War with China over Taiwan. Inevitable?

[UnseenParticipant]

jakelafort wrote:

Yes Unseen and in keeping with your request i did not answer Davis. I am not downplaying the significance of Taiwan and China.

If it felt like I was a little over the top, I apologize. I see PopeBeanie has provided a link to the Israel/Middle East discussion.

[jakelafortParticipant]

No worries Unseen.

[UnseenParticipant]

Question: Can Taiwan realistically be protected from ultimate seizure by China? If you admit that China will ultimately absorb Taiwan, should the United States commit blood and treasure to protecting it?

[UnseenParticipant]

Taiwan’s Status Is a Geopolitical Absurdity

Officially, 17 countries recognize Taiwan’s democratic government, which is known as the Republic of China, but the United Nations regards the People’s Republic of China government in Beijing, which has never controlled Taiwan, as speaking for the island. This leads to one of the many absurdities that affect Taiwan: Its 23 million citizens can travel the world on Taiwanese passports—emblazoned with Republic of China (Taiwan)—which are among the most widely accepted documents on the planet, but they cannot enter UN buildings with them. (This is despite the fact that in 1942, the Republic of China was among the first countries to sign the United Nations Declaration.) Washington does not recognize the Republic of China, yet Taiwan is the U.S.’s 11th-largest trading partner, the world’s 22nd-largest economy, and a crucial link in Silicon Valley’s supply chain.

Despite its limited international presence it is difficult to overstate Taiwan’s strategic importance to both the United States and an increasingly assertive China. 

[TheEncogitationerParticipant]

Unseen,

Without mentioning the distraction I unintentionally started (my apologies for that,) if Taiwan had it’s own means to defend itself in an age of fighter planes, killer satellites, and ICBMs, it wouldn’t require American lives.  And since Taiwan is a prosperous Asian Tiger Nation with a relatively free market, providing it the means of defence by trade shouldn’t require sacrifice of treasure.

If anyone in Taiwan still hopes to unite with the mainland and Mongolia under a Chang Kai-Shek-style Republic of China, they need to give up right quick.  First, Chang Kai-Shek was a pretty bloody authoritarian in his own right and Taiwan deserves better.  Also, not until both Emperor Xi and the whole Communist apparatus is out of power could uniting with part of the mainland even be a possibility.  It also wouldn’t be fully possible with the Uighurs seeking to either secede or impose their own Tamerlane-flavored Islamic Republic.  Taiwanese should just be happy for the island they have and the freedom and success it has, and fight to hold onto that.

As for not having a place in the United Nations, no big loss for Taiwan.  I wish we were out of it and it was out of the U.S.  Having the United Nations here is like being forced to pay the tab for your own roast, only there’s no laughter and the roast is literal.

[_Robert_Participant]

It’s so easy to have others die for some academic political cause. The test should be unless you are willing (because the threat is so important to you) to take a 50 caliber round right through your helmet and leave half of your brain matter on the ground in Taiwan…you should not be in favor of sending troops. So you know as bad as the Syrians have it….it does not pass that test. Nor did Viet Nam, Iraq, Korea, Panama, Grenada or Kabul. I did not agree with the threat assessments of any of those, most ended as cluster fucks. WWII yeah. That threat was real. WWI.. I am not sure the Kaiser, Serbians, etc. were a real threat to the US and well it fixed nothing.

[jakelafortParticipant]

I agree with Robert.

[UnseenParticipant]

If we go to war over Taiwan it will be like our going to war in the Middle East over oil, but instead of oil, it’s microchips. We’ve let this tiny nation become the microchip cartel and so it’s a great prize for a superpower to want to control.

A Taiwanese perspective on the Semiconductor Industry: Maintaining the Competitive Edge

At the foundation of today’s technology, semiconductors have been regarded as the “new oil” of the 21st century. Omnipresent in our daily life (ranging from mobile phones, to cars and fighter jets), the semiconductor industry is becoming a crucial element of national security, moving beyond matters related to global trade. 

Taiwan holds a near monopoly in this security-related product. Responsible for 63% of global semiconductor market share, Taiwan lies at the heart of the semiconductor industry, reaching an output value of 3 trillion NTD in 2020 (107.53 billion USD). As a world leader in semiconductor manufacturing, the Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (臺灣積體電路製造公司,TSMC) accounts for 54% of the global semiconductor market share. The demand for the chips below 10 nm (the most advanced chips available thus far) is towering and is estimated to become the largest portion of monthly installed capacity share in 2024. Currently, in the global market of chips below 10 nanometers, TSMC is the major supplier (accounting for 84% of the pure foundry revenue in 2020). The only competitor producing chips below 10 nm is Samsung of South Korea with a 14% of pure foundry revenue in 2020. So far, the major clients of TSMC, such as China and the US, do not have the capacity to produce their own advanced semiconductors. As a result, Taiwan has become an indispensable link in the global production of semiconductors.  

[_Robert_Participant]

US and European firms make the machines used in Taiwan to produce chips and chip making is not labor intensive…the chip argument is weak as we could just keep the machines home and pick up where we left off. A war would disrupt the supply chain at least as long as a transition. The military/industrial complex licking their chops as they launch yet another flag waving ‘freedom’ propaganda campaign.

Applied Materials
Lam Research
ASML

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

War is not necessarily the only concern to businesses. The supply chain is as likely to be interrupted by extreme weather scenarios or even an Earthquake which happened in 2016 or even a Tsunami which have also happened before. It could even start as some small event that has unintended consequences.

I can think of no reason why America cannot become self sufficient in producing its own chips. It has the knowledge, finances and the technical expertise to do so. Some “upskilling”  with the smaller chips may be needed but again that is not a game stopper.

OK- just noticed Robert’s comment above – I agree that the disruption to the supply chain due to a war would probably have the same timeline as building operational factories. But Capital Expenditure is an investment that has ROI’s that are more than just monetary. Build Back Better!

• This reply was modified 3 years, 3 months ago by  Reg the Fronkey Farmer.

[PopeBeanieModerator]

Unseen wrote:

What we ought to be spending money on is on helping India develop into a power rivaling China. It has a larger population, more competent scientists, and is positioned to be a superpower that can balance and restrain China from its goal of dominating Asia.

A tiny Indian archipelago makes China nervous

[UnseenParticipant]

China’s thirst to rule the world has just gone hypersonic

I think the United States is China’s Golden Goose, so I’m not too worried about a hot war with China, but North Korea…?

[PopeBeanieModerator]

Hypersonic offensive and defensive weaponry’s been in the making for years now, so this is not as surprising to experts as the article implies (even in the headline). I saw a few errors in the flashy drawing, but the threat of these new weapons is nevertheless real. The most reliable mode of defense has to be space based and/or laser/particle beam, or even faster hypersonic technology. (It just occurred to me how Musk’s SpaceX capabilities could play a huge part in deploying a majority of the space based stuff.) China obviously thinks it can do what it wants without regard to internationally recognized agreements in the long run (or “march”).

Your suggestion of allying more closely to India sounds to me like the most effective strategy. As for North Korea, it’s the most populated and closely managed cult in the world, and is less predictable, except for its potential to behave erratically and out of bounds. I don’t put it past China to surreptitiously use them like a tool or surrogate force against South Korea or against other nations within their ballistic missile range. Any predictions about North Korea will be very speculative, until the cult gets overthrown somehow, which (imo) makes the prospect of liquidating the top leadership the least unpalatable option, and the sooner the better.

[PopeBeanieModerator]

Unseen wrote:

Question: Can Taiwan realistically be protected from ultimate seizure by China? If you admit that China will ultimately absorb Taiwan, should the United States commit blood and treasure to protecting it?

Somehow I missed this post before. That would be quite a large project for China to take on, but perhaps they could afford to “buy out” NK’s leadership, and institute a customized long march for NK… it could even be the most humane thing to do for NK’s population, if it were managed over a generation’s time or so.

[UnseenParticipant]

PopeBeanie wrote:

Unseen wrote:

Question: Can Taiwan realistically be protected from ultimate seizure by China? If you admit that China will ultimately absorb Taiwan, should the United States commit blood and treasure to protecting it?

Somehow I missed this post before. That would be quite a large project for China to take on, but perhaps they could afford to “buy out” NK’s leadership, and institute a customized long march for NK… it could even be the most humane thing to do for NK’s population, if it were managed over a generation’s time or so.

Was there an answer to my question in there somewhere? New question: If NK went after Taiwan instead of China, what could we realistically do about NK? More generally, is there a realistic solution to any NK aggression? At least China is run by rational leadership. NK is run by an intelligent madman.

[Author]

Posts