Best analogy I can think of is a married couple. The wife (Taiwan) leaves the husband (China), but never bothers to file for divorce (declare independence). After 50 years of basically having nothing whatsoever to do with each, the wife decides to make it official and files for the divorce. So she tracks him down and hands him divorce papers. The husband pulls out a gun and shoots her (China invading Taiwan).

So OBVIOUSLY the wife was the aggressor. How dare she?

Yeah, that's how logical it is.

EDIT: So I'm feeling that I should counterpoint:

Fun to read your posts.

Get this straight:

1. No matter what, if taiwan does independence, it is war. Point.

Yes, but why? Is there some reason for China to take such a stand?

2. China will not lose the war, China has all means to take taiwan, if things turn urgly during the war, sorry taiwanese, there will be nukes put in, like USA did in Japan. Of course not hot nukes, just neutron mini nukes to take out any large-scale resistance.

China can be as proud as you like of their paultry nuclear stockpile, but are they insane where the USSR wasn't? Are they willing to open that pandora's box? The USA has enough nukes to kill every living thing in China several times over, so going nuclear would be pure idiocy. Kinda hard to be cocky when you're dead. Besides, what will China have accomplished by turning Taiwan into an uninhabitable wasteland of gamma fallout (from the Neutron bombs). They gain nothing, and stand to lose everything.

3. Taiwan is taken, USA sactions come, then China collapse? Give me a break to laugh, China was blocked after Korea War by almost ALL Western, so what? China still OK, nobody will die from hunger, and the Communist leaders still drive in Big Cars and live in Villa's, they don't give a dammn sh*t about sanction.

I did not say that China would collapse, I said that what is in the process of becoming a very strong economic force ends up dying on the vine with nobody to sell their crap to. Since you don't seem to know your economics, I will explain what happens next. All jobs where foreign companies employ Chinese ends. All Chinese exports cease because nobody buys their stuff anymore. This creates a market vacuum that looks exactly like the Great Depression. A very productive economy with nobody buying anything it produces always causes an economic collapse. Siting the Korean War as an example doesn't fit. Currently, China exports and produces a LOT more than it did then. They're market economy is a lot more reliant on exports than the Chinese Communist Party of 1950 ever dreamed of.

4. If Western get crazy with sanctions, OK, China will get crazy too, massive production of all kinds Nukes, flooding all mini nukes plus hot nukes to ALL Western enemies (there are a lot of them in the world). So happy every one.

The scary thing about this statement is that I don't think you grasp the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction. Once again, its pretty hard to be cocky when you're dead. China's enthusiam toward the strategic nuclear theater is kinda pointless considering.

5. Saint: we start to know more and more about Singpaporens now. To take on you, very easy, we sell nukes to Indonesia and Malaysia, we can missile nukes to Sigpapore city in 2 hours, finish you in 2 hours, happy? Don't be mad, if China is able to assure MAD (you know what MAD means?), then nobody can really bully China at all.

Right, all your points seem to lead back to nuclear holocaust. Lovely thoughts ... And who on earth was suggesting "bullying" China??

6. Last month, Chinese government has announced that they will put MORE money in strategic weapons to assure more MAD, preparing for the ugliest to come. Think about USSR with those nukes, USA didn't dare to confront USSR at all, simply because it is suicide to do that.

You're got your roles reversed. The Soviet Army was so gigantic, the USA and its allies would have been crazy to have started anything. But the West had one ace in the hole - the assurance that the USA was ready and willing to launch their missiles if the Soviets ever invaded Western Europe. Worked pretty good apparently.

Don't think you always have the upper-hand, Korea War and Vietnam War all have proven what is a paper tiger

Since all the scenarios you mentioned end in the total nuclear obliteration of China and some hefty obliteration of the US and its allies, who cares who has the "upper hand".

Give peace a chance, don't push too hard, before it is TOO late

I have to agree with Guy, that's the most hypocritcal thing I ever heard.

none

I suppose I'm not comprehending your analogy. The reason I used the husband/wife annalogy is because marriage is a union. Once, many decades ago, Taiwan and China were the same united country. Sure Taiwan was just a tiny piece and the rest is much larger, but the analogy fits because it all began as a civil war between Mao and the Communists vs Chaing Kai-shek (or however the correct spelling is). Sorta like a marital dispute. Chaing ended up retreating to a tiny corner of China, Formosa, and claimed it as his own. Because world diplomacy was stupid in those days, people were actually willing to recognize Chaing's government as the "official" government of China even though everyone knew it was a boldfaced lie. Because of the confusing circumstances that followed, Taiwan never declared its independence from China back when virtually nothing could have been done to stop them.

Your analogy makes a bit better sense as two brother fighting to the death over an inheritance. The one brother is about to kill the other. The loser runs away. He moves into a family ranch (to fit the analogy) and asks a couple friends to help protect him from his brother coming and killing him. The friends agree to help, not wanting to see their friend get massacred. Neither brother withdraws his claim to ownership of the full inheritance. A generation passes and both men die of old age. The children of the man on the ranch officially declare ownership of the ranch and withdraw their father's ridiculous claim to the rest. The children of the victorious brother, in their indignation to this move, gather their weapons and head over to the ranch and kill all of the children living at the ranch.

Now the question at hand is this: Is it wrong to stop this massacre?

You see, what you are suggesting isn't true. At no point in the proposed scenario is the United States "coming and kicking China's ass". The possible US role in the affair doesn't even exist until China attacks. No, China is doing what it did to Tibet: Attacking, slaughtering and controlling a weak country that hasn't any chance of defending itself. Seriously, does China intend to invade Taiwan with love and flowers and a bunch of signs say "lets just be friends"? No, they're coming with death, destruction and massacre to crush all who dare oppose them. If that's not being the bully, what the hell is??

I think all this thread is proving is that China is a very dangerous and crazy country.

Depends on who is president

Be very carefull about judging an entire country based only on what one person have posted....

Two persons actually, but you're absolutely correct in your assessent.

Not only 2, if you go to Chinese websites, you will know 99.99% Chinese
are like us about Taiwan

The real issue here is:
Taiwan as a place of land, belongs to ALL Chinese, both in Mainland and Taiwan. So that part of Chinese in Taiwan (ROC: Republic of China), does not have the right to take that piece of land away without aggreement of Mainland Chinese, if they do, that is called Dirty Selfish, and we Mainland Chinese will kick their sorry as*s. POINT.

Who will recognize a "independence declared Taiwan"? USA? EU?
I am pretty sure no real big countries will recognize it at all, so why the trouble about of this independence stuff?

About Nuke War:
Chinese are very peaceful and kind people in the world. If we treat each other as friends, that's great, but if you try to piss off Chinese, then you have seen how we fought in Korea War.

Also last week, when a jonalist asked a PLA delegation in Beijing about how many times PLA can destroy USA, the General replied: Is ONE time to destroy USA not yet enough?

I quote the general's words here simply because I find it so funny that someone is talking about destroying China a couple of time, holly, what is the difference btw killing one once and twice?

As I said: give peace a chance, meaning USA does not send wrong signal to Taiwan (go go go independence, China will do nothing against you, and we USA will help you).

If there ever should be a war between USA and China, no one will win anyway.
The whole World will loose....

That's an understatement, the whole world would be dead.

The United States is not the aggresor In this scenario, China is, regardless of what the Chinese "opinion" is.