"As is known to all, the US has long held "strategic ambiguity" when it comes to the Taiwan question - not to make statements over whether to "defend" Taiwan island if the People's Liberation Army (PLA) makes military moves to reach reunification across the Straits. If Biden's answer implies that the US is giving up strategic ambiguity, and that US troops will fight the PLA if a war breaks out in the Straits, that would be a major shift in the cross-Straits situation and will be bound to trigger fierce confrontation.
....
Biden's words are not backed by basic US policy or laws. Even the Taiwan Relations Act and Six Assurances do not include content on US commitment to send troops to defend the island.
....
Biden does not have the political authority to announce that the US military will "defend Taiwan" when a war breaks out, nor does he have the confidence to have a strategic collision with the Chinese mainland in the Taiwan Straits to support Taiwan secessionists until a desperate fight erupts, and make the Americans bear the risk of a bottomless war for Taiwan island. So, even if he dared make a slip of the tongue, he would dare not really think so from the bottom of his heart. "

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202110/1237049.shtml?id=12

On Friday, October 22, 2021 at 9:15:32 AM UTC-10, ltlee1 wrote:
> "As is known to all, the US has long held "strategic ambiguity" when it comes to the Taiwan question - not to make statements over whether to "defend" Taiwan island if the People's Liberation Army (PLA) makes military moves to reach reunification across the Straits. If Biden's answer implies that the US is giving up strategic ambiguity, and that US troops will fight the PLA if a war breaks out in the Straits, that would be a major shift in the cross-Straits situation and will be bound to trigger fierce confrontation.
> ...
> Biden's words are not backed by basic US policy or laws. Even the Taiwan Relations Act and Six Assurances do not include content on US commitment to send troops to defend the island.
> ...
> Biden does not have the political authority to announce that the US military will "defend Taiwan" when a war breaks out, nor does he have the confidence to have a strategic collision with the Chinese mainland in the Taiwan Straits to support Taiwan secessionists until a desperate fight erupts, and make the Americans bear the risk of a bottomless war for Taiwan island. So, even if he dared make a slip of the tongue, he would dare not really think so from the bottom of his heart. "
>
> https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202110/1237049.shtml?id=12

Do not underestimate democacies when they have to go to war. Hitler made that mistake. Democracies fight for God and country which makes them one.

On Saturday, October 23, 2021 at 10:53:38 PM UTC-7, Jedi Master wrote:
> On Friday, October 22, 2021 at 9:15:32 AM UTC-10, ltlee1 wrote:
> > "As is known to all, the US has long held "strategic ambiguity" when it comes to the Taiwan question - not to make statements over whether to "defend" Taiwan island if the People's Liberation Army (PLA) makes military moves to reach reunification across the Straits. If Biden's answer implies that the US is giving up strategic ambiguity, and that US troops will fight the PLA if a war breaks out in the Straits, that would be a major shift in the cross-Straits situation and will be bound to trigger fierce confrontation..
> > ...
> > Biden's words are not backed by basic US policy or laws. Even the Taiwan Relations Act and Six Assurances do not include content on US commitment to send troops to defend the island.
> > ...
> > Biden does not have the political authority to announce that the US military will "defend Taiwan" when a war breaks out, nor does he have the confidence to have a strategic collision with the Chinese mainland in the Taiwan Straits to support Taiwan secessionists until a desperate fight erupts, and make the Americans bear the risk of a bottomless war for Taiwan island. So, even if he dared make a slip of the tongue, he would dare not really think so from the bottom of his heart. "
> >
> > https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202110/1237049.shtml?id=12
> Do not underestimate democacies when they have to go to war. Hitler made that mistake. Democracies fight for God and country which makes them one.

And, of course, "God" is man-made imagination. So, it is "country" against "country".
The Vietnam War, Afghanistan War, and the war throughout the Middle East proved that...

On Sunday, October 24, 2021 at 12:53:38 AM UTC-5, Jedi Master wrote:
> On Friday, October 22, 2021 at 9:15:32 AM UTC-10, ltlee1 wrote:
> > "As is known to all, the US has long held "strategic ambiguity" when it comes to the Taiwan question - not to make statements over whether to "defend" Taiwan island if the People's Liberation Army (PLA) makes military moves to reach reunification across the Straits. If Biden's answer implies that the US is giving up strategic ambiguity, and that US troops will fight the PLA if a war breaks out in the Straits, that would be a major shift in the cross-Straits situation and will be bound to trigger fierce confrontation..
> > ...
> > Biden's words are not backed by basic US policy or laws. Even the Taiwan Relations Act and Six Assurances do not include content on US commitment to send troops to defend the island.
> > ...
> > Biden does not have the political authority to announce that the US military will "defend Taiwan" when a war breaks out, nor does he have the confidence to have a strategic collision with the Chinese mainland in the Taiwan Straits to support Taiwan secessionists until a desperate fight erupts, and make the Americans bear the risk of a bottomless war for Taiwan island. So, even if he dared make a slip of the tongue, he would dare not really think so from the bottom of his heart. "
> >
> > https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202110/1237049.shtml?id=12
> Do not underestimate democacies when they have to go to war. Hitler made that mistake. Democracies fight for God and country which makes them one.

For tens of millions Americans, the US has left the straight way and wandered off to follow the way of Balaam son of Bezer, who loved the wages of wickedness. Is the US still a democracy? It will be a matter of definition. Not many nation will still consider the US a city on the hill.

As for Hitler, he and some Nazi high officials were raised Catholic.

On Friday, October 22, 2021 at 7:15:32 PM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
> "As is known to all, the US has long held "strategic ambiguity" when it comes to the Taiwan question - not to make statements over whether to "defend" Taiwan island if the People's Liberation Army (PLA) makes military moves to reach reunification across the Straits. If Biden's answer implies that the US is giving up strategic ambiguity, and that US troops will fight the PLA if a war breaks out in the Straits, that would be a major shift in the cross-Straits situation and will be bound to trigger fierce confrontation.
> ...
> Biden's words are not backed by basic US policy or laws. Even the Taiwan Relations Act and Six Assurances do not include content on US commitment to send troops to defend the island.
> ...
> Biden does not have the political authority to announce that the US military will "defend Taiwan" when a war breaks out, nor does he have the confidence to have a strategic collision with the Chinese mainland in the Taiwan Straits to support Taiwan secessionists until a desperate fight erupts, and make the Americans bear the risk of a bottomless war for Taiwan island. So, even if he dared make a slip of the tongue, he would dare not really think so from the bottom of his heart. "
>
> https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202110/1237049.shtml?id=12

It is now very clear that the US had walked back and/or limited on its commitment to
defend Taiwan. The US has good reason to play the Taiwan card. However, it fails miserably.

It did not do its homework well. First of all, the PRC has little manuvering room. It has
no choice but to reunify. It can wait, for decades if necessary, but it cannot give up
reunification. The people of Taiwan know that. Many Taiwanese once hated the Republic
of China (ROC). But they now embrace the Republic of China. It is average Taiwan
residents' "China card."

While Western media talks about PRC invasion as if it was inevitable and sooner rather
than later, most Taiwan residents don't react at all to such nonsense. Of course, a small
percentage of hardcore TIers are the exceptions.

Not have the choice of not to unify Taiwan, the PRC could only increase its military preparedness.
It also indicated it is now increasing its nuclear weapon arsenal as well as its missile capability.
With the US clearly using Taiwan to contain China, the PRC would be foolish not to respond.

Of course, the PRC also notices that Taiwan residents are not reacting to the war talk. The PRC
then procede to challenge the US on its determination and to what extent that the US is committed
to defend Taiwan.

Regardless all these politics of gamesmanships, waiting for years to take
back Taiwan will only make it harder to take back Taiwan.

Already more than 70 years had gone after Taiwan was taken away. Should
China wait for Taiwan to hand back the island Taiwan to China without a war
fight?

"ltlee1" wrote in message
news:3e4af807-edbf-4ed2-8f82-ca4ccc36b10en@googlegroups.com...

On Friday, October 22, 2021 at 7:15:32 PM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
> "As is known to all, the US has long held "strategic ambiguity" when it
> comes to the Taiwan question - not to make statements over whether to
> "defend" Taiwan island if the People's Liberation Army (PLA) makes
> military moves to reach reunification across the Straits. If Biden's
> answer implies that the US is giving up strategic ambiguity, and that US
> troops will fight the PLA if a war breaks out in the Straits, that would
> be a major shift in the cross-Straits situation and will be bound to
> trigger fierce confrontation.
> ...
> Biden's words are not backed by basic US policy or laws. Even the Taiwan
> Relations Act and Six Assurances do not include content on US commitment
> to send troops to defend the island.
> ...
> Biden does not have the political authority to announce that the US
> military will "defend Taiwan" when a war breaks out, nor does he have the
> confidence to have a strategic collision with the Chinese mainland in the
> Taiwan Straits to support Taiwan secessionists until a desperate fight
> erupts, and make the Americans bear the risk of a bottomless war for
> Taiwan island. So, even if he dared make a slip of the tongue, he would
> dare not really think so from the bottom of his heart. "
>
> https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202110/1237049.shtml?id=12

It is now very clear that the US had walked back and/or limited on its
commitment to
defend Taiwan. The US has good reason to play the Taiwan card. However, it
fails miserably.

It did not do its homework well. First of all, the PRC has little manuvering
room. It has
no choice but to reunify. It can wait, for decades if necessary, but it
cannot give up
reunification. The people of Taiwan know that. Many Taiwanese once hated the
Republic
of China (ROC). But they now embrace the Republic of China. It is average
Taiwan
residents' "China card."

While Western media talks about PRC invasion as if it was inevitable and
sooner rather
than later, most Taiwan residents don't react at all to such nonsense. Of
course, a small
percentage of hardcore TIers are the exceptions.

Not have the choice of not to unify Taiwan, the PRC could only increase its
military preparedness.
It also indicated it is now increasing its nuclear weapon arsenal as well as
its missile capability.
With the US clearly using Taiwan to contain China, the PRC would be foolish
not to respond.

Of course, the PRC also notices that Taiwan residents are not reacting to
the war talk. The PRC
then procede to challenge the US on its determination and to what extent
that the US is committed
to defend Taiwan.