> We should be minding our own business focusing on our own citizens,
Yes, and part of that includes highly overdue reciprocal actions against a nation that has denied our citizens' businesses from flourishing there.
This is just hiding behind Taiwan unless you're so naive that you think that state actors help other states out of the goodness of their hearts.
Is it the US calling the shots or not? If so then no, Taiwan clearly doesn't have a say since everything hinges on the US' power.
In democracies, politicians have to care about what the public thinks. Americans as a whole are extremely judgmental about moral issues, and any president that stands by and allows 25 million Taiwanese to be crushed under the boot of the CCP will go down in history as the biggest coward since Neville Chamberlain.
By and large yes, I do think democracies tend to operate (highly imperfectly) out of the goodness of their hearts (as they perceive it).
The US is not a democracy for 90% of Americans (Princeton study).
> Americans as a whole are extremely judgmental about moral issues, and any president that stands by and allows 25 million Taiwanese to be crushed under the boot of the CCP will go down in history as the biggest coward since Neville Chamberlain.
Sure. Except America will support “bad guys” and oppose “good guys” according to what suits them (like natural resources). Like how Saddam Hussein was an ally of the US until he went against their interests.
The American people protested Reagan's interference in Latin America. That made them stop doing it. Right? No. They just went clandestine.
> By and large yes, I do think democracies tend to operate (highly imperfectly) out of the goodness of their hearts (as they perceive it).
Every post-WWII president up to 2003 (at least) could be indicted under the Nuremberg principles if they were upheld.[1]
It's easy to have good intentions according to yourself when there are no one else around who can challenge your worldview.
No more than the people of the south had a say in what happened to them.
Imagine if after the civil war, china got involved and 'liberated' the south from the north.
Taiwan is entirely a US creation. And china should take it back.
Almost everywhere there is instability in east asia, it's the fault of the US. From japan to myamnar and everything in between.
Isn't China at odds with every neighbor except for NK?
> Taiwan is entirely a US creation
Do you forget that during WW2, US supported mainland China with aid? Without US opening up its market, mainland China wouldn't have developed so fast.
In many ways that matter, current mainland China is more of a US creation than Taiwan.
Also, Taiwanese people are not puppets.
> And china should take it back
Shouldn't and couldn't. The US accepts a one-China policy. So the other way could also happen.
> Imagine if after the civil war, china got involved and 'liberated' the south from the north.
The difference is slavery. Taiwan is not going against CCP in defense of slavery.
Firstly, India is not in east asia. My comment was specificially on east asia. But even here we are indirectly involved due to britain using india to invade china. Funnily enough, it's called an 'expedition' rather than a failed invasion. As the 'successor' of the british empire, we are now the principal 'free tibet' agitators.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_expedition_to_Tibet
Also, india claims chinese territory ( once again as a legacy of the british invasion of china from india ). Frankly, india and china have the same enemy. They should really be working together, not against each other.
> Do you forget that during WW2, US supported mainland China with aid?
We supported the 'nationalists' who were fighting the 'communists'. Guess which one is mainland china and which one is taiwan.
> Without US opening up its market, mainland China wouldn't have developed so fast.
You have it backwards again. Why do you repeat the same thing in so many threads? Are you part of a pr group or something? Just so strange. It's not the US that opened its market. It was china who opened its market to the US. This is basic history. Not just in the 1970s, but also in the 1800s as well. And it's not just china that advanced, it's the US that advanced as well. Crazy how a country can advance if the US isn't trying to destabilize or invade it. Huh? One can only imagine what india, iran, much of africa, south america, etc could be if we'd disappear or simply stop undermining or destroying these regions.
> Also, Taiwanese people are not puppets.
The people aren't but the elite are. They are our worthless puppets.
> Shouldn't and couldn't. The US accepts a one-China policy. So the other way could also happen.
They can and should. Not only that, they should broaden it into a racial or regional issue. White supremacy got east asia colonized, oppressed and nuked. Maybe turn the tables on us.
> The difference is slavery. Taiwan is not going against CCP in defense of slavery.
The civil war wasn't about slavery either. The north had slave states - maryland, delaware, missouri, kentucky, west virginia.
'The Emancipation Proclamation did not free all slaves in the U.S., contrary to a common misconception; it applied in the ten states that were still in rebellion on January 1, 1863, but it did not cover the nearly 500,000 slaves in the slaveholding border states (Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, and Delaware) or in parts of Virginia and Louisiana that were no longer in rebellion.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emancipation_Proclamation
But your point is moot since the supreme court declared secession to be illegal. We, in the US, legally do not believe in self-determination by a group of people.
Stop getting your 'history' from propaganda. My advice, go look it up and dig just one layer deeper and you'll realize most 'history' is nonsense.
Obviously not. That’s the whole point. They are pawns. You think TSMC refuses to sell chips to China voluntary? I actually have no idea what the people of Taiwan want. But I know it doesn’t matter. They do what we (the US) want… for now.
Those chips aren't entirely TSMC creations.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/02/17/united-states-taiwan-ch...
> But in reality, TSMC’s manufacturing capabilities rely on a variety of critical inputs that are predominantly supplied by U.S. and U.S.-allied firms. Even
Now, shouldn't the US have a say when it provides critical inputs? Why should US allow its high-end designs to be used by an adversary?
The is plenty of aggressions from both sides to go around. Everyone wants this eventually, the only dispute is when it should go hot.
"Everyone"? A likely outcome in a war between China and the US most of us reading here will end up dead or worse. I don't understand what has happened. It is like the elites have become mad and people have just stopped caring and shut their eyes.