POLL: A two part poll: Should Speaker Pelosi go to Taiwan and should she take Minority Leader McCarthy

It may not be a matter of whether we should defend Taiwan but whether we can. China's military does not compared to ours, but it has reached the strength where we likely would not prevail in a battle in the Taiwan strait.

And in considering the Speaker's planned trip, it's also worth considering that many high EU officials have visited of late on official trips. It's unclear why the Chinese decided to make a stand here. There's no doubt that when she scheduled the trip, it was not done without administration approval. That's just the way these things work. There's a lot of high level coordination between foreign policy apparatus.

I don't think anyone anticipated the Chinese response based upon the fact that other high EU officials have visited without drawing much of an objection.

 

This just isn’t so, though it’s precisely what China would like the average American to believe. Here are the facts, though:

Taking Taiwan by force (by subterfuge would be a different matter) would require a very complex, very large combination of coordinated amphibious and airborne operations. No one in the world is better at these than us in terms of doctrine, equipment, and training … and yet we would have a very difficult time taking Taiwan by force even if the Chinese sat back and did nothing while we tried. Bear also in mind that prevailing over Taiwan means China would have to establish air and maritime superiority over the island and its surrounding waters. That would prove difficult enough for China against Taiwan alone. Doing it while the world’s, by far, best air and naval forces are interfering would be a fool’s errand. China’s military center of gravity is its ground combat forces, which it can’t bring to bear without controlling the air and sea. It can cause a lot of problems for the Taiwanese with its overwhelming number of ballistic missiles, but it can’t capture or hold ground with them. One other thing people always seem to forget or airily wave away is that China still has no answer for our stealth aircraft capabilities. If we were to involve ourselves militarily, we can hit them in lots of places that hurt while they swing away at air.

No one should want war with China. I certainly don’t for a host of reasons. But one of those reasons is not fear that they would humble us in the field. That is Chinese information operations designed to bully us into allowing them their way unimpeded.

 

Militarily interfering with Pelosi's delegation to Taiwan would be an act of war. We should not be bullied and we should defend and respond militarily in return.

I read an article elsewhere on a conservative site that it was Joe Biden who tipped China off to the trip. If so, not saying it is true, we have real a problem in the White House concerning a president who is too cozy with Communist China.

 

I’m not talking about subduing Taiwan, which I agree would be difficult against resistance. I have read that there is doubts the Taiwanese would be like Ukrainians. I don’t know about that.

I’m talking about a naval battle in the Taiwan Strait with the US Navy against the Chinese Navy, Chinese shore missile batteries and the Chinese Air Force that can be deployed from land bases, not just carrier based air power.

I read 2034 by a retired admiral, which had some weird stuff that was inherently unbelievable and which supposedly takes place 12 years in the future. But he made it clear he was trying to get out the message that it could very badly for cyber reasons.

Plus I’ve read that the last 12 war games, if I’m remembering the number correctly, of a US-Chinese naval battle in the Taiwan Strait had the Chinese winning. Now I understand that sometimes such war games are staged and leaked to support funding. But it only makes sense that with the advances they’ve made, it would be very difficult to win a naval battle in the Taiwan Strait.

IIRC, for the Chinese to subdue Taiwan completely, much would depend on how quickly they could accomplish subterfuge, as you say, and how much resistance their was. There are cultural reasons to have some concerns. But the US Navy being able to guarantee security against invasion is considered to be dubious.

 

New developments of Pelosi's visit to Taiwan.

I also think that, yes, Pelosi should take a visit to Taiwan if she wants to take that visit.

 

Don’t see the point of having China dictate where, when, and who in our government can visit other countries. IMO, China bit off more than they can chew with these statements- another “red line” so to speak. Their turn to blink.

 

What other high EU officials? Do you mean the EU commission or individual EU countries? Because nobody cares about officials from the EU commission. Nobody knows who they are and they have no power to do anything. But if you're talking about high level officials from individual EU countries, I don't think any has visited Taiwan in a long time.

Pelosi will definitely be the influential politician to visit Taiwan in a long time. The impact will be more than even Gingrich visiting in '97 because Gingrich was in the opposition party and his visit can reasonably be explained as showing up Clinton who was getting chummy with China. This visit will be seen as having the blessing of the highest authorities of the US and would 100% be interpreted as a change to the status quo by China.

Personally, I don't believe that China intends to start a war over the visit. They specifically mentioned that they would respond by changing the status quo themselves to their favor. What exactly that means is difficult to say, but perhaps regular flyovers over Taiwan, and regular attacks on anti-air assets that would lock on or fire upon Chinese warplanes.

I feel more certain that China will start preparing for war in earnest. Even by Cia estimates China spends less than 2% of its GDP on the military, so they can raise it to a similar level to ours which is at ~3.5%. That would be a doubling of their military spending, and given that they're already able to build so much military hardware with their current level of spending, we'll probably witness a level of build up that's on the cold-war level.

 

I voted no because I think foreign policy is the business of the executive branch. I think china is just Sabre rattling for domestic consumption but I thought Russia was to in Ukraine. So what do I know.

 

We're not gonna fight in the Taiwan strait, China's gotten too strong for us to realistically win there. We'll be mostly fighting a containment/blockade battle, fully utilizing our advantages in bases, carriers, and subs, instead of allowing them to utilize their advantage in missiles. China knows that too, which is why they won't fight right now. They're more likely to escalate by starting an arms race, so that either we engage in a battle of industrial might or risk losing our advantages.

 

I don't disagree. No one knows. But in every scenario I've read, the "red teaming" of China's side starts with preemptive attacks on our bases in Guam and Japan, taking them out before they can be used

 

First BS on the revisionist history on Gingrich. Here is Clinton getting "chummy", and the context for the 97 visit. Ya'll believe your own BS

The Third Taiwan Strait Crisis, also called the 1995–1996 Taiwan Strait Crisis or the 1996 Taiwan Strait Crisis, was the effect of a series of missile tests conducted by the People's Republic of China (PRC) in the waters surrounding Taiwan, including the Taiwan Strait from 21 July 1995 to 23 March 1996. The first set of missiles fired in mid-to-late 1995 were allegedly intended to send a strong signal to the Republic of China government under Lee Teng-hui, who had been seen as moving its foreign policy away from the One-China policy. The second set of missiles were fired in early 1996, allegedly intending to intimidate the Taiwanese electorate in the run-up to the 1996 presidential election.

The U.S. government responded by staging the biggest display of American military might in Asia since the Vietnam War.[5] In July 1995, USS Belleau Wood (LHA-3) transited the Taiwan Strait, followed by the USS O'Brien (DD-975) and USS McClusky FFG-41 on December 11-12, 1995. Finally on December 19, 1995, the USS Nimitz (CVN-68) and her Battlegroup passed through the straits.[6]

President Clinton ordered additional ships into the region in March 1996.[7] Two aircraft carrier battle groups, Carrier Group Five centered on USS Independence (CV-62) and Carrier Group Seven centered on Nimitz, were present in the region[8] as well as the amphibious assault ship Belleau Wood.[9] The Nimitz and her battle group and the Belleau Wood sailed through the Taiwan Strait, while the Independence did not.[10] The crisis forced the Chinese leadership in 1996 to acknowledge its inability to stop U.S. forces from coming to Taiwan's assistance

Third Taiwan Strait Crisis - Wikipedia

EU contacts/visits all here. Easily searchable


'You are not alone': EU Parliament delegation tells Taiwan on first official visit

EU lawmaker promises support to Taiwan | DW | 19.07.2022

Senior lawmaker says EU supports Taiwan's 'sovereign' existence

 

Again, no one cares about EU lawmakers. French, German, UK, sure, not EU. I bet most here can name numerous leaders of EU member countries, how many can name a single member of the EU parliament?

I'm very well aware of the '96 Taiwan strait crisis, both countries quickly mended ties after the 2-carrier visit, laying the ground for Jiang's visit to the US later in' 97. Gingrich's visit was an effort to derail that repproachment, to no avail.

 

Disagree on both. China cares about EU officials and Taiwan. The EU is underappreciated as a power. I don’t know where to get this full article, which Moravcsik turned into a book that I own but have not read yet.

But especially in trade, the EU is a superpower. And they are not a military slouch either.


https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228680476_Europe_The_quiet_superpower


Gingrich is nonserious. He has never made a decision with any power he had that reflected a moment of statesmanlike thought about US interests. He’s a fool and a danger. The Chinese did not see Clinton as giving in on Taiwan. They were humiliated.

 

I never said the Chinese thought Clinton gave in, his show of strength in 96 was what allowed him to achieve the repproachment in 97. Kind of like how "only Nixon could visit China".

Again, the EU parliament is powerless, they're low level politicians compared to those of its member states. That's not really debatable. When you deal with the EU, you deal with Macron, Scholz, etc, not whoever is in the EU parliament.

 

Yes, but they don't go and make statements like that without the backing of Heads of State. It's a perfect way to make that statement without putting the Head of State out there. In fact, I suspect that's what was behind having the speaker go there. I think we didn't anticipate fired up given the other visits. Not sure what caused this line in the sand, maybe because they are feeling back on their heels

 

Visits and statements by low level officials like them are precisely designed to show support to Taiwan while giving the heads of states plausible deniability. Such is not the case for Pelosi. You may not understand it, but clearly the US government does, which is why such a visit has not happened in 25 years. Even Gingrich visited Beijing and Shanghai first before visiting Taipei, and he was from the opposition party, so you could argue that it's an unprecedented escalation. Here's a letter to Biden from a group of former intelligence officials.

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity: Military Clash With China Over Pelosi Visit? - Antiwar.com Blog

"Presumably, your advisers have prepared assessments regarding the extent to which the expressed Chinese concerns articulate genuine existential concerns or are mere saber rattling and diplomatic posturing. We want you to know that it is our collective opinion that such a visit by Speaker Pelosi would be viewed in the most serious light by China; that China would react quite strongly, reflecting the reality that it would consider such a visit close to an existential threat warranting high risk of armed hostilities."
...
Instead, the Speaker appears to be conducting unilateral diplomacy, the objectives of which are far from clear. If Speaker Pelosi goes through with her earlier stated plan to visit Taiwan, this would represent an uncoordinated foray into U.S. foreign policy and national security affairs, in which the executive branch is supposed to have the lead. And this will be widely seen as combustible disarray in Washington.

The potential for the Speaker’s visit to Taiwan generating a military-on-military clash between US and Chinese, and also between Chinese and Taiwanese, forces is high. While there might be some in your inner circle who believe that the Chinese are bluffing, and that there are no existential issues involved in Speaker Pelosi’s possible visit to Taiwan, we respectfully disagree. Similar miscalculations were made regarding Russia’s pre-war posture vis-à-vis Ukraine. Indeed, some of us were surprised when Russia actually invaded. But we try to learn from our mistakes."

 

Yes we miscalculated on Ukraine that doesn’t mean that China will attack.

 

I am not saying that the Chinese are definitely bluffing and then it’s worth the risk. I don’t know. My point is very simple. There’s no way the trip was originally planned without implicit administration support, based upon their perception of how the Chinese would respond. Sure the Chinese would view it as a provocation, and respond with rhetoric. But I don’t think this response was anticipated. And I don’t think it’s explainable by the sequence of the visit, which after all, was advertised as a trade tour consistent with the new TPP lite.

Either we miscalculated, or the Chinese decided to draw a line in the sand because of recent events where they have been on their heels. Most likely some combination of the two.

I don’t know what the right route is now. Probably not to go forward as planned although I don’t know if there’s any middle ground that will satisfy the middle Kingdom. I rather like that pun. It’s not worth a military confrontation.

IMO, a lot will depend on what Taipei wants. I will personally be satisfied if go through some equivalent of “Freedom of Navigation” exercise to establish the principle while avoiding the confrontation, at least for now, hopefully much longer.

The only certainty is that no matter what choice is made, Marco Rubio will say something idiotic that makes it sound simple and that talking like a movie cowboy will make the Chinese bend the knee.