From: lulu@ucrengr.ucr.edu (david lu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: The Foreign Minister of PRC said ...
Date: 2 Sep 92 20:25:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: galaxy.22147
Organization: University of California, Riverside

In article <1992Aug31.182901.13892@zip.eecs.umich.edu> cyc@z.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:
>>>Also the fact is U.S. government has expressed many times for opposition of 
>>>Taiwan Independence. And China is not Iraqi, Lybia, or Panama. Military 
>>>confrontation with China can be very costly to the U.S. 
>
>But U.S. has also expressed countless times that Taiwan's problem should be
>resolved peacefully. One comment to those stubborn Chinese, westerners
>believe people are granted the right to live, to decide their own future,
>to make decisions on their own business. Taiwanese are granted to decide
>and choose whatever they want to do. It's none of China's business, period.

If China does decide to blockade Taiwan, the US will certainly
denounce the action verbally.  However, I very much doubt that
they will take any military actions either against China or to
protect Taiwan.  There are a lot of reasons for this.  One, China
is a major superpower, fully capable of a nuclear attack.  US
will not risk such a confrontation just for the sake of Taiwan.

Second, the US is in a budget crisis right now.  With all the
military cutbacks already in progress, the Senate will not approve
the funds for a military action even if the Pentagon wants one.

Third, Bush's expertise is in Foreign Affairs.  He knows better
than to confront China, a major power in the UN Security Council.
Taiwan is not even a member of UN.  If Clinton gets elected, then
things may be a little different.  Democrats are always more
idealistic than they are realistic, so they might give Taiwan a
hand.  However, they will place more of their attention on the
US's domestic issues first.  Clinton's current platform is spending
more money on domestic problems, and less on foreign aid.

So while US agrees that Taiwan's problem should be solved
peacefully, they will not use military force to enforce that
peace.

>Not as costly as what American have lost in WWI, WWII, Korea war, Vietnan
>war, or even the recent Gulf war. BTW, what is the cost of freedom and
>democracy ?

>Freedom and democracy is the central of American's interest.
>If you think American will trade business opportunity with freedom and
>democracy, give me a break.
>
>Yi-Chieh

US will look after her own interest first, and you can't really
blame her on that.  She's not willing to give up the lives of her
own servicemen for the sake of Taiwan.  Even the 50 or so casualties
in the Gulf War was not taken very well by the American public, and
they will certainly lose more than that if they engage China in war.
One can't put a price on "freedom and democracy" for oneself.  But the
price for someone else's "freedom and democracy" is very negotiable.

				- David

-- 
---==lulu@ucrengr==---  just another overworked graduate student.
David T Lu, Amateur Thinker: lulu@ucrengr.ucr.edu, {ucsd, uci}!ucrengr!lulu
"I seem to be having tremendous difficulty with my lifestyle."
					- Arthur Dent, Hitchhiker's
Xref: sparky soc.culture.taiwan:12422 soc.culture.korean:3951