• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

China & Taiwan #October

Status
Not open for further replies.
DEFCON Warning System said:
After some thought, I don't think Biden was being "political" when he said the US would come to Taiwan's defense. The answer was off-the-cuff and Biden is old school enough to mean "defend" when he says "defend" in this context.
Click to expand...
He might actually mean “defend” when he says defend Taiwan. but what he wants and what will be allowed are two different things.
They would not even aggressively prosecute chinas 5g company for espionage charges . What makes us think anything said by a president means anything anymore.
 
Obreid said:
He might actually mean “defend” when he says defend Taiwan. but what he wants and what will be allowed are two different things.
Click to expand...
Still the president has absolute authority to defend militarily or engage with CCP forces without Congress for minimal of 3 months. After 3 months of war with CCP will than Congress be able to say Ya or Nay on it. That's why people where worried with Trump & China cause as president gives him every authority to do so within a 3 month window before Congress can legally vote on it.

People often forget how much power a US president has over foreign policy or war. Bush did it with Iraq. Went in without permission which is his right, than three months later Congress gets to vote weather to continue the war or stop it.
 
DarkNoon said:
Still the president has absolute authority to defend militarily or engage with CCP forces without Congress for minimal of 3 months. After 3 months of war with CCP will than Congress be able to say Ya or Nay on it. That's why people where worried with Trump & China cause as president gives him every authority to do so within a 3 month window before Congress can legally vote on it.

People often forget how much power a US president has over foreign policy or war. Bush did it with Iraq. Went in without permission which is his right, than three months later Congress gets to vote weather to continue the war or stop it.
Click to expand...
Show that in law not just opinion
 
DarkNoon said:
Any president can declare war without permission from Congress. Since there already is a treaty makes it all the more easy for biden to do it.
Click to expand...
Will he do it is another question I can't answer... My guess its 50/50 coin toss realistically with Biden.

But I can tell you as a fact if CCP attacked Taiwan Biden or any next president will and does have absolute authority to defend or attack CCP without Congress. The question is will he use that authority.
 
Obreid said:
Show that in law not just opinion
Click to expand...
And here we go with the constitutional arguments. We have both made it clear where we stand. I am for what has been set by precedent as dous the rest of the state and federal goverment.

Legal precedent has been set by Bush for a president to declare war without Congressional approval for a minimum of 3 months.
 
In the exercise of the national defense and security the president can act for three months.

While I agree we should stand by and defend Taiwan.
Their is no imminent threat to US national security or defense if China commenced missile strikes in Taiwan.

This goes back to what I was saying about us being very sure and very clear and concise about why and what our goals are in any future conflict.
While we have to provide a means for the executive to respond to imminent threats.
We also cannot allow the executive the leeway to walk us into never ending wars of police action and nation building.

The US has no treaty or military guarantees with Taiwan since 1980
So maybe the place to start would be with the US reestablish full diplomatic relations with Taiwan also known as the Republic of China. And tie a defense pac to that.

But as it stands there is no legally means a president can start attacking PRC military forces unless they are firing on American forces. He doesn’t have any precedent to declare war on PRC if they strike against ROC.
We only have “strategic ambiguity”

I want Americans and the CCP to be very clear that if we go to war to defend Taiwan there will be no half measures.
No more never ending wars of attrition.
Complete and total wars of submission and capitulation by the enemy.
 
DarkNoon said:
Well its certainly trending fast:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1451398625528057860
Click to expand...
What does that mean though.
Well lend them money to fight the good fight.
Well send them military supplies.
Well sail though chines submarine “Wolfpack” to deliver food fuel and bombs.
Well shoot down PLA planes flying to close to Taiwan.
It’s vague and about as threatening as smacking fist to palm.

My point is we need to be specific and clear and Congress MUST be involved.
Because after Afghanistan we cannot afford anymore failed defense policies.
Standing up and puffing out chest out and saying yeah boy won’t cut it anymore.

But that won’t happen will it. Congress actually work? whatever. congress is like joining a college fraternity retirement home.
 
Obreid said:
What does that mean though.
Well lend them money to fight the good fight.
Well send them military supplies.
Well sail though chines submarine “Wolfpack” to deliver food fuel and bombs.
Well shoot down PLA planes flying to close to Taiwan.
It’s vague and about as threatening as smacking fist to palm.

My point is we need to be specific and clear and Congress MUST be involved.
Because after Afghanistan we cannot afford anymore failed defense policies.
Standing up and puffing out chest out and saying yeah boy won’t cut it anymore.

But that won’t happen will it. Congress actually work? whatever. congress is like joining a college fraternity retirement home.
Click to expand...
“The U.S. defence relationship with Taiwan is guided by the Taiwan Relations Act. We will uphold our commitment under the act, we will continue to support Taiwan’s self-defence, and we will continue to oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo,” the spokesperson said.
www.breitbart.com

Backflip: White House Contradicts Joe Biden's Promise to Defend Taiwan

President Joe Biden promised the U.S. would come to Taiwan’s defense and had a commitment to support the island China claims as its own.
www.breitbart.com www.breitbart.com
 
RiffRaff said:
60 days, according to the War Powers Act of 1973.
Click to expand...
But doesn’t the case have to be made an imminent threat to the US.
Yes we would be sending military aid their way no question. But as far as actually positioning ourselves to engage PLA forces.
Again I’m not arguing against not supporting The Republic of China. I do fully support that.
I’m arguing for a clarification of US policy away from “strategic ambiguity”
To one of strategic clarity ensuring all the parties involved are very clear that the US stands 100% with Taiwan.
So their is no confusion what our response will be. It might discourage any missteps by the PRC.
 
Obreid said:
the exercise of the national defense and security the president can act for three months.
Click to expand...
That is very vague. Even when Bush did it was very vague. We went into Iraq for "suspicion" of WMD's. There was no immediate threat to the US when they planned it even if there where really WMDs. Threats to "national defense" are often if not always vague.

I could come up with 10 reasons why CCP attack or takeover of Taiwan is a national defense threat. Or at least vague threats like Bush used in Iraq.
  1. Military bases in Japan more vulnerable.
  2. Military bases in Korea vulnerable.
  3. Military bases in rest of Asia vulnerable.
  4. Maritime Safty.
  5. Tech Chip Production Security.
  6. We could have citizens there at the time.
  7. Protect other allies in the region.
  8. Lose control of the SCS & China being able to assert its 9dash line.
  9. Lose the rest of what little left in credibility the US has which has defense complications.
  10. Possibly is a secret backdoor treaty already in place that ties our hands into coming to Taiwans defense.
Any of these vague reasons are fine enough to militarily physically defend Taiwan by any President not just Biden.
 
Last edited:
DarkNoon said:
That is very vague. Even when Bush did it was very vague. We went into Iraq for "suspicion" of WMD's. There was no immediate threat to the US when they planned it even if there where really WMDs. Threats to "national defense" are often if not always vague.

I could come up with 10 reasons why CCP attack or takeover of Taiwan is a national defense threat. Or at least vague threats like Bush used in Iraq.
  1. Military bases in Japan more vulnerable.
  2. Military bases in Korea vulnerable.
  3. Military bases in rest of Asia vulnerable.
  4. Maritime Safty.
  5. Tech Chip Production Security.
  6. We could have citizens there at the time.
  7. Protect other allies in the region.
  8. Lose control of the SCS & China being able to assert its 9dash line.
  9. Lose the rest of what little left in credibility the US has which has defense complications.
  10. Possibly is a secret backdoor treaty already in place that ties our hands into coming to Taiwans defense.
Any of these vague reasons are fine enough to militarily physically defend Taiwan by any President not just Biden.
Click to expand...
in October 2002, the U.S. Congress passed Public Law 107-243, titled “Authorization for the Use of Military Force in Iraq Resolution of 2002.


Did Bush Ask Congress for a Declaration of War?

While this resolution granted the president authorization to
www.theclassroom.com www.theclassroom.com

The executive does have limited powers regarding national defense. But they are limited and congress is still required to pass their approval in any major engagement or war.
Again I’m not saying we shouldn’t help to defend Taiwan. To the contrary I’m saying the congress should be fully engaged in this now before there is any conflict. To clarify and elaborate that the United States fully supports and will defend the independent nation of Taiwan.
If we were to do this now we would be sending an unambiguous message to the PRC and we might just avoid a war.

I would hope by now the leadership in Washington would be thinking ahead and doing things that might avert another war. But sadly that is too much to hope for.
But we can do what we always have done and stumble into another conflict with ambiguous goals and wonder what went wrong five or ten years from now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom