War Games: Russia Takes Ukraine, China Takes Taiwan. US Response?

[J.C.MacSwell]

8 hours ago, geordief said:

"Gang up," ,of course

LOL. I thought it was some reference to limiting communication, and I just wasn't in on the lingo.

22 minutes ago, iNow said:

Do you think Canada would join the US if the US tried to forcibly stop it?

 

19 minutes ago, MigL said:

No idea, INow.
Our Prime Minister likes to talk the game, but doesn't have the means, or the stomach, to back it up.
Canada is, as a result, not taken seriously in international matters.

No doubt.

But the US does like the backing, even militarily, of countries like Canada for posturing and political purposes.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/china-canada-warships-taiwan-strait-1.6214303

 

2 hours ago, Pbob said:

I can help you with an answer but firstly I need to know some answers . 

1)Is China intending to invade Taiwan on moral grounds ? 

2)Is Russia intending to invade the Ukraine on moral grounds ? 

Please state reasons why China and Russia are planning to take control of these countries ? 

All invasions claim moral grounds. The US response would of course include disagreeing with any Chinese moral premise.

[Pbob]

33 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

 

 

All invasions claim moral grounds. The US response would of course include disagreeing with any Chinese moral premise.

Why antoganise the Chinese by sending ships through the straight without giving China a phone call asking if they could dock and enjoy the sights of China why they were that way ? 

Newtons laws about reactions and  the world needs to stop these games and become friends , forget history that is the cause of hostility and build a proper future . 

China is a beautiful country and there should be more tourism , the Chinese should respect that our laws sometimes differ from their laws  .

I know Dubai isn't China , but giving somebody a decade in jail for CBC oil is bad morals . 

Laws are the difference in how society interacts .

 

 

Edited December 6, 2021 by Pbob

[J.C.MacSwell]

This could all lead to a major politico-economic Cold War. Hopefully not WW3.

51 minutes ago, Pbob said:

Why antoganise the Chinese by sending ships through the straight without giving China a phone call asking if they could dock and enjoy the sights of China why they were that way ? 

Newtons laws about reactions and  the world needs to stop these games and become friends , forget history that is the cause of hostility and build a proper future . 

China is a beautiful country and there should be more tourism , the Chinese should respect that our laws sometimes differ from their laws  .

I know Dubai isn't China , but giving somebody a decade in jail for CBC oil is bad morals . 

Laws are the difference in how society interacts .

 

 

+1, but I think the purpose of being there was to send a slightly different message.

I'm okay with China having some Laws I don't agree with. Treatment of the Uyghurs? Not so much.

Not to imply sending warships through the Taiwan Strait was about the Uyghurs in any way whatsoever. It would have been about Taiwan, International Waters and possibly Japanese Islands along the route.

Apparently someone didn't like the +1 on that post. And neg rep'ed it.

I guess there is also the possibility they simply disagreed with something in it...be quite the situation if we all did that, when we saw something we didn't agree with.

But don't mind me. Bully away.

Edited December 6, 2021 by J.C.MacSwell

[Pbob]

52 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

This could all lead to a major politico-economic Cold War. Hopefully not WW3.

+1, but I think the purpose of being there was to send a slightly different message.

I'm okay with China having some Laws I don't agree with. Treatment of the Uyghurs? Not so much.

Not to imply sending warships through the Taiwan Strait was about the Uyghurs in any way whatsoever. It would have been about Taiwan, International Waters and possibly Japanese Islands along the route.

Apparently someone didn't like the +1 on that post. And neg rep'ed it.

I guess there is also the possibility they simply disagreed with something in it...be quite the situation if we all did that, when we saw something we didn't agree with.

But don't mind me. Bully away.

The problem in the world is that in politics , the worlds politicians who have advisors try to come across as smart , using word gibberish rather than open transparency . 

Me peronally if I was Joe Biden, I  would directly contact Xi Jinping and state my case transparently , we all love China and the Chinese people but we feel you are  wrong in ill treating minorites in regards to morals . 

As for Japan , they should also make way towards China in friendship  because unless the world finally unites , the world is probably over . 

We have more important things than war games to consider at the moment . 

 

 

[iNow]

2 hours ago, Pbob said:

Oh please don't get upset over nothing

Who’s upset? All I said is I’d prefer realistic responses over pie in the sky horseshit. It seems you have nothing but horseshit and off topic nonsense to add. 

1 hour ago, Pbob said:

China is a beautiful country and there should be more tourism

Again, you’re encouraged to reread the thread title. There’s an actual topic here to explore. Tourism to China is not it. 

21 minutes ago, Pbob said:

The problem in the world is that in politics , the worlds politicians who have advisors try to come across as smart , using word gibberish rather than open transparency . 

Again, this might be an interesting topic to explore. Consider doing so in another thread. This one has a specific topic. You’re responses suggests you struggle to comprehend this. 

21 minutes ago, Pbob said:

We have more important things than war games to consider at the moment . 

Then stop posting to this thread, because that’s what it’s about. This is pretty basic. Stop trolling. 

Edited December 6, 2021 by iNow

[MigL]

15 minutes ago, Pbob said:

politicians ... try to come across as smart , using word gibberish

Somewhat like you on science topics.
( no, I didn't give you a neg rep )

17 minutes ago, Pbob said:

As for Japan , they should also make way towards China in friendship 

China isn't just threatening Taiwan, but other nations in the South China Sea.
They are actively building 'islands' in the ocean, and claiming they are part of the Chinese land mass in order to extend their territorial limits.
Their military spending, and build up, is the largest in South East Asia, and is destabilizing the whole area, by forcing countries like Japan, South Korea, and even India and Australia, to increase their militaries.

These are not 'war games' we are considering, but a powder keg whose fuse is already lit.

[J.C.MacSwell]

10 hours ago, TheVat said:

Our commitment to Taiwan, a smallish island that exports lychee nuts and which is snugged up next to China (Mike Phelps could probably swim out there), seems shaky at best.   The loss would be more symbolic than strategic is my guess.  Ukraine, with its central location, and having major NG and mineral resources, and being one of the planet's major grain exporters, and having received some serious commitments from the US and European allies, and being headed towards NATO membership, might be a more significant bone of contention, and maybe even rise above our domestic catnip issues.  It will be ugly when it heats up.  But I'm not scanning the real estate ads in Auckland yet.  Maybe I should.  

China does have some concerns, whether real or imagined, for their limited access to the Pacific. 

[MigL]

10 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

China does have some concerns, whether real or imagined, for their limited access to the Pacific. 

So did russia, with their limited access to the Black Sea ( and the Mediterranean ).
Did that give them the right to annex the port of Sevastopol, or the whole Crimean peninsula ?

[Arikel88]

USA can beat in battlefield against both Russia and China 1 vs 1 but if they join it is complicated when it all happens and at the end we all die. The elite just pit country vs country to elimanate the population.

[CharonY]

5 hours ago, Pbob said:

I have done some quick research and it sounds like Taiwan committed ''mutiny'' against China and China want to take back control because of the maritime border and close approximity

I do not think your assessment is accurate (except in the vaguest possible sense).

Taiwan's history is complex with many changing hands. But if we start in the late 19th century to the end of WWII, Taiwan was a Japanese model colony and a blueprint of what the Japanese vision of a Pan-Asian system under Japanese rule might have been. 

Toward the end of WWII there was also a civil war in mainland China between Chiang Kai-shek, leader of the Republic of China and Mao Tse-tung. Chiang eventually lost and fled to Taiwan, which he declared to be new seat of power of the Republic of China. For some time they were seen as the legitimate government of mainland China in exile, though obviously that did not hold for very long.

So technically if there was a mutiny, it was committed by the People's Republic of China against the Republic of China (and not the other way round). 

 

[iNow]

So, if China tries to take control of Taiwan… and intelligence suggests it’s more likely to happen now,than it has been for decades… should the US and any country considered an ally respond? How might they respond?

[CharonY]

7 minutes ago, iNow said:

So, if China tries to take control of Taiwan… and intelligence suggests it’s more likely to happen now,than it has been for decades… should the US and any country considered an ally respond? How might they respond?

I think taking over would not be trivial. It is not like China has a foot in the door and while economic ties have deepened, there was always an anti-mainland sentiment first from the older generation, because of remembered history, but the Taiwan eventually became democratic and younger folks now are for the most part not willing to give it up. So a soft takeover seems very unlikely, but how would a military takeover look like? 

A full on invasion is more likely to trigger a defensive response, and especially Japan will push for it. If China gets away with a military takeover, many other countries will become very nervous indeed.

Otoh I wouldbe surprised if the Chinese government does not realize that such an action could further destabililize the situation and am not sure whether they think it would be worth the risk. I would think that they will try their hardest to get pro-China support and use that to make  a semi-soft power projection.

[iNow]

27 minutes ago, CharonY said:

how would a military takeover look like? 

Digital

Cyber in other parlance

Edited December 6, 2021 by iNow

[iNow]

13 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Apparently someone didn't like the +1 on that post. And neg rep'ed it.

I guess there is also the possibility they simply disagreed with something in it...be quite the situation if we all did that, when we saw something we didn't agree with.

But don't mind me. Bully away.

It wasn't me, but you need to start considering member posts in context, JCM. This guy was just banned for his nonsense all across the site, in science threads, and in this thread here, too. If you ignore peoples behavior more broadly, of course sometimes it will look personal and like bullying, but that's rather obviously not what happened here. He was just banned for his ridiculous behavior, and frankly comments like these from you are what's too personal and closer to bullying than anything which happened here.

 

Regarding the actual thread topic (now that the troll trying to force us off-topic is gone), you have always had a pretty good perspective on history and world affairs IMO, and I'd like to hear your perspective.

Do you think it would be better for the US to sit back and watch if/when these events occur with Russia and China, or do you think we should ignite a new powderkeg with some sort of retaliatory action? Asking because we're already in a bit of a cyber cold war countering and launching attacks on a daily basis, so in some ways the next step could just be an escalation of existing activities. 

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, iNow said:

It wasn't me, but you need to start considering member posts in context, JCM. This guy was just banned for his nonsense all across the site, in science threads, and in this thread here, too. If you ignore peoples behavior more broadly, of course sometimes it will look personal and like bullying, but that's rather obviously not what happened here. He was just banned for his ridiculous behavior, and frankly comments like these from you are what's too personal and closer to bullying than anything which happened here.

 

Regarding the actual thread topic (now that the troll trying to force us off-topic is gone), you have always had a pretty good perspective on history and world affairs IMO, and I'd like to hear your perspective.

Do you think it would be better for the US to sit back and watch if/when these events occur with Russia and China, or do you think we should ignite a new powderkeg with some sort of retaliatory action? Asking because we're already in a bit of a cyber cold war countering and launching attacks on a daily basis, so in some ways the next step could just be an escalation of existing activities. 

The next step is, the rest of our lives; be it Chinese or Russian or us... How do we know if fight or flight, is more appropriate...

[geordief]

26 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

The next step is, the rest of our lives; be it Chinese or Russian or us... How do we know if fight or flight, is more appropriate...

What do you think? Or are  you saying there is no way to tell?

[dimreepr]

1 minute ago, geordief said:

What do you think? Or are  you saying there is no way to tell?

There wolf, there castle...

[geordief]

37 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

There wolf, there castle...

Thank you for your cooperation.

[CharonY]

11 hours ago, iNow said:

Digital

Cyber in other parlance

I am not entirely sure how that would work in terms of power takeover. Do you mean information warfare and creating sufficient unrest to step in? If so, I would agree that it would be on option, considering that it was rather successful in creating effective pro-virus organizations in the midst of a pandemic. However, part of the tension is because in Taiwan the sense of independence has become somewhat more vocal (though openly a vague status quo is still preferred over open conflict). Moreover, over the last few decades, Taiwanese identity has become a thing. In the past, the Kuomintang (Chiang's party) has seen itself as the legitimate China and the ruling class also considered themselves Chinese, whereas the population that was already there saw themselves as a broad mix of identities and especially the older population identified themselves culturally closer to Japanese and did not speak Mandarin. However, after the Kuomintang arrived on Taiwan, they made Mandarin the official language and other dialects and languages were banned from school and other public places. This resulted in households where multiple languages were used to speak between generations and the identity of the Taiwanese people was conflicted to say the least. Now it seems that a new, separate identity has emerged within the younger generation and the desire to be distinct from mainland China is probably the strongest it has been since the post-war generation. In contrast, unification is only supported by a very fringe, so creating discordance in that area is not that easy (but again, one would think that a deadly pandemic would be an unifier for humanity and it turned out not to be).

I will also note that in the past there have been open conflict between Taiwan and China with regard to offshore islands resulted in exchange of fire (literally) from the 50s to the late 70s. The situation seems to revert to days of those conflicts again. I am very doubtful of a Russian-style invasion of the Ukraine happening in Taiwan as the diplomatic ambiguity was carefully designed to create uncertainty for such an event. Conversely, parties with vested interest in the conflict, especially Japan, will push the US heavily into intervention. I have doubts that the US will let China project its power unchecked in that region and lose several allies in the process.

 

[iNow]

1 hour ago, CharonY said:

Do you mean information warfare and creating sufficient unrest to step in?

This probably could be its own topic (how will wars be fought in the future and how will cyber and digital attacks play a role in that). This would be included, but I was thinking more about attacks on hard infrastructure, seizing control of energy grids, locking up banking, disabling food and resource distribute, etc. It's like traditional kinetic attacks from warships and troops and guns, but quicker to deploy and more impactful in many ways. 

Propaganda and sowing of unrest internally via social media is a separate, but clearly related, aspect of all this. It would also likely be a big part of any US response to China or Russia for such aggressions.

Just speculating out loud... War today would look very little like wars yesterday. 

[CharonY]

3 minutes ago, iNow said:

This probably could be its own topic (how will wars be fought in the future and how will cyber and digital attacks play a role in that). This would be included, but I was thinking more about attacks on hard infrastructure, seizing control of energy grids, locking up banking, disabling food and resource distribute, etc. It's like traditional kinetic attacks from warships and troops and guns, but quicker to deploy and more impactful in many ways. 

Propaganda and sowing of unrest internally via social media is a separate, but clearly related, aspect of all this. It would also likely be a big part of any US response to China or Russia for such aggressions.

Just speculating out loud... War today would look very little like wars yesterday. 

That may be true, but at some point there must be some kind of power takeover. Either boots on the ground or some politicians moving in replacing the existing ruling class. I can see how the conflict plays out on that level, but I have a hard time imagining the takeover procedure. Because I think that will eventually trigger US responses (or not). 

[iNow]

48 minutes ago, CharonY said:

I think that will eventually trigger US responses (or not).

And it’s this piece I’m hoping to explore further 

[StringJunky]

My take on this subject is that Russia was not happy when the US declared a change of military focus from them to China.,  hence the posturing on the  Russia's borders. Ultimately, I think it is worried about NATO getting a strike advantage in a conflict by arming up in neghbouring countries. China is much more the empire-builder than Russia, I think, and has better resources to fulfill its expansionist objectives. China seems to be playing the war-by-attrition game, with constant incursions of Taiwanese airspace and island-building BS to claim stakes in geographical continuity with the artificial islands.

If NATO states publicly that it has no intention of military build-up in the neighbouring countries , Russian forces will probably disperse.  I feel this  issue is more to do with pragmatism than ideology. China is ideologically driven, so conflict is more likely.  China is trying to win by capturing inches of territory quietly, until it has it all... it is implacably and slowly wedging its way foward.

Edited December 6, 2021 by StringJunky

[geordief]

19 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

My take on this subject is that Russia was not happy when the US declared a change of military focus from them to China.,  hence the posturing on the  Russia's borders. Ultimately, I think it is worried about NATO getting a strike advantage in a conflict by arming up in neghbouring countries. China is much more the empire-builder than Russia, I think, and has better resources to fulfill its expansionist objectives. China seems to be playing the war-by-attrition game, with constant incursions of Taiwanese airspace and island-building BS to claim stakes in geographical continuity with the artificial islands.

If NATO states publicly that it has no intention of military build-up in the neighbouring countries , Russian forces will probably disperse.  I feel this  issue this more to do with pragmatism than ideology. China is ideologically driven, so conflict is more 

If  @Prometheus  is correct about the Confucian  underpinning of Chinese  society

https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/126218-war-games-russia-takes-ukraine-china-takes-taiwan-us-response/?do=findComment&comment=1193365

and if your own observation concerning the reliability of timekeeping devices  is also to be banked,then any Chinese  tilt at their pesky Taiwanese  neighbours may well fall at the hurdle of synchronicity of  attacks

:-;

Edited December 6, 2021 by geordief

[iNow]

20 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

China seems to be playing the war-by-attrition game, with constant incursions of Taiwanese airspace and island-building BS to claim stakes in geographical continuity with the artificial islands. <...> China is trying to win by capturing inches of territory quietly, until it has it all... it is implacably and slowly wedging its way foward.

Water cuts through rock not because of its power, but because of its persistence. /NodsToDimreepr