tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719362718346107647.post2656931603630266061..comments2024-03-16T09:11:27.097-04:00Comments on GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD: Taiwan TangoGrEaT sAtAn'S gIrLfRiEnDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09760252542953109449noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719362718346107647.post-46951800009160066242008-07-27T20:11:00.000-04:002008-07-27T20:11:00.000-04:00The U.S. should support a free and independent Tai...The U.S. should support a free and independent Taiwan. I have long favored restoring diplomatic relations with Taipei.RightDemocrathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03612704627184425765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719362718346107647.post-86701919282850105242008-07-22T13:33:00.000-04:002008-07-22T13:33:00.000-04:00Very timely post as the Olympics approach...I had ...Very timely post as the Olympics approach...I had forgotten the focus on Taiwan in the beginning stages of the Bush Presidency...seems we took a turn to the arab world with good reason of course. My favorite line "Flaunting those sexed up goodies like a honking economy, free speech, transparent and periodic elections"...too good Courtney! :)NNikkihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06506161645223765063noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719362718346107647.post-62269478081059985992008-07-20T18:20:00.000-04:002008-07-20T18:20:00.000-04:00By the way, Courtney, nice video. I'd never he...By the way, Courtney, nice video. I'd never heard of The Bravery before. Not bad. Like the name. Keep my eyes open.<BR/><BR/>Oh, and if you haven't checked out your Henry Jackson site, recently, this article might be of interest vis a vis Pakistan.<BR/><BR/>http://www.henryjacksonsociety.org/stories.asp?pageid=49&id=732<BR/><BR/>Turns out, concerns about dialogue might be warranted. If dialogue is being used as an excuse for cowardice, that is, if this article is right and the military is avoiding confronting the Taliban privately, while claiming to do so publicly. The only utility of dialogue that I can think of would be to moderate and undermine public support for the Taliban and al Qaeda, especially in remote areas of the country, to give them legitimate routes for democratic engagement, to moderate their own aims and claims and make less likely violent resistance and violent attacks on civilians, to politically isolate thugs who can then be more easily brought to justice, to facilitate relationships and communication with local populations to gather information to locate and capture or kill Taliban and al Qaeda leaders, to turn those militants who are capable and willing to turn, and to otherwise pave a path for the eventual capture or death of remaining militants. As a political strategy to facilitate military and law enforcement efforts, I think that has much potential (as does the defense and security correspondent for the Economist, who outlines similar ideas in their most recent front-page interview with him). But dialogue as a way of abdicating the responsibility to protect Pakistani citizens and to collaborate with Afghan and U.S. forces to locate and capture or kill Taliban or al Qaeda forces is cowardice and should be called out as such. We need to work with those guys and respect their territorial integrity for as smooth, constructive, and successful effort as possible. But we also need them to step up and confront these bloodsuckers with more courage and integrity.<BR/><BR/>Nice site. Thought you'd be interested.Ben Sutherlandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14193389264010365448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719362718346107647.post-55814641201705754352008-07-20T17:34:00.000-04:002008-07-20T17:34:00.000-04:00Absolutely, Courtney. The U.S. and world's major p...Absolutely, Courtney. The U.S. and world's major powers have dithered on this question far too much in appeasement of China's totalitarian impulses (and probably out of ambivalence, given Taiwan's polarized attitudes toward independence - not all Taiwanese favor independence, sadly - and their failue to get a majority of Taiwanese to affirm independence with votes like the recently failed votes for U.N. membership). There is no reason for the U.S. to sell out Taiwan's completely legitimate right to democratic self-government on the premise that U.N. Security Council veto power might makes right. We need China's help. But we don't need it so bad that we can't stand up for single biggest democratic challenge to China's autocratic rule.<BR/><BR/>I do think that the Dalai Lama is probably right that a patient move towards autonomy will probably be the least bloody and most constructive path.<BR/><BR/>But I've always said of the situation in Tibet, as well as Taiwan and Hong Kong, should they get more assertive about their desire for independence, that such does not mean that the Chinese have some kind of right to a peaceful transition. If Taiwan, Tibet, or Hong Kong thinks it is a better route to fight or if they need equipment for their defenses to back up a move towards independence, then China can have a tizzy all they want, but we should back them up. American leaders may choose not to do so for self-interested reasons. But that doesn't mean a thing about the legitimacy of Taiwan's right to self-determination.<BR/><BR/>Having said that, I don't think battling their way towards independence is the smartest move, at this point (I don't think anyone does, but I would be less upset about such a move than most, since I completely agree that their right to govern themselves is far more fundamental than any strategic self-interest that major powers may believe themselves to have. I do think that the Dalai Lama is right that a less bloody and still possible constructive path is patiently moving towards autonomy, then independence. But I am in favor of whatever efforts will ultimately secure independence.<BR/><BR/>Should the peaceful route turn out to be a dead-end, then if I were a Taiwanese, Tibetan, or Hong Kong citizen, I would be willing to fight. I just wouldn't want to die or have my countrymen die in a suicide mission where a superior force cannot be effectively challenged. <BR/><BR/>That is the challenge that Taiwan, Tibet, Hong Kong, and the U.S. and most Western democracies who, generally, support independence for all 3 of these populations, I think, in principle, but are looking out for their own self-interest and are afraid of provoking backlash that might undermine democratization efforts -the first motivation being less noble than the second, by my watch - but who want to find the most constructive route to support them. <BR/><BR/>You're right. Selling arms might be an effective way to back up the notion that while who favors independence should favor the least bloody, most peaceful route, first, it is not the only route and Taiwan reserves its right to fight and certainly to defend itself, given any Tibetan-like impulses on the part of the PRC, should they need to.<BR/><BR/>There may be legitimate reasons to hold back on those weapons transfers that I have not heard, so I am open to argument on this. But supporting the Taiwanese in this way does continue to send the signal - just because China says its control of Taiwan cannot be challenged, doesn't mean that it won't or can't.Ben Sutherlandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14193389264010365448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6719362718346107647.post-49972681384204664072008-07-20T16:14:00.000-04:002008-07-20T16:14:00.000-04:00It is easier for China to invade Taiwan than to t...It is easier for China to invade Taiwan than to take on the Russian. Well maybe not too easy. For a while there China saw the Great Satan as weak, able to walk all over us. But those days were over when the Great Satan did some regime changes in Afghanistan and Iraq. They no longer see the Great Satan as weak, they no longer think that they can whip us in a fight.<BR/><BR/>We should be sending the Taiwanese as many weapons as we can. It will keep China at bay.Findalishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02881549378886491540noreply@blogger.com