Replies

Thanks.

I think I see your logic.

China likely did not attack in earlier decades as it had enough of a problem feeding itself.

I think you underestimate the sense of nationalism and energy of nationalism in China.

One group of Chinese once asked me if I thought Taiwanese compatriates wanted to reunify with China. I, somewhat unwisely, said that--sure--Taiwan compatriats wanted to get rid of their refrigerators, color TV's, Air conditioners, cars etc. to become like their Mainland relatives. There was nervous laughter.

Now, many to most city dwellers in Mainland China have most of those things plus.

I never said anything like

Chinese people are all murderous psychpoaths as you think.

But some key leaders have very selfish, arrogant, myopic etc. priorities and goals which could easily cost millions of lives. And they would feel no need to apologize for it just as they feel no need to apologize for Tienanmen now.

The vast masses of Chinese would prefer stability. But I think you still underestimate how many of them would at least tacitly support attacking Taiwan rather than even losing face, much less the "unity of the Motherland."

If you have never lived there long term, I can understand how you might not have picked up that cultural gestalt.

Lee Deng Huai's asserting the functional independant status of Taiwan is easy for the Beijing leaders to rationalize away. I don't know what their trip wire would be about Taiwan. They may not have it precisely defined though I bet they do. But there is one.

Beijing also knows that if Taiwan could vote, at least 51% would vote to become our 51st State. Given that Beijing has said all along that the masses of Taiwan citizens long to be reunited with the Motherland, any Taiwan referendum indicating otherwise is an unacceptable loss of face to the senior Beijing leaders. Quite intolerable.

And children and upstart provences in China are to be slapped down soundly at any impudence.

I think you also have a flawed memory to remember it as though Beijing said they'd attack if Taiwan chose wrong in 2,000. They didn't say it that way. Again, their word choices are important. They may have implied all kinds of things. But implications are something else.

They very rarely paint themselves into a corner as you imply.

Would the regime be doomed if they attacked? I doubt it. It would depend on many things.

IF we had devastated their major cities with nukes for some reason; if there were major quakes and drought here and there; if Taiwan had managed a considerably potent military response; If our CIA operatives etc. were causing a lot of trouble and enlisting a lot of yearning for democracy--perhaps so.

There are other scenarios when it is unlikely the regime would fall.

I never said anything like Chinese people are all murderous psychpoaths as you think.

Actually, this is exactly what you are saying.

You said that they'd hapily kill millions and millions and that Chinese people would support it -- all because in Taiwan and the US the names of some buildings were changed from institute to consulate or embassy.

If your claims are true, that would mean they are psychopathic murderous people.

You can't have it both ways.

Look, China isn't going to attack.

If they do, we are able to be ready for it and use it to end that horrible regime (worse than Hussein's) and help out to make China a truly great nation it could be.

You want to be sacred. OK. Be scared.