, and we crushed him. We went into Iraq a second time, and smashed him again. Anyone who doubts American courage, especially under a Republican president, is going to end up a very unhappy person.

And I don't know what you're talking about when you say we rely on sophisticated gizmos. The most sophisticated gizmo I've been trained to use is my night vision and my M-4. But I will guarantee anyone who messes with the Army or the Marine Corp a short trip to hell if they think we're afraid to engage them face to face. Aimed fire is something that American soldiers are known for worldwide, and it would be best for you if you learned this before your ignorance is disproven in another, less pleasant fashion.

Besides, I didn't say it wasn't doing what it thinks is right... I'm saying that the difference is that they aren't strong enough to win. The United States is. Like it or not, we are unmatched in strength. China is matched in strength by it's smaller neighbor.

lwarmonger

We could save Taiwan without losing LA. The Chinese would use their nuclear weapons as a deterrant, but they would never hit us first. At most, they could take out two dozen American cities. We would kill the majority of their population. An American president could go to war with China without worrying about a nuclear strike. Our military can defeat theirs. Easily. Occupying China would prove to be difficult, but cutting them off from the outside world and then destroying their cities and industry through strategic bombing would not be hard for the US to accomplish. I can see how much you want the US to be "cut down to size" and I'm sorry to dissappoint you, but it isn't going to happen anytime soon.

Officer of Engineers

Keshto,

1st, learn the context, the PLA officers were speaking of deterance, not trading LA for Taipei.

2nd, the PLA banked wrong that there would be no American reaction.

From your quote

__________________
Chimo

keshto patel

Its a vieled threat.

Officer of Engineers

From a middle ranking officer?

highsea

Who's talking about Jessica Lynch? Read this...

Kentucky NG in action in Iraq

That's what I'm talking about. 8 guys and 2 girls wiped out 40 insurgents and captured their weapons. They killed 27 of them and captured the rest. Don't give me that crap about US bravery- these people aren't even full time soldiers. They didn't back down an inch. Put that in your hookah and smoke it.

__________________
My baby called me up. She said- Why don't you ever take me out? Pick me up in your brand new car....You shake the short change from the old fruit jar...

keshto patel

Its a diplomatic type manuver where President does not involve himself. Its the message and not the messenger which counts.

Officer of Engineers

Do you even read your own reference?

keshto patel

Yes.

Its clear cut, even a blind understands this kind of language.

Officer of Engineers

You're misreading everything.

1st, this is NOT from any official Chinese release. This is a bunch of bellycrawlers in a social setting, debating without any official sanction.

2nd, READ

In other words, the Chinese are saying that they can retalliate against an American 1st strike. NOT trade LA for Taipei.

As for this

A pure statement of fact, most Americans don't even know what Taipei is, so naturally, they would care more about Los Angeles than about Taipei.

NOWHERE in all of your reference is there language by ANYONE IN AUTHORITY to threaten LA.

Selective

ello all.. my 1st post

Australia's relationship with China is unlike what american is to chinese. Unlike america, china is in our region so we see it preferable to maintain friendly relations with china. With China's boom in demand for raw materials Australia stands to make alot of money if good relations continue to grow. As it continues to sign large contracts with other countries in the region we will see china continue to test their growing power with other powers. The flip side for australia is that this could effect our economic/political/military ties with the other powers e.g japan and u.s. I doubt it would tho as we regard it as seperate agenda's.

Australias stance on tawain is different to the u.s.. so the comments by armitage believing in australia joining forces with u.s on tawain was ill'advised. It's true that australia's alliance with the u.s is very strong and Armagitage was without doubt the closest ally of aus in the white house. So his words were more passionate than anything. Unfortunately our relationship with china and the u.s does clash over the tawain issue and most politicians here are silent about it.

China's ability to project its strength at australia is pratically non-existent. China's warning to australia not to invoke the anzus treaty to aid u.s and tawian in a war wont have any effect on our decision to join in if we see fit. In my opinion tho, I dont see australia joining in a arm's race to prepare for a war against china, which is what aus would need to do to fight for tawian because our government simply wont spend the money to begin with unless we a faced we a clear present danger ourselves.

essay

The possibility of military clash between China and USA is unpredictable,or may not happen for ever in the future,when Taiwan acclaim it,s independent statue.
So let alone Australian,s intervention.Beijing is speeding up it,s military modernization and it,s soldier,s training as a result of possible american military
intervention which may not be their major concern.Beijing leaders concerned more about domestic stability than other,s things ,because domestic stability,especially the problems of Chinese peasants who occupy nearly 75 percent of national population ,is paramount for the stability of Communists leading rule.
Under the lead of Communist party,China,s economy has experienced great achievement in the past two decades,and living standards of ordinary people has improved considerably.But , new problems have emerged out of prosperous society.Corruption,and gap between wealth and poor which greatly threaten the leadership of communist,s party and stability of society.So ,that,s why newly elected chairman,Hu jing tao,promise to eliminate corruption in his governmental speech,and as a chinese,i,m full of confidence about his determination to eliminate corruption.
So far i,m concerned,China certainly don,t initiate war against Taiwain at first,provided that taiwain leader don,t declare independence,secondly,USA is not
stupid enough to sacrifice his numerous soldier,s life and his national interests,as well as the stability of asian pacific region for the "SO CALLED DEMOCRACY OF TAWAIN".

lwarmonger

We wouldn't lose many in a war against China. Our fleet would blow China's fleet and air force away, and then selective strikes would be made against key industrial and military targets within China, while a total blockade was formed around China's coast. Minimal loss to the US, and absolutly crippling to China's ability to sustain a conflict (imported raw materials, especially oil, are essential).

No problem at all.

And it gives the US an opportunity to crush China sooner, rather than later. Regardless of whether one thinks China's economic growth will continue at the same pace or not, I think everyone can agree that it would be an easier conflict now than in the future.