Taiwan Urges China to Remove Missiles

[Vassnti]

I agree. We should do it as a short-term measure at least, as a sign of goodwill.

Buddy, the Taiwanese are our brothers. All solutions to this issue should be peaceful ones.

Chance of Taiwan attacking China = 0
Use of bombarding Taiwan with thousands of missiles = 0

This is not the way to win friends

The sooner both sides accept that there is no role for the military the sooner both sides can work on peacefull reunification.

 

[Kylin]

I said missile threat, not missiles itself. You are right it would be only symbolic, but first steps to normalisation are mostly symbolic.
ROC are militairly no threat to China, so aiming/deploying missiles at them can be seen as an agressive move. By removing the missile threat room for diplomacy will be enlarged.

hmm you are right, I took the issue too literal.

 

[HavocHeaven]

why bother? Many Taiwanese would not sign a peace accord with the mainland China anyway. These ppl regard signing such accord as a risk of being considered as one part of China. LOL

 

[HavocHeaven]

China should remove the missile threat.
Time to normalise relations after all these years.

By no means I am a war monger. I, for one, against any war or conflict between the two sides of the strait.
But I have to disagree what you said, with respect. What will happen if the mainland dismantles its military forces? I can assure you two things: 1st, Taiwan will declare independce without any hesitation in case that the pro-independence DPP is the ruling party. 2nd, the mainland will respond with an attack immediately. Losing military balance causes a war. Before the two sides reach any kind of agreement or consensus regarding the indepence of Taiwan, mainland China must maintain military pressure on Taiwan to make sure DPP will not declare independence.

PS, Washington does like the current military equilibrium between the mainland and Taiwan. When the balance tips away in favor of the mainland, Washington expresses concerns over security of Taiwan. When DPP plays fire, Washington labels them as trouble makers.

 

[Alchemy]

Hahaha don't you remember 1962? Even Iraq put up more of a struggle.

Wake up , you still stuck in 1962??? ... during 1930s you too were ovverun by smallish Japan(remember Japanese invasion of Manchuria) y ....dont recite history lessons , this is 2011 mate , a whole different story !

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

Wake up , you still stuck in 1962??? ... during 1930s you too were ovverun by smallish Japan(remember Japanese invasion of Manchuria) y ....dont recite history lessons , this is 2011 mate , a whole different story !

Click here for your answer.

 

[S10]

Wake up , you still stuck in 1962??? ... during 1930s you too were ovverun by smallish Japan(remember Japanese invasion of Manchuria) y ....dont recite history lessons , this is 2011 mate , a whole different story !

The difference is we fought the Japanese for 8 years and never gave up. In fact, we were part of the big five allied nations at the end of WWII. Unless you mean to tell me India won a hard fought war in 1962, it's far from the same.

 

[Chinese Century]

india got humiliated by china in 1962.
india got a pants down hiding.

 

[AADHAAR]

india got humiliated by china in 1962.
india got a pants down hiding.

Yes, Rape of Nanking was no humiliation at all.

In fact, China no longer looks at it as a rape.

They just consider it as another way of having sex.

Then came the Second rape, the Cultural Revolution.

But again, kudos to the chinese spirit ... they see the cultural revolution as another way of having sex .... not rape.

Always remember what Sun Tzu said, "There is no rape, if you don't accept it. Call it Sex. Enjoy it"

 

[Alchemy]

The difference is we fought the Japanese for 8 years and never gave up. In fact, we were part of the big five allied nations at the end of WWII. Unless you mean to tell me India won a hard fought war in 1962, it's far from the same.

Had US not nuked japan , may be would have been fighting for another 8 years !

What i want to highlight is not a lost war etc etc ,. .every nation however great has had its victories and losses in one form or other .. i was just repling to a flame and nothing against China !

 

[JustForFun]

By no means I am a war monger. I, for one, against any war or conflict between the two sides of the strait.
But I have to disagree what you said, with respect. What will happen if the mainland dismantles its military forces? I can assure you two things: 1st, Taiwan will declare independce without any hesitation in case that the pro-independence DPP is the ruling party. 2nd, the mainland will respond with an attack immediately. Losing military balance causes a war. Before the two sides reach any kind of agreement or consensus regarding the indepence of Taiwan, mainland China must maintain military pressure on Taiwan to make sure DPP will not declare independence.

PS, Washington does like the current military equilibrium between the mainland and Taiwan. When the balance tips away in favor of the mainland, Washington expresses concerns over security of Taiwan. When DPP plays fire, Washington labels them as trouble makers.

Did I say anything about dismanteling military forces? A standing army of over 1 million soldiers and the ability to quickly redeploy missiles should be more than enough dererrent.
Removing a missile threat can hardly be called loosing military balance.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

No, until the unification is successful.

 

[akinkhoo]

you guys do know the real reason those missiles are there is to wipe out the F-22 before they can even take off to bomb China. even if Taiwan is to be unified today, those missiles will still be there necessary deterrence against US fighters that are in range of Shanghai since China has no means or intention of forward deploying it's own fighters in range of LA to maintain the balance of power.

 

[HavocHeaven]

Did I say anything about dismanteling military forces? A standing army of over 1 million soldiers and the ability to quickly redeploy missiles should be more than enough dererrent.
Removing a missile threat can hardly be called loosing military balance.

Not really, man. You simply cannot subjectively label some type of China's military utility as a ghana-must-go threat. If China removes missles, what's next? Fighters? Aircraft carriers? All of these stuff seem overwhelming. Taiwan must face the fact that China with a 1.4 billion population has to maintain such military forces. No way they can keep military superiority over the mainland as they did back in 1970's.

Trust me, goodwill doesn't create peace in this scenario. Goodwill doesn't prevent DPP from declaring independence which will result in a war. Military pressure does. Actually I don't care if Taiwan is part of China or not. IRL I have many Taiwan friends and I will send them a group email saying congtratulations when Taiwan achieves independence in a peaceful manner. But now the problem is independence ---> war. I do not want my own family and my Taiwan buddies involved in any wars.

Nevertheless I like the idea of relocating these missiles. Goodwill is not the solution but it is at least a bonus. However, focusing on missiles or making it a precondition is kinda overaction. China shows the "goodwil" in many other ways such as not building the needed amphibious transport abilility. 1 million or 2 million does not matter if you can not deliver them to the target field. It's not that PLAN has no the money or production capacity to build up such ability. It's more a signal that China considers the chance of a Taiwan strait war is slim.

 

[HavocHeaven]

you guys do know the real reason those missiles are there is to wipe out the F-22 before they can even take off to bomb China. even if Taiwan is to be unified today, those missiles will still be there necessary deterrence against US fighters that are in range of Shanghai since China has no means or intention of forward deploying it's own fighters in range of LA to maintain the balance of power.

This reminds me the 2009 RAND report about a Taiwan strait war in 2013. They made an assumption that China will destroy F-22 at the beginning to win a few days' air superiority. And based on such assumption, they did a thorough analysis.