Taiwan Independence: Realistically, how?

[achdizzy1099]

I....America will run in the opposite direction and Taiwan will almost certainly lose. History is what it is: brutal.

Whoa whoa whoa there cowboy. clearly you have not brushed up on your US history. America, the United States of America, loves to drop bombs on Asian people. They love it.'Bombs Away McKay' used B-29s on Japanese cities like an 8 year old uses a magnifying glass on an ant hill. The good christian Nixon celebrated the lords 1972nd birthday by not bombing North Vietnam for a day. The list goes on and on.

There are 101 reasons the USA would welcome a skirmish with China. They're just not allowed to start it..... China knows they have the most to lose in this 'theoretical' conflict. Don't believe the hype.

T

[Omniloquacious]

I want Taiwan to remain independent but I have found the people here value that much less than I expected. I no longer am going to argue for a position the majority can be easily convinced not to care about.

I’d love Taiwan to become fully and formally independent. But I recognize that it’s an impossible dream under present conditions, so I wouldn’t support any politician whose manifesto included the pursuit of independence as a core goal.

What I care about now is that Taiwan gains the best benefits it can from clinging to the coattails of China’s rise. If it can positively influence China’s political development along the way, so much the better.

I believe this matches the views held by the majority of Taiwanese.

[Mucha Man]

...I wouldn’t support any politician whose manifesto included the pursuit of independence as a core goal.

This doesn't make sense to me, or seems very selectively biased. The KMT include as a major goal the eventual unification of Taiwan with China. Yet you accept having a KMT president because he has stated he will not pursue unification within his term. Then why not take the DPP at their word too: while independence is the party's long term goal, they too will not make any changes to the status quo at this time. Furthermore, any future outcome from Taiwan (including unification) depends on the will of the people through democratic process.

In essence, the parties platforms are equivalent for the time being with respect to independence. But only one outcome is acceptable to China. And that makes all the difference.

What I care about now is that Taiwan gains the best benefits it can from clinging to the coattails of China’s rise. If it can positively influence China’s political development along the way, so much the better.

I believe this matches the views held by the majority of Taiwanese.

Yes, but that is a pipe dream I believe as political influence from both the Chinese government and the large Taiwanese enterprises that stand to greatly profit from unification will only grow as ties increase.

I can't see Taiwan resisting when both governments hope for eventual unification; the business elite see it in their best interests; the media functions as a supplier of cheap entertainment; and there is still a large portion of the voting public who look back at martial law as the good old days and hence aren't all that concerned about losing a few freedoms.

Despite polls showing an increase in Taiwanese identity and little interest in formal unification, I think the tide can easily be made to go backwards. I see it already happening with some blue friends.

[Dog's_Breakfast]

I....America will run in the opposite direction and Taiwan will almost certainly lose. History is what it is: brutal.

Whoa whoa whoa there cowboy. clearly you have not brushed up on your US history. America, the United States of America, loves to drop bombs on Asian people. They love it.

It's only fun to bomb other countries when they can't bomb back. And when you can bomb them without damaging American-owned businesses, like McDonald's and KFC.

Years ago there was much talk of "neutron bombs" which can kill people but don't damage private property. Maybe we can get some traction with that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_bomb

Uh oh, Wikipedia says it does damage property, but not nearly as much as conventional nuclear weapons. Well, there are always bio and chemical weapons. Certified "safe" for private property. A humane way to fight a war.

cheers,
DB

[urodacus]

Years ago there was much talk of "neutron bombs" which can kill people but don't damage private property. Maybe we can get some traction with that.

Uh oh, Wikipedia says it does damage property, but not nearly as much as conventional nuclear weapons.

what's all this about not damaging property? there's no way that the US would be able to occupy and enforce such an occupation of China, so the safest option for the US to prevent the eventual Phoenix rising from the ash (with a very large chip on its shoulder) would be to turn as much of it as possible into a hard glassy plain. H-bombs all the way!


that's be a great way to restart US manufacturing and exports.

[Hamletintaiwan]

Years ago there was much talk of "neutron bombs" which can kill people but don't damage private property. Maybe we can get some traction with that.

Uh oh, Wikipedia says it does damage property, but not nearly as much as conventional nuclear weapons.

what's all this about not damaging property? there's no way that the US would be able to occupy and enforce such an occupation of China, so the safest option for the US to prevent the eventual Phoenix rising from the ash (with a very large chip on its shoulder) would be to turn as much of it as possible into a hard glassy plain. H-bombs all the way!


that's be a great way to restart US manufacturing and exports.

Wow! You guys think big.
Bombing China with nukes.

I think it was a year before China became a member of the WTO when China was for the first time capable of delivering a nuclear warhead to Washington.

By now, they have their own manned space program.

[Omniloquacious]

Then why not take the DPP at their word too: while independence is the party's long term goal, they too will not make any changes to the status quo at this time.

Unfortunately, even Tsai’s moderated version of the party platform waved the independence banner too loudly and provocatively, making it a much closer objective than realism, wisdom and Taiwan’s best interests allow. Equally damagingly, it pitched anti-China rhetoric, albeit much muted from past hysteria, at a perilously strident level. That is why she and her party lost the election.

The majority of Taiwanese would love Taiwan to be fully and formally independent. But they don’t want to rock the boat by pushing for it at the wrong time. Now is very evidently still the wrong time, and that is not likely to change within the foreseeable future. That is the true “Taiwan consensus”, and I’m sure that Tsai knew it very well, but was prevented from catering to it by the stone-engraved tenets of the DPP’s core ideology.

[Satellite TV]

A more legitimate question is how unification will actually occur because the U.S. does not seem really serious about actually having an official Republic of Taiwan given their debt to the PRC government.

The PRC owns about 9% of US Debt. Hardly enough reason for the US to push Taiwan to need unifictation with China which it won't do anyway.

[Dog's_Breakfast]

Unfortunately, even Tsai’s moderated version of the party platform waved the independence banner too loudly and provocatively, making it a much closer objective than realism, wisdom and Taiwan’s best interests allow. Equally damagingly, it pitched anti-China rhetoric, albeit much muted from past hysteria, at a perilously strident level. That is why she and her party lost the election.

I mostly agree with your analysis. The DPP needs to shed the baggage of the Ah-Bien era, face reality, stop the negative campaign tactics, and generally grow up. Few people in Taiwan really like China and want to reunify with it, but it does no good to provoke the neighborhood bully when all you've got is "my Uncle Sam will beat you up" (meanwhile, see Uncle Sam cowering in the corner, telling you to shut up). We don't have to like China, but we have to get along with it - most Taiwanese have figured that out, but the DPP leadership thinks it can win elections by playing the anti-China card. This time the strategy didn't work, though they did convince 46% of the voters, which is not all that far from a majority. So I would not count the DPP out entirely.

And the KMT badly needs to clean up the corruption. Many Taiwanese are rightfully indignant about that.

A more legitimate question is how unification will actually occur because the U.S. does not seem really serious about actually having an official Republic of Taiwan given their debt to the PRC government.

The PRC owns about 9% of US Debt. Hardly enough reason for the US to push Taiwan to need unifictation with China which it won't do anyway.

I don't think it's the monetary debt to China that worries the USA. It's the fact that just about everything on the shelves at Wal-Mart is made in China. Even the Dept of Defense is sourcing parts from China. The USA is dependent on China for the majority of its tech products, be it microwave ovens or computers. Cut that off, and America is in trouble. Yes, in theory the USA could make all those again, as it did in the past. But rebuilding the now torn-down factories, training the workers, even recruiting engineers (who are by now mostly old and retired) is not so simple. Once you let your manufacturing and engineering infrastructure go to Hell, it doesn't just come back because you want it to. Outside of weapons (which again, depend on Chinese parts), the main exports of the USA today are Hollywood movies and agricultural products. I would call the USA an undeveloping country.

[Charlie Jack]

. . . America will run in the opposite direction. . . .

. . . see Uncle Sam cowering in the corner, telling you to shut up. . . .

I thought the discussion was about independence.