Post Reply
Page 1 of 4  •  1 2 3 4 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Where are American Principles?
6 years ago  ::  Jul 20, 2008 - 10:17AM #1
koolpoi
Posts: 6,535
After cutting off diplomatic relations with Taiwan, the US commited to providing the island defensive weapons.This was codified into law by the Taiwan Relations Act.So why the freeze on weapon sales?Look at any objective analysis of the military balance between the ROC and the PRC.Beijing has clearly stated its intention to use military force if Taiwan does not submit to "reunification".The government in Taipei is trying to improve relations with the mainland but there is still overwhelming popular opposition to becoming a part of the PRC.So why would a country commited to freedom and democracy betray one of its oldest and most dependable friends in Asia?Yes,China is more useful than Taiwan in current American foreign policy goals but what do principles mean if they are only followed when it is beneficial?How many times has the US violated its own ideals on realpolitik grounds only to find years later the that principles also have pragmatic value in the long run?The Chinese Communist Party knows that the ideological basis for its dictatorial rule is weakening as China becomes ever more capitalist.The CCP is trying to reinvent the PRC as nationalist one party state,a 21st century style dictatorship.Taking over Taiwan would be a huge step in building the party's nationalist credentials.Why does the US want to help the CCP in this effort?Taiwan is living proof that real democracy is a viable option for China and that idea scares the CCP.But isn't a democratic China in US long term interests?Why not sell Taiwan all the weapons it wants?Such weapons will never be used except to defend a democracy against a dictatorship.Oh yes,it will also provide jobs for US workers.Not a bad thing these days.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jul 20, 2008 - 6:34PM #2
mountain_man
Posts: 39,756

koolpoi wrote:

....Such weapons will never be used except to defend a democracy against a dictatorship.


You have proof of that?

Oh yes,it will also provide jobs for US workers.Not a bad thing these days.


You asked about "American" principles... shouldn't that "American" principle be we build peace, not bombs? Is that "American" principle be that we make profits from war, that we encourage war, that we are a bully that arms those that support us?

And shouldn't all the American countries have a say in this principle?

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jul 21, 2008 - 1:39AM #3
newyawka
Posts: 1,772
[QUOTE=koolpoi;636951]But isn't a democratic China in US long term interests?[/QUOTE]
it's irrelevant to american interests whether the country has a democratic political system or not. what the american ruling class wants is a capitalist china, preferably one controlled enough by the central government to ensure predicatbility and worker subjugation, and they're getting it. that's why this "freedom-loving" administration has been silent on the issue of murderous internal chinese policies. the best coverage of china nowadays comes from the labor press: try this link for instance.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jul 21, 2008 - 1:39AM #4
newyawka
Posts: 1,772
[QUOTE=koolpoi;636951]But isn't a democratic China in US long term interests?[/QUOTE]
it's irrelevant to american interests whether the country has a democratic political system or not. what the american ruling class wants is a capitalist china, preferably one controlled enough by the central government to ensure predicatbility and worker subjugation, and they're getting it. that's why this "freedom-loving" administration has been silent on the issue of murderous internal chinese policies. the best coverage of china nowadays comes from the labor press: try this link for instance.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jul 22, 2008 - 4:54AM #5
koolpoi
Posts: 6,535
Mountain man,the proof is common sense ie. any free country facing invasion from a country on the verge of superpower status and having about 50 times its population is going to use its military power only in defense against that threat.If you believe surrender is always morally superior to fighting,I can understand your thinking.If a communist takeover of a small peaceful democracy doesn't bother you ,nothing I can say will change your mind.Selling weapons to Taiwan helps a small democracy keep its independence and gives jobs to Americans.The only downside is that it angers the CCP.The choice is between short term realpolitik benefits  and the long term benefits of sticking to ones principles.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jul 22, 2008 - 5:09AM #6
koolpoi
Posts: 6,535
Newyawka,The US "ruling class"might well find a PRC takeover of Taiwan acceptable but the Americans I got to know during my studies in the US  would not.I know many in the US  may see foreign affairs differently in the wake of 9/11 but I hope things have not changed so much that the US would sell out Taiwan to get on the good side of the CCP.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jul 22, 2008 - 11:08PM #7
mountain_man
Posts: 39,756
[

koolpoi wrote:

Mountain man,the proof is common sense ie.


Almost always common sense is neither. When someone says something is "common sense" they are usually starting from an a priori assumption that has no basis in fact.

any free country facing invasion from a country on the verge of superpower status and having about 50 times its population is going to use its military power only in defense against that threat.


Do you have proof of that? No, you can't have proof since your argument is based on humans behaving rationally. You'll be wrong every time you do that.

If you believe surrender is always morally superior to fighting,I can understand your thinking.


By making a statement like that, I can see that you will never understand my thinking.

If a communist takeover of a small peaceful democracy doesn't bother you ,nothing I can say will change your mind.


you're not doing a good job of that anyway. ;)

Selling weapons to Taiwan helps a small democracy keep its independence and gives jobs to Americans.


We can do better than being the worlds arms dealer. Maybe we should try exporting peace instead. Have you heard of this thing called "peace"? It's this strange state where no one is fighting or threatening to fight. I know it's a hard concept for some to grasp.

The only downside is that it angers the CCP.The choice is between short term realpolitik benefits  and the long term benefits of sticking to ones principles.


What if the principles you want to stick to are wrong?:confused:

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

I am a Humanist. I believe in a rational philosophy of life, informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by a desire to do good for its own sake and not by an expectation of a reward or fear of punishment in an afterlife.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jul 23, 2008 - 2:37PM #8
newyawka
Posts: 1,772
[QUOTE=koolpoi;640558]Newyawka,The US "ruling class"might well find a PRC takeover of Taiwan acceptable but the Americans I got to know during my studies in the US  would not.[/QUOTE]
oh, i wouldn't either. but where do we locate "american principles"? in the mass of the people, about whom it is very hard to make generalizations, or in the rulers, who set and implement the foreign policy?

[QUOTE=koolpoi]I know many in the US  may see foreign affairs differently in the wake of 9/11 but I hope things have not changed so much that the US would sell out Taiwan to get on the good side of the CCP.[/QUOTE]
too late for that!
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jul 23, 2008 - 9:57PM #9
Erey
Posts: 18,941
Koo Poi,

I guess most people don't believe China will invade Taiwan.  they might posture and bluster but they won't do it.

I don't know if the situation has become more serioius or not. 

I would naturaly choose Taiwan over the PRC.  The PRC seems to be moving to a greater simliarity with Taiwan.
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Jul 23, 2008 - 11:08PM #10
koolpoi
Posts: 6,535
Erey,The PRC has made it crystal clear that it will use military force against Taiwan if the island does not submit to "peaceful reunification".In Taiwan this is referred to as a"forced marriage".It is interesting how  people who are horrified when a 14 year old girl is forced to marry a man old enough to be her grandfather see nothing wrong with the forced marriage of an entire country.It is easy to see China as interested in nothing more than economic growth.Then something like the recent events in Tibet reminds us of the CCP's real thinking.The Dalai Lama has for years been seeking nothing more than real cultural autonomy and religious freedom for his people.He is quite willing to accept CCP control of military,economic and diplomatic affairs for Tibet.Yet the CCP brands him a"splitist" and a "wolf in monk's robes".In other words,compromise on such matters is unthinkable for the CCP.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 4  •  1 2 3 4 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook