China has warned that World War Three could be triggered 'at any time' after it sent dozens of warplanes into Taiwan's airspace.
An article in the state-backed Global Times newspaper on Tuesday said that 'collusion' between the US and Taiwan was so 'audacious' that the situation 'has almost lost any room for manoeuvre, teetering on the edge of a face-off.'
It claimed that the people of China were ready to back all-out war with the US, warning the island nation against 'playing with fire'.
Almost 150 Chinese warplanes have breached Taiwan's airspace since Friday, including 56 jets on Monday in a dramatic escalation of Chinese aggression against the self-governing democracy.
Joe Biden said he had spoken to Chinese President Xi Jinping about Taiwan and they agreed to abide by the Taiwan agreement as tensions continue to ratchet up between Taipei and Beijing.
'I've spoken with Xi about Taiwan. We agree...we'll abide by the Taiwan agreement,' Biden said to reporters at the White House on Tuesday.
However, that call took place on September 9 and it's not clear what agreement he was referring to.
read more:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10063171/China-warns-World-War-Three-triggered-time.html
Replies
Hahahaha We'd have to get it first.
But my point was.....are we so stupid to allow ourselves to depend on a communist country (our greatest adversary) to provide us with anything essential?
Being sarcastic..........Why not ammunition? They could beat us without ever having to fight us.
I believe I pointed out the problems with securing the skills and expertise needed to reestablish such enterprise... however, it must be done unless we are prepared to be at the mercy of foreign manufactures for items critical for our national security
My mother was born in 1917, lived through the Spanish flu pandemic (an actual pendemic they had no cure for), survived two World Wars, went through inflation where the currency lost all value...twice, a nazi take over, a communist take over, a revolution against the Soviets, So I'd say she had a bit of a clue what was going on in the world.........and I remember when I was a little girl her saying there will be a yellow wave to take over the world, sort of ike the mongols who killed most of the people on their way to take over Europe.
I just saw that the top 1% has more wealth between them than all of the middle class combined in America.
Husain Obama might be correct in their case "you didn't build that".
We have got to get things under control!
On availability of "Food Products" and Manufacturers Labels, the Key Phrase continues to be "Comparative." Bear in mind to differentiate the concept of "Food" and "Snacks."
Lynn Bryant DeSpain
What can and what should the US do...
The relevant legal document is the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). The legislation was enacted by Congress in 1979 following the U.S. decision to cut ties with Taiwan, abrogate the U.S.-Republic of China (Taiwan) Mutual Defense Treaty, and establish relations with China. The TRA is frequently cited by U.S. policymakers as the legal framework governing Taiwan policy actions. In reality, although the TRA has practical importance for civil and commercial relations with Taiwan, it does not strictly bind U.S. policymakers with respect to US-China-Taiwan relations.
TRA Sections 2 and 3 contain the key provisions with respect to military defense of Taiwan. Section 2 declares as a matter of U.S. policy that the U.S. expects the “future of Taiwan will be determined by peaceful means,” that “any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means, including by boycotts or embargoes, [is] a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area”, and “to maintain the capacity of the United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan.”
Section 3 implements this policy by requiring that the U.S. government “make available to Taiwan such defense articles and defense services in such quantity as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability.” It further requires the President “to inform the Congress promptly of any threat to the security or the social or economic system of the people on Taiwan and any danger to the interests of the United States arising therefrom.” Finally, the TRA requires the “President and the Congress shall determine, in accordance with constitutional processes, appropriate action by the United States in response to any such danger.”
On its face, the TRA appears to only require the U.S. to sell defensive materials to allow Taiwan to maintain self-defense and for the President to inform Congress of any threat to the security of Taiwan. If China launched a military assault, the President is only legally obligated to “determine, in accordance with constitutional processes, appropriate action.” This requirement is for executive-legislative consultations and hardly seems like an obligation, as Bernstein alleges, “to intervene if China launched an armed strike on Taiwan.”
Therefore, Taiwan would be wise to not be overly comfortable regarding its U.S. security guarantee. Legally, it’s not much of a guarantee at all. However, the TRA should also not be dismissed as legally inconsequential with respect to U.S. obligations. After all, other U.S. defense guarantees in the region are not much more robust than the TRA.
For instance, Article V of the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty simply states that “[e]ach Party recognizes that an armed attack against either Party” in areas administered by Japan “would be dangerous to its peace and safety.” The U.S. and Japan agree that each country “would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional provisions and processes.” The same language is found in the analogous provisions in the Korea, Philippines, and Australia-New Zealand defense treaties.
There is also the recent addition of the 'Protection and Enhancement Initiative (TAIPEI) and advanced new arms sales to Taiwan' which affirms the previous status of assistance, not troops. However, the President out of caution should raise our DEFCON status to DEFCON 3 and inform the Joint Chiefs to prepare to defend against an attack by China over the Taiwan problem. Once XI is informed the President should inform XI that we are preparing for escalation and expect China not to engage in any further belligerent escalation over our defensive measures.
portions of this post extracted from:
News & Publications | The Institute of World Politics (iwp.edu)
Taiwan’s U.S. Defense Guarantee is Not Strong, But It Isn’t That We...
Those are all in theory very good. Lots of nice "shoulds" in your scenarios. (You must have done well in War College.) But remember who we are dealing with as CINC, and with the CINC/Armed Forces as well as this political schill, Lloyd Austen. Doing what is right , effective, and prudent is no longer the playbook they use! Nor does their sworn oath to "Protect and defend the Constitution of the United States (and it's borders & people) from all enemies both Foreign and DOMESTIC)" as their integral & internal operating modus operandi. They burned their oath and sworn allegiance to the communist ideology being pushed thru Obama/Biden and this administration. So save your theories of "shoulds", and put them out there when they will actually be considered.
Christina...
My post only presents a summary of the facts regarding the defense treaties and agreements the US has with Taiwan and others in the region... the agreements are vague at best and leave it up to Congressional and Presidential consultations before acting decisively in the region. Given our recent history of abandoning our allies, I would not expect China to be overly concerned about US troops or direct support for Taiwan.
However, China needs to be concerned over Japan, S. Korea, and Australia's response... as they may view the loss of Taiwan as unacceptable; providing China with a Green Light to ravage the region. Taiwan would be advised to seek firm agreements of support from the regional powers, as US support will most probably be limited to supplying limited arms, munitions, equipment, and intel services.
In just "Comparative Population Growth" of Sixty Years, China could ill afford any large scale War on its own soil at this time compared to the U.S. Just in the basics of Food and the Burial/Cremation/Treatment of Casualties, without which the proper control of allows the rapid spread of disease and plague. China Population, 1.4 Billion. United States Population, 329 Million. We Export Vast Quantities of Food. China virtually Exports None, but Imports large amounts. Simple Logic.Even "War Mad Tyrants" get hungry.
Lynn Bryant DeSpain
Some needs to read the made in China Labels on the back of all food products. Also note the package states US brand names but you will be shocked at the volume of food products the US imports.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next