W*gs care to defend your peaceful friends now?

[Hotrod]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=45278

W*gs tell me how they dont want conflict. How they have no intentions of attacking Taiwan

If they dont have any intention of a Taiwan conflict why call us out and threatend the USA "hundreds of US citys destroyed" sounds like a peaceful nation to me W*gs.


go ahead and defend this rofl

[clarker]

Originally Posted by Hotrod

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=45278

W*gs tell me how they dont want conflict. How they have no intentions of attacking Taiwan

If they dont have any intention of a Taiwan conflict why call us out and threatend the USA "hundreds of US citys destroyed" sounds like a peaceful nation to me W*gs.


go ahead and defend this rofl

That is some scare sh.t. Nothing to joke about.

[SoCalBronco]

They would never nuke the US thats garbage talk. They could threaten it over and over again, its irrelevant what they say on that point.

Harken back to the early 1970s concept of M.A.D or Mutually Assured Destruction. Once both sides in a potential conflict have amassed a certain amount of arms, a critical threshold of sorts, its irrelevant who has more or who makes a nuclear threat against the other. Since both sides would be assured of destruction in a nuclear exchange, its never in either side's self interest to realistically consider such an option.

China can say whatever it wants, but nuclear threats are always just hot air because of this concept.

[Spider]

Hey . what have we been telling them Hotrod ? ........ SoCal you damn right they will Nuke us over Taiwan , if they feel we are aiming nukes at them......

[SoCalBronco]

Originally Posted by §Pide®

Hey . what have we been telling them Hotrod ? ........ SoCal you damn right they will Nuke us over Taiwan , if they feel we are aiming nukes at them......

Fair enough bro, but if its just Taiwan, do u think its worth it for them to nuke us knowing full well that if attacked we would nuke back, and both countries would unquestionably be destroyed? Its not worth it, there is nothing worth it. They might try some War Games or whatever near Taiwan trying to show off some new toys, but they would never, ever attack the US pre emptively because neither side could survive a nuclear attack. I could see them punishing us in other ways, like economically for example, if we hindered one of their interests like Taiwan, but nukes, i cant see that.

Ofcourse this all assumes that they balance interests rationally and think of the likely consequences of their actions before they act. If they just shoot from the hip like Chief Fan, thats another story altogether....

[Spider]

Originally Posted by SoCalBronco

Fair enough bro, but if its just Taiwan, do u think its worth it for them to nuke us knowing full well that if attacked we would nuke back, and both countries would unquestionably be destroyed? Its not worth it, there is nothing worth it. They might try some War Games or whatever near Taiwan trying to show off some new toys, but they would never, ever attack the US pre emptively because neither side could survive a nuclear attack. I could see them punishing us in other ways, like economically for example, if we hindered one of their interests like Taiwan, but nukes, i cant see that.

Ofcourse this all assumes that they balance interests rationally and think of the likely consequences of their actions before they act. If they just shoot from the hip like Chief Fan, thats another story altogether....

Yes I do , as I tried to point out to W*GS , Peking Needs Taiwan , the structure of Mainland China demands Taiwan ....... China is willing to risk alot ......

[Antilles]

I'm REALLY not trying to say China is peaceful, but doesn't the very first sentence of the article state that China would use nuclear weapons IF ATTACKED? Don't you think we'd say and do the same if China attacked Guam? I'd say the first sentence in the article is the only thing that is really important and the rest is just rhetoric, as inflamatory as it may be...

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Antilles

I'm REALLY not trying to say China is peaceful, but doesn't the very first sentence of the article state that China would use nuclear weapons IF ATTACKED? Don't you think we'd say and do the same if China attacked Guam? I'd say the first sentence in the article is the only thing that is really important and the rest is just rhetoric, as inflamatory as it may be...

I cant remember the USA threating anyone with Nukes , we made no seceret that if Russia attacked we could retailiate , But I dont remember us saying will nuke anyone if they attacked us ........

[elsid13]

This is saber rattling. OLD Time China is trying to flex it military muslce, but as the middle class continue to grow and the chinses economy is intergrated into the rest of the world much of the threat goes away. Countries that trade together don't fight each other. Yes there are problems, but China is less a threat to national security then the disaster and displacment going on in Africa and the sub-India area.

[Antilles]

Originally Posted by §Pide®

I cant remember the USA threating anyone with Nukes , we made no seceret that if Russia attacked we could retailiate , But I dont remember us saying will nuke anyone if they attacked us ........

good point. I can't remember the US outright threatening the use of nukes either, although it is a pretty fine distinction between an explicit threat and an implicit threat like the one in your cold war example.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Antilles

good point. I can't remember the US outright threatening the use of nukes either, although it is a pretty fine distinction between an explicit threat and an implicit threat like the one in your cold war example.

I would agree that I was splitting hairs to a point .......

[clarker]

Originally Posted by §Pide®

I cant remember the USA threating anyone with Nukes , we made no seceret that if Russia attacked we could retailiate , But I dont remember us saying will nuke anyone if they attacked us ........

Does the Cuban Missel Crises count? Not being a smart a**, just asking.

[elsid13]

Originally Posted by clarker

Does the Cuban Missel Crises count? Not being a smart a**, just asking.

No, Kenndy never directly threaten a nuclear attack againt USSR. Close that US has come is McArthur demanding Truman use nukes on the Chinese during the Korean conflict.

[Montaq]

Originally Posted by §Pide®

I cant remember the USA threating anyone with Nukes , we made no seceret that if Russia attacked we could retailiate , But I dont remember us saying will nuke anyone if they attacked us ........

Does Japan count?

[clarker]

Originally Posted by Montaq

Does Japan count?

Oh, man, how did we forget that one? Yeah, I would say that counts.

[BRONCCRUSHFAN]

I remember full well back in 95, they launched some Surface to Surface missles over the China Sea at Taiwan. Granted they exploded into the sea a few miles off the coast, but the effect was the show of the Chinese force. Of course 3 days later, this Jarhead was aboard an LKH, as part of a Marine BLT there just daring them to launch another "test." My good friend Chaishen, who was born and raised in Taipei, told me that the PRC is very committed to getting Taiwan back.

[W*GS]

First off, a "hawk" (as mentioned in the articles) no more represents overall Chinese policy than that US general (or whomever he was) some time back who used some ill-chosen words to describe the war in Iraq as a "crusade". I don't recall the exact quote, but there's a reason generals and higher-ups aren't often let near microphones without a lot of training in media handling.

Also, the claim was nothing like "We're gonna nuke the US", rather "If we're attacked, we'll retaliate with nuclear weapons". In short, very much the same as official US policy. If China isn't "peaceful" because of the actual content of the remarks, then the US isn't either, by the same standard. BTW, during the Cold War, the US never officially committed to a non-first-use policy, which means the US could have launched nukes first before the USSR did. The USSR said it would launch only if under attack from nuclear weapons - the US never made that statement.

And yes, the US has threatened use of nuclear weapons - during the Korean War, as was noted; Carter used diplomat-speak to tell the world that the US would use nukes to protect access to the Persian Gulf, and there was a suggestion during the Vietnam War that Nixon had gone bonkers and was seriously considering using nukes. I don't recall if this last one is genuine or not, but the other two certainly are.

So, Hotrod, your argument has been nuked - in a rhetorical sense.

[SoCalBronco]

Originally Posted by W*GS

there was a suggestion during the Vietnam War that Nixon had gone bonkers and was seriously considering using nukes. I don't recall if this last one is genuine or not, but the other two certainly are.

.

President Nixon never considered using Nuclear weapons in Vietnam, although he very much wanted the North Vietnamese to think so. It was his self proclaimed "Madman Theory" that he shared with his chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman, on Air Force One early in his administration in 1969. He had borrowed the concept from an idea President Eisenhower had in a different conflict over a decade earlier. He wanted, via several statements and general stances, the North Vietnamese to believe that "this guy is a madman, we better deal with him and close this thing up" or something to that effect. The theory was flawed though, since the North Vietnamese knew that the US public would never go for such a bombing.

[W*GS]

Thanks for the reference, SCB. Yep, the "Madman Theory". So Nixon.

[Hotrod]

Originally Posted by Antilles

I'm REALLY not trying to say China is peaceful, but doesn't the very first sentence of the article state that China would use nuclear weapons IF ATTACKED? Don't you think we'd say and do the same if China attacked Guam? I'd say the first sentence in the article is the only thing that is really important and the rest is just rhetoric, as inflamatory as it may be...

The question here is IF they did attack Taiwan would our defense of them be seen as an attack

[Hotrod]

Originally Posted by W*GS

First off, a "hawk" (as mentioned in the articles) no more represents overall Chinese policy than that US general (or whomever he was) some time back who used some ill-chosen words to describe the war in Iraq as a "crusade". I don't recall the exact quote, but there's a reason generals and higher-ups aren't often let near microphones without a lot of training in media handling.

Also, the claim was nothing like "We're gonna nuke the US", rather "If we're attacked, we'll retaliate with nuclear weapons". In short, very much the same as official US policy. If China isn't "peaceful" because of the actual content of the remarks, then the US isn't either, by the same standard. BTW, during the Cold War, the US never officially committed to a non-first-use policy, which means the US could have launched nukes first before the USSR did. The USSR said it would launch only if under attack from nuclear weapons - the US never made that statement.

And yes, the US has threatened use of nuclear weapons - during the Korean War, as was noted; Carter used diplomat-speak to tell the world that the US would use nukes to protect access to the Persian Gulf, and there was a suggestion during the Vietnam War that Nixon had gone bonkers and was seriously considering using nukes. I don't recall if this last one is genuine or not, but the other two certainly are.

So, Hotrod, your argument has been nuked - in a rhetorical sense.

Again your basing your arguement on the idea that we would out and out attack them. The problem with that is of course we wont 'attack" them but I think they would see our defense of Taiwan as and attack on them.

So, W*gs, your nuke attack on my argument has met its destruction due to my ballistic missle space defense system.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Montaq

Does Japan count?

sure does and you are right , we did threaten before we droped the fat man and the skinny boy ........ we demanded Japan to surrender , Japan didnt we dropped the big ones

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Hotrod

The question here is IF they did attack Taiwan would our defense of them be seen as an attack

Damn right it would ...... China looks @ Taiwan as we would lets say texas , and Texas was pulling out of the USA , and Mexico was aiding Texas and said , If America invades we will defend Texas .....

[Hotrod]

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0715/p07s01-woap.html

I just know Spider and others will just love this source but some interesting information anyway.

[Spider]

Originally Posted by Hotrod

http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0715/p07s01-woap.html

I just know Spider and others will just love this source but some interesting information anyway.

I dont have a real Problem with cs monitor ......actually I see them doing more about Poverty then getting caught up in what I call Bull**** religion