Originally Posted by MontyB

I think you may have overlooked the fact that they already have that ability, the thing keeping them out of Taiwan is not the military capacity of Taiwan (which would certainly pack a punch but is hardly likely to be able to handle the shear volume of the mainlands material) but more that they would be fighting the US and its arsenal as well.

I am somewhat convinced that the US desire to keep the embargo in place has more to do with the US trying to maintain some control over European affairs than it is in protection of Taiwan.

I think it is more an attempt by the US to thwart Chinese expansion. We had an interesting discussion about this in my history class. Would the US risk a nuclear exchange with China over Taiwan? I was apalled that so many people thought we would back down, we didn't back down during the cold war, even when the doomsday clock was at 11:58 (if it gets to 12:00 everything go bye bye.) we did not back down, it was the Soviets who were forced to back down. To me it is unthinkable that the US would not go to war with China if they tried to invade Taiwan, we do afterall have a Carrier Task Force in the Straights of Taiwan, that is roughly 15,000 Americans right in the middle (I think, I am not a Navy man, I do not know the composition of one of the CTF's) of China and Taiwan. 15,000 Americans who would have to be killed in order to invade Taiwan. I was flabbergasted that so many people said that Taiwan was not worth it, we promised to defend them, they are our allies, I can not believe we would sell them down the river like that, I was speechless, literally, speechless.

Chinese improvements in the military is NOT modest. It's taking great strides as China's booming economy pulls it along with it.
A stronger China means it'll be even tougher to maintain a balance of power in the Asia Pacific region. Sure, the US will be stronger than China for a long time to come, but the US has the disadvantage of having to use its strategic reach capability to actually do something in East Asia. China doesn't have that problem, meaning if China solves the quality problem even partially, they have the advantage.
Taiwan breaking off from the mainland... they've been separate for 50 years. I think if they wanted to split off, they should be allowed to. Whether or not Taiwan joins China or not won't affect the Chinese much, but it will affect the Taiwanese (because of the sheer economic power that China is compared to Taiwan).
China's ability to take Taiwan in a limited war that includes the United States is highly questionable. Sure they have all those troops but how will the Chinese GET them to Taiwan? Swim? To unleash a seaborne assault they need sea and air superiority. An Airborne assault will require air superiority. The Chinese don't yet have that sort of strength. So China's ability to take Taiwan is not a guarantee.

The path is clear, China wants EU to lift the ban for access to more advanced weapons, which EU placed due to the Tiananmen Square Incident in 1989. The US is worried about China's military buildup and wishes against lifting the ban, so human rights issue is brought up. China counters by noting how the US has double standards when it comes to human rights. This is a move to strip the US of its creditability and silence the opposition in lifting the ban for human rights.

China's next move is made:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Bei...?oneclick=true

What will the US do next?

"No, but they do need those missiles in order to threaten their neighbors."

Is that a global war paranoira? Are you really concerned about the China's human-rights or China's global influence?

If you oppose the ban, please do state the correct reasoning instead of sugar-coat the issue with an emotional topic.

If I haven't made myself clear enough I'll state it here that I oppose lifting the ban because I fear that China would get more advanced weapons technologies (sonar, radar, etc.) that will dramtically reduce the effectiveness of Taiwan's defensive weapons.

Zyca, my post was not directed towads you. But to Damiene, because the American politicians tend to blind the public with emotional issues.

Gotcha. But I guess Cabal would now see more clearly where I stand.

Originally Posted by Boobies

"No, but they do need those missiles in order to threaten their neighbors."

Is that a global war paranoira? Are you really concerned about the China's human-rights or China's global influence?

If you oppose the ban, please do state the correct reasoning instead of sugar-coat the issue with an emotional topic.

Is it paranoid to acknowledge the fact that China will be a world superpower in about a decade and to try and prevent this? Is it paranoid to believe that China will eventually use force to bring Taiwan back under the control of Beijing as has been their goal for over 50 years? Is it paranoid to realize that the US will likely be involved in a war between China and Taiwan? Is it paranoid to look at the bigger picture, to look at the politics going on behind the scenes with these human rights accusations? If so then I guess I am paranoid. The US does not care if the EU makes a profit selling weapons to China, what we are worried about is what China will do with those weapons, as I said before, retaking Taiwan has been a goal for the mainland for over 50 years, if China is able to get hold of the finest European technology they will likely be that much closer to reaching their goal. Of course I condemn the human rights violations by both the American and Chinese governments, but I am also biased, like you, and Redleg, and Sherman, and the 13th redneck, everyone on this forum is biased in some way, we can deny it all we want but that does not make it less true. I am inclined to protest about the Chinese violations while trying to supress news of the American violations because of my patriotism. And as has already been stated, these back and forth exchanges are all part of a bigger picture, which is the destabilization of Asian politics by the rise of China as a world power.

I see. The US governemtn's double stadards are causing a lot of problems globally. Well, at least you admit what the US doing is all for power and control.

However, a lot of people unlike you can seperate the differences among human-rights, religions, democracy, politics global power, and influences when some hot topics surface.

It is kind of funny how the US policy is to thrust for control but use democracy and human-rights as a shield.

I see. The US governemtn's double stadards are causing a lot of problems globally. Well, at least you admit what the US doing is all for power and control.

Double standards would have to be America greatest problem in terms of credibility on these issues an example of this would be:
http://www.world-crisis.com/analysis...10_0_15_0_C33/

While this doctrine remains ie "as long as they are on your side it doesnt matter what they do" the US has no right to comment on another nations human rights.