Biden Will Directly Defend Taiwan With US Military

intel-bank

Well-known member
USED TO BE two major wars and a minor "conflict" simultaneously in different parts of the world. I don't think we have that capacity any longer. At least, not from a "boots on the ground" perspective.
The thing is, the reason so many people aren't joining the military (well there's quite a few, but one) is that they don't see it as actually fighting for freedom. They see our recent wars and go "I don't want to die in some random middle east country I couldn't find on a map."
Fighting against Russia or China directly or in practice would likely actually lead to a lot more people joining.
Keep in mind, though, our military has likely been spending to compensate for this. And they likely have insane weapons or technology nobody knows about. Or will very soon.
We can do a lot with our drones, likely even crazy drones we dont know about. The military has all sorts of tricks up its sleeves for when it really needs them.
 

DarkNoon

Dedicated Moderator
Staff member
If china did invade, would Congress have to approve it before we can defend Taiwan?
No. Any US serving President can start a war or military operation without Congress. Bush proved this and set major precedence for it.

But after a MINIMUM of 3 months after starting said war Congress must approve to keep it going or to stop it.
 

DarkNoon

Dedicated Moderator
Staff member
Any US serving President can start a war or military operation without Congress.
Heck Biden did that military strike in Afghanistan a few week ago and didn't give Congress the "official" heads up until days afterward.

Simply President can order the military to war however he sees fit and only needs approval from Congress AFTER the fact.
 

Ps22009

Active member
No. Any US serving President can start a war or military operation without Congress. Bush proved this and set major precedence for it.

But after a MINIMUM of 3 months after starting said war Congress must approve to keep it going or to stop it.
Welp....
 

DarkNoon

Dedicated Moderator
Staff member
When’s the last time America declared war lol
Exactly... 😬🥶
No. Any US serving President can start a war or military operation without Congress. Bush proved this and set major precedence for it.

But after a MINIMUM of 3 months after starting said war Congress must approve to keep it going or to stop it.
Heck Biden did that military strike in Afghanistan a few week ago and didn't give Congress the "official" heads up until days afterward.

Simply President can order the military to war however he sees fit and only needs approval from Congress AFTER the fact.
 

Seriously

Well-known member
It’s a double edged weapon.
A president, any president, can commit us to a potentially expanding conflict with unexpected consequences.
And because it has a stop watch on it the goals and tactical commitment to it will always be non-committal and risk poor planning a goals.


MAKE congress debate and establish binding treaties with nations for mutual defense. Or don’t commit to it.
Limited strikes are one thing but commitment of significant conflict is another.
 

TruthandJustice

Power Poster
Regular Contributor
Exactly... 😬🥶
And Congress threatening Obama about going into Syria?There is a difference between bombing some rogue terrorist and risking a nuclear war without either being invaded directly or in response to a formal treaty. Biden wouldn’t have said that if the Republicans controlled Congress. That would be grounds for impeachment if he didn’t go through the motions and cover his ass in some official form.
 

Seriously

Well-known member
Still does not mean he can't jump into a conflict or start a war without Congress. Only after the fact does Congress get a say.
There is not much use of that if that setting president leads us bumbling into a major conflict that results significant deaths.
I’m not saying your wrong in how it works currently. Only that this is not a good way to approach any potentially major war.
Make them make real world defense treaties or don’t get involved.
I actually believe we should have a defense treaty with Taiwan.
It openly stipulates our intentions to defend and leaves little doubt to China our commitment.
Case in point Biden say US troops would definitely be in Taiwan helping defend them. A definite public change of policy.? But the next day the “no, no there is no change in US foreign policy”
Strategic ambiguity led Russia to risk invading Ukraine.
 

TruthandJustice

Power Poster
Regular Contributor
Still does not mean he can't jump into a conflict or start a war without Congress. Only after the fact does Congress get a say.
You may be right on the actual act itself but I am talking about letting the cat out if the bag with what he said specifically. This would give Congress the ability to stop said action before it began hopefully.
 

Irag8er

Moderator
September 11, 2001


DECLARATION OF THE WAR ON TERROR BY THE USA – SEPTEMBER 20, 2001​


Speeches are powerful elements of politics and throughout the entire historical course, emotions, regrets and feelings of glory were said from congressional benches, on television, and radio, bringing people and classes together for commotion or to start wars. At the beginning of the new millennium, full of expectations, the world found itself stunned by the attack on the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York.

Days after the attack, on September 20, 2001, President George W. Bush addresses the US Congress and consequently the world in a strong, blunt speech that marks out enemies and makes a declaration: the US is in a war, a war on terror.
 

Torcher

Well-known member
Regular Contributor
Ok you learned folks , help me out here. What is the current US law requiring aid to the Republic of China over the Communist Chinese controlled Mainland?
(wording question that way is not a weak attempt at propaganda but rather reflecting that I’m almost certain is the emphasis of the law)
 

Friendly Engineer

DEFCON Staff
Staff member
Ok you learned folks , help me out here. What is the current US law requiring aid to the Republic of China over the Communist Chinese controlled Mainland?
(wording question that way is not a weak attempt at propaganda but rather reflecting that I’m almost certain is the emphasis of the law)

(b) Policy​

It is the policy of the United States-

(1) to preserve and promote extensive, close, and friendly commercial, cultural, and other relations between the people of the United States and the people on Taiwan, as well as the people on the China mainland and all other peoples of the Western Pacific area;

(2) to declare that peace and stability in the area are in the political, security, and economic interests of the United States, and are matters of international concern;

(3) to make clear that the United States decision to establish diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China rests upon the expectation that the future of Taiwan will be determined by peaceful means;

(4) to consider any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means, including by boycotts or embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States;

(5) to provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character; and

(6) 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.
 

Torcher

Well-known member
Regular Contributor

(b) Policy​

It is the policy of the United States-

(1) to preserve and promote extensive, close, and friendly commercial, cultural, and other relations between the people of the United States and the people on Taiwan, as well as the people on the China mainland and all other peoples of the Western Pacific area;

(2) to declare that peace and stability in the area are in the political, security, and economic interests of the United States, and are matters of international concern;

(3) to make clear that the United States decision to establish diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China rests upon the expectation that the future of Taiwan will be determined by peaceful means;

(4) to consider any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means, including by boycotts or embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific area and of grave concern to the United States;

(5) to provide Taiwan with arms of a defensive character; and

(6) 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.
But it doesnt really mean anything, does it?
 
Top