politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This could be true. Trump is threatening to take Greenland. In contrast, China unlike Russia is not threatening Europe.
Only Taiwan
Americans regularly make the mistake of assuming that other countries will behave like America, even when the evidence points the other way.
If China actually wanted to invade Taiwan it's hard to imagine a better time to do it than right now. The US has used up almost all it's supply of Patriot interceptors and JASSM long range cruise missiles. We used up all our most effective ammunition attempting to bully Iran and even pulled ordinance out of the Pacific theater to do so.
On top of that the global economy is on shaky ground. This would be the most difficult time to try to put together a coalition to sanction China. It doesn't help that they control many of the precursor resources that we need for our advanced weapons systems.
On the other hand, they've demonstrated that their geography gives them an option vis a vis Taiwan that the US does not have with Iran, they can force capitulation without a ground invasion. Taiwan is so close to mainland China that they can completely blockade the island. They've done it several times and gotten away with it just fine. They do this ever time anyone gets near their "red lines"; that's basically any formal declaration of independence.
So the evidence points us to two obvious conclusions:
They will get Taiwan though talks. They won't invade because the US says it will bomb TMSC factory is China tries. It's not worth the risk for China to try to invade. But they will get it though talks soon.
China definitely considers the downsides of all the options in front of them.
When it comes to Taiwan, US intervention of any sort is now likely much lower on their list. They've been dumping funds into SMIC. Although they're not on par with TSMC yet, they're catching up fast. On top of that, the US would have a much harder time blowing up their factories (plural). They've used up most of the munitions that they could use to do it with and there's no safe way to get a ship into firing range of Taiwan.
The biggest incentive is cost. Why fight over something that (as you pointed out) they can get through talks? It may take longer but it's much cheaper that way.
Correct but Europeans probably view Taiwan as something far away.