Taiwan: Being sold out by the U.S.?

[TheNoNamedOne]

We all know the story -- The U.S. formally backed and recognized Taiwan as the 'true' seat of Chinese legitimate government until Pres. Nixon visited China and began a period courting China on more friendly terms. That entailed reversing course and recognizing Mainland China over Taiwan.

Now, though, Taiwan, for the last several decades has been a powerhouse in terms of economic contribution to the world and region and has become a full fledged democracy respecting human rights, and is itching to finally break free from China by declaring its independence. How can the U.S. sell out its support for such a cause when democracy and human rights is one of our core principles, and dictators are at odds with that?

If we are not willing to support their call for independence, then why should we even bother to send aircraft carriers between the island and the Mainland as a show of force to cool things down when things get heated? We could do that several years ago, but with Chinese military modernizing, that option may not be open to us in the future.

Do you support ignoring our core principle beliefs on freedom, democracy, human rights, and what we stand for at the cost of appeasement and peace in the world, and in this case Taiwan and China -- eventually ceding Taiwan to China by force or coercion?

France risked war with England in support of the weaker colonies of the New World in her bid for independence, and we should be eternally grateful for that, so why shouldn't we vocally throw in our public support for Taiwan wishing to become independent? Or is all our rhetoric about freedom and democracy just that -- rhettoric?

I think sending conflicting messages to the world is a dangerous thing to do. It causes countries to miscalculate as to what our military reaction will be and where the line in the sand is that is not to be crossed.

[Asshat]

We all know the story -- The U.S. formally backed and recognized Taiwan as the 'true' seat of Chinese legitimate government until Pres. Nixon visited China and began a period courting China on more friendly terms. That entailed reversing course and recognizing Mainland China over Taiwan.

That is an oversimplification. It involved putting China in a more favorable footing with US trade. Trade with Taiwan continued, and later in the 70's it was Taiwan who began a campaign of independance including riots on a US base.

How can the U.S. sell out its support for such a cause when democracy and human rights is one of our core principles, and dictators are at odds with that?

The "cause" is one of economic freedom, not one of democracy and human rights.

Do you support ignoring our core principle beliefs on freedom, democracy, human rights, and what we stand for at the cost of appeasement and peace in the world, and in this case Taiwan and China -- eventually ceding Taiwan to China by force or coercion?

I thought it was a good idea to go into Iraq in the face of UN violations, ethnic cleansing of Kurds, and weapons proliferation and a disposition of using WMD. I now know I was lied to about some of it, and that the US is unable to politically posture itself to achieve harmony between Kurds and Sunni, and Sunni and Shia. So no, I no longer feel the US should foment war based upon the rights of other country denizens if the rest of the world does not feel it is important.

I think sending conflicting messages to the world is a dangerous thing to do. It causes countries to miscalculate as to what our military reaction will be and where the line in the sand is that is not to be crossed.

I agree, and because of the last ten years, believe that the UN should be abolished as well. It is apparent that the US had no viable foreign policy plans, and the UN despite it's voting and posturing is a toothless old tiger riding on the backs of a few token country's young men, and a whole bunch of American young men and women as well as her economy.

As much as I love Taiwan and her people, I think the risk is too great.