Posted on 07/05/2004 12:26:18 AM PDT by twntaipan
Yes...also for a possible quarantine of shipping from N. Korea because of NK trading in WMD components. The covert wars are heating up into real conflicts.
We can make Thug China even more backward than it is, with our submarines. They aren't stupid enough to push W enough to find out the costly way.
The Chinese know that our forces are stretched thin, and they may be testing us as we get closer to the election. I would strongly advise them not to push too hard.
We're not stretched thin enough for them to push us, as you say. They shouldn't let their emotions get out of hand. Thanks for your response.
Taiwan is toast. They don't realize it, but they are.
The U.S. won't back them at all. Why, you ask. Notice that over $100,000,000,000 has been invested in China, much by U.S. companies. China has become the world's center for manufacturing.
The U.S. in not going to risk its investments. We cannot win a war against China, since we've denuded ourselves of manufacturing infrastructure.
Taiwan may as well realize that, given a choice between sacrificing their lives and freedom on the one hand, and cheap Chinese junk on the other, we will defend cheap trinkets first.
Behold, free traitors - the first installment on the bills you're running up is about to come due. But what the hey - it's only a few million people's freedom. Enjoy your trip to Wally World.
Utter nonsense.
"We've denuded ourselves of manufacturing infrastructure""Why, you ask. Notice that over $100,000,000,000 has been invested in China, much by U.S. companies. China has become the world's center for manufacturing. "
You're getting warmer...
"cheap Chinese junk "
Right on target!
Taiwan's exports to China were something like $19 B in the first 4 months of 2004. Their imports from China were about $3 B.
Taiwan's semiconductors, LCD displays, and other high tech products go to China for assembly with plastics, mechanicals and other parts produced in China.
The finished goods are shipped mainly to the US.
Taiwan's economy would be totally trashed by a Chinese embargo.
Could be toast, or could be not. The biggest foreign investor in China (that $1 billion you talk about) is not the US--it's Taiwan.
So if Taiwan were taken, that investment would be controlled by the PRC. Sounds like an invasion could generate some short term profit...for the PRC.
Don't forget their partner Wally World....
Please don't forget that Taiwan has countless billions invested in China. Taiwanese are also very busy exploiting China's vast sea of cheap labor. It could well be that many Taiwanese capitalists would not mind be taken under China's wing (so to speak) if they could freely pursue their world trade in electronics, computer items and other hi tech products.
That's a very good point. And if the PRC is as clever as I suspect they are, they wouldn't hesitate to offer very profitable agreements in exchange for political support.
Which would let the US off the diplomatic hook of needing to defend Taiwan...
Which might suggest that U.S. corporations would be willing to kick some bucks into the arrangement too.
(sigh)
Ping
But the prospect for future investment from Taiwan would be...NIL. Taiwanese businesses don't keep all their cash in Taiwanese banks.
Hmm? I'll bet those businessmen would pay a lot to get their relatives out, wouldn't they? And if I can think of that, I dare say the PRC can too.
When and if it comes, I get the feeling you'll be cheering the PRC. Is that the case?
And, in reality, just how well do you think the PLA swims? They still don't have the force capacity to take Taiwan short of nuclear. I mean, how successful has the US been with only missile strikes and air strikes. The PLA won't be able to take Taiwan with ease and they know it.
I was in Taiwan in 1996 when the PRC lobbed missiles off the island to intimidate the voters (which failed miserably). Those with the most money (everyone seems to have money in Taiwan) had their money and their families long gone by the time the missiles flew.
It boils down to steel, ammunition, oil, and the sad truth that there are no permanent allies, only permanent interests.
Steel: Let's take steel first, since I just finished doing the numbers:
| Month | Domestic net tons | Import net tons | Total net tons | % imported |
| 2003-01 | 8,435,000 | 2,423,000 | 10,858,000 | 22.32% |
| 2003-02 | 8,087,000 | 1,757,000 | 9,844,000 | 17.85% |
| 2003-03 | 9,117,000 | 2,199,000 | 11,316,000 | 19.43% |
| 2003-04 | 8,845,000 | 1,806,000 | 10,651,000 | 16.96% |
| 2003-05 | 8,567,000 | 1,873,000 | 10,440,000 | 17.94% |
| 2003-06 | 8,692,000 | 1,710,000 | 10,402,000 | 16.44% |
| 2003-07 | 8,424,000 | 2,008,000 | 10,432,000 | 19.25% |
| 2003-08 | 8,629,000 | 1,615,000 | 10,244,000 | 15.77% |
| 2003-09 | 9,027,000 | 1,883,000 | 10,910,000 | 17.26% |
| 2003-10 | 9,273,000 | 1,701,000 | 10,974,000 | 15.50% |
| 2003-11 | 8,485,000 | 1,831,000 | 10,316,000 | 17.75% |
| 2003-12 | 9,038,000 | 1,690,000 | 10,728,000 | 15.75% |
| 2004-01 | 9,082,000 | 2,304,000 | 11,386,000 | 20.24% |
| 2004-02 | 9,104,000 | 1,940,000 | 11,044,000 | 17.57% |
| 2004-03 | 10,042,000 | 2,399,000 | 12,441,000 | 19.28% |
| 2004-04 | 9,143,000 | 2,436,000 | 11,579,000 | 21.04% |
| AVERAGES | 8,874,375 | 1,973,438 | 10,847,813 | 18.15% |
We are importers of steel, to the tune of 18% of what we use. In a serious war, we could only count on our own factories and what tiny fraction comes from Canada (if you will trust my guesstimate, it only averages maybe 400,000 tons per month from my perusing the press releases; if you would like to verify, please look at the end of the "import" press releases, which come at the end of the month. The domestic net tonnage comes in the middle of the month.) A steel plant is not something you can put up in a day or even a year. We have closed a lot of them over the last few years: Birmingham and Georgetown come to mind immediately; I was just in Pittsburgh, and I don't believe that the Steel City has any major steel operations going. (By the by, looking at these steel production numbers makes me strongly doubt that we are in any sort of substantive economic recovery. We have only just barely managed to get above the 16 month average each of the last 4 months in total net tonnage; taking into account all of the bubble construction going on (it's enough so that www.steel.org has set up a second website devoted only to that business) and guesstimating that it is consuming a reasonable fraction of the steel consumed, I don't see how the huge "productivity" numbers from Washington correspond to any reality of things made.)
Ammunition: As has been mentioned many times, we don't sufficient capacity at Lake City to manufacture cartridges to handle Afghanistan and Iraq. One would have to believe that any conventional war with China would consume enormous quantities of ammunition, which with even the plans to acquire more would still be insufficient.
Oil: (A lot of this is just wild surmise, based off some extrapolation from WWII and quickly scanning some websites for rough numbers.) We import over 50% of our crude oil, and we have about a strategic reserve that will hold us out, by itself, for about 30 days, meaning that we could, assuming that we were to use about the same amount of oil in a crisis as we do now that we could get along for about one year. Of course, that is ludicrous. If we get into a major shooting war with China, our consumption of oil, just as in World War II, will skyrocket. Taking some very wild guesses that we would go to 30 million barrels of consumption per day, and that we uncap enough currently unprofitable wells to get us to 10 million bbls/day production, then we are still only about 30 days supply before the reserve was empty and we would have to revert to what only we could produce out of the ground. It's not insubstantial, but it will not suffice to run our economy at enough of a pace to rearm and reindustrialize our nation and fight the world's most populous country.
The world likes to bet on a winner, and there are plenty of countries that aren't our allies now and won't be in the event of war with China, and this includes the strategically critical India. Our greatest ally, Japan (they spend a mint each year, their equipment is first rate -- take a look at their military budget and read the assessments of their forces at Global Security ) is agonizingly dependent on oil shipping through the naval conflict zone. They would have to repose great faith in us, or simply decide that they will honor their treaty with us at a cost that could be greater than what they lost in WWII, in order to openly support us.
The tally:
I think that it is clear that we would cede Taiwan rather than risk a major defeat or at least very ugly stalemate with China. No Subic Bay, maybe no Yokosuka, just Guam and Diego Garcia for resupply
Many will say, yes, but our forces, small they may be, are far superior to China's and can devastate their war machine and economy. Taiwan will defend themselves, they would say (I do not -- I don't know what might happen, but I firmly believe that there will be significant fifth column activity), but Taiwan's military is equally tiny. If China can even get a foothold on the island say, even by a flotilla of Mariel-type craft, with no thought to resupplying their troops, it would cause enough panic in Taipei that I think that there is a good chance that they will simply sue for peace. Certainly, there will be plenty in the business community, just as in Hong Kong that will welcome the PRC. (See The Fall of Hong Kong: China's Triumph and Britain's Betrayal for the cynical shenanigans of many in the Hong Kong business community).
If China elects to go to a blockade of some sort, I think that it might succeed, and is probably their best strategy. I don't think we would try to break the blockade, because the risk of hot war would be far too high.
If they try to simply pepper Taiwan with missiles, that strategy is probably a loser for them. It will cost them dearly in the world's view, and even with significant fifth column activity probably won't succeed in causing a complete capitulation.
Certainly not. I'm trying to open people's eyes to the dangers so it won't happen. It isn't an easy fight. Too many value cheap junk from the PRC over freedom for Taiwan - or anyone else.
And, in reality, just how well do you think the PLA swims? They still don't have the force capacity to take Taiwan short of nuclear. I mean, how successful has the US been with only missile strikes and air strikes. The PLA won't be able to take Taiwan with ease and they know it.
Today, it would be tough. But the PRC is building its military at a rapid rate - in terms of missiles, aircraft, and ships.
What happens if the PRC launches conventional missiles - they presently have 550 aimed at Taiwan - in an initial wave, followed by aircraft. I believe it takes less than 20 minutes for their aircraft to get to Taiwan? In the meantime, special forces already in place attack command-and-control centers, aircraft runways, and infrastructure.
Will Taiwan be able to sink an invasion fleet? Will they be able to react effectively after such a blow?
I was in Taiwan in 1996 when the PRC lobbed missiles off the island to intimidate the voters (which failed miserably). Those with the most money (everyone seems to have money in Taiwan) had their money and their families long gone by the time the missiles flew.
So how long will the troops fight if the elite abandons the island?
As to troops fighting if the elite leave: The island's voting population was almost exactly evenly divided in the recent election. But should the PRC actually attack, many who voted against Chen Shui-bian (because of his seeming commitment to Taiwanese independence) would swing against the PRC. Nothing motivates people to defend themselves like an attack on their homeland, and that would be especially true for Taiwan.
Bottom line: If the PRC thinks Taiwan is an easy grab, they are mistaken--regardless of the US joining in (and I for one think that with GWB as president the US will come to Taiwan's defense--heck, even Clinton sent a carrier task force down the Taiwan straits back in 1996).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.