Re: 2pid, I really want to know

On May 10, 2:56=A0pm, ScottW <Scott...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> =A0So your point is..why maintain a deterrent?

No, there are other things that we could do, assuming your earlier
comment was correct.

> Because even a US unopposed Chinese invasion of Taiwan is going
> to have serious consequences for the US.

Even if we seriously opposed it our chances of success are very
limited. They'd have about 150 miles to travel. We'd have thousands.
Look at a map. Taiwan would largely be on their own. We pulled out
years ago.

> Do you really think US trade relations would be unaffected?
> The dollar? =A0Chinese holdings of US bonds?

Where did I say that? However, China taking over Hong Kong was not a
big deal, despite claims that it would lead to a calamity for the
population and world markets.

> The US policy is to maintain a position the gives peacful
> negotiated resolution to the problem the only path to solution.

Absolutes are seldom the case in the real world, 2pid. There is no
"only".

> China is clearly pursuing the capability to have a military option.
> We can make that option much harder to acquire.

No, we can't. They're getting their technology from the Russians,
among others. All we could possibly do is make exercising it a little
more costly. I'd predict at most a token show to save face.

Do you suppose we'd go nuclear over Taiwan? Would we nuke China if
they chose to nuke Taiwan?

If we aren't willing to go the whole way, we'd better not go at all.

> > Now go back to your basket and lick yourself.
>
> =A0Brilliant display of intellect.

Yap yap yap.