# China invading Taiwan in the near future? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 4, 2000, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/china-invading-taiwan-in-the-near-future/17702 "2000-03-04T22:02:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Freedomx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/4af34b/32.png) [@Freedomx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freedomx)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2000, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/china-invading-taiwan-in-the-near-future/17702/21 "2000-03-10T14:17:00Z")
[http://204.202.137.112/media/World/images/apr\_gore\_hsia\_990518\_h.jpg](http://204.202.137.112/media/World/images/apr_gore_hsia_990518_h.jpg) Buddhist Temple? What Buddhist Temple? ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [March 11, 2000, 6:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/china-invading-taiwan-in-the-near-future/17702/22 "2000-03-11T06:41:00Z")
If the Chinese really thought Clinton was such a pushover, why would they have waited until the eighth year of his administration? If the Chinese are working on invasion plans, it’s probably ground work in the hope of a Bush victory. After all, Republican administrations have always been more accomodating to China. ---
**Author:** ![Ringo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/779978/32.png) [@Ringo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ringo)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2000, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/china-invading-taiwan-in-the-near-future/17702/23 "2000-03-13T06:46:00Z")
[Here](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/et?ac=000114832908976&rtmo=LbNxh7yd&atmo=ggggg3JK&pg=/et/00/3/12/wtai12.html)’s a _Telegraph_ article (I don’t know how long that link will last) that covers the current situation. It seems to be saying what’s been noted by **bantmof** , that there’s no way they couuld pull it off. And that it is driven by hopes to influence Taiwanese elections. And here are some snippets from a [Bill Gertz](http://www.drudgereport.com/gertz.htm) column: > [@](#): > > Any military action by Beijing to reunify the island by force would bring grave consequences, Mrs. Albright told the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on commerce, justice, state and the judiciary. > > The secretary was asked about recent bellicose statements by China, including a government white paper issued last week that said China would use force against Taiwan if it delayed reunification. > > … > > The white paper should be viewed within the context of elections in Taiwan and “internal issues in China,” she said without elaborating. > > Some analysts believe the harsh rhetoric from Beijing prior to March 18 elections in Taiwan is a sign of internal differences among China’s communist rulers because it is undermining support in the United States for legislation that would boost China’s trade. > > The white paper, issued immediately after the visit to Beijing by a high-level U.S. diplomatic mission, may represent a shift in Chinese policy. In the past, Beijing has threatened force if Taiwan declared independence. The white paper appeared to _lower_(?) the threshold for the use of force. > > Under the 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, the United States has pledged to prevent the mainland from forcibly reuniting with Taiwan. > > … > > China’s military newspaper on Monday stated that the United States risked a nuclear missile attack if it intervened to defend Taiwan from a Chinese attack. > > The commentary in the Liberation Army Daily stated it is “not a wise move to be at war with a country such as China, a point which the U.S. policy-makers know fairly well also.” A friend made the comment last night that he really couldn’t see why defense of Taiwan’s independence should be something the U.S. must take military action to forestall - i.e., what’s the difference to the U.S. if it becomes part of China? ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2000, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/china-invading-taiwan-in-the-near-future/17702/24 "2000-03-12T19:04:00Z")
What’s the difference? The Taiwan Relations Act was passed in 1979, during the Cold War, when the U.S. was still seriously worried about the whole world falling to the Commies. Last I heard, mainland China was still a Communist nation. ---
**Author:** ![mealworm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e56c9b/32.png) [@mealworm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mealworm)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2000, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/china-invading-taiwan-in-the-near-future/17702/25 "2000-03-12T19:13:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by tracer: > \*\*What’s the difference? The Taiwan Relations Act was passed in 1979, during the Cold War, when the U.S. was still seriously worried about the whole world falling to the Commies. > > Last I heard, mainland China was still a Communist nation.\*\* Exactly. I think it is our responsibility, as the only true Superpower, to protect fledgling democracies from communism. Do you really want those people to fall under that kind of rule? How selfish. We need to protect these growing freedoms from Communism… It’s still a threat, despite the end of the ‘Cold War’. But it’s important to remember that we would not be at war with the Chinese people… They really have little control and are a genuinely peace-loving people. They don’t want war with the US at all. We have a problem with their government, not their people. There is so much they can do if they could just get out from underneath the communist rule. Infamus [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/china-invading-taiwan-in-the-near-future/17702.md?page=1)