What is Ron Paul's plan re: Taiwan?

[split_lipz]

The portion I was hoping to get responses on was whether America could accept new states into the union.

Give me an example. You don't mean we should make Taiwan a state do you?

 

[hypnagogue]

The way we made Texas a state. We also have commonwealths in Puerto Rico and the Northern Mariana Islands, so perhaps Taiwan could become a commonwealth. I believe hawaii was recognized as an independent nation for a brief while.

Article IV section 3 provides that new states may be added.

I'm brainstorming here. If the people of Taiwan wished to become a state amongst the United States, why should we not welcome it?

 

[Brutus]

Hypnagogue,

That is an interesting thought. It would at least seem to be more Constitutional, though again I don't think it is practical nor wise. There is no common culture, language nor history with Taiwan, and they are geographically very remote to take responsibility for their borders (in case you hadn't noticed, we're not doing that well in the contiguous states).

I wish the Taiwanese people well, and if I weren't taxed to support hundreds of petty dictators around the world I'd be tempted to contribute to their defense on my own.

 

[ChickenHawk]

This is an interesting conversation and something that I have thought a lot about. I have had a difficult time really understanding RP foreign policy. I initially thought that he was a full-on surrender monkey but came to the conclusion that that is not the case. If China invaded Taiwan would RP just ignore it? Keep trading and talking with the Chinese like nothing happened? Or would he take some sort of action? An embargo or sanctions of some sort? Those are the sort of things that most people believe start WWII. It seems to me if we did nothing that would be irresponsible. I don't like going to war to defend other peoples countries for them but I also don't like the idea of allowing powerful countries to unslave less powerfull ones. An exerpt from a famous Ronald Reagan speach comes to mind:

If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based upon what we know in our hearts is morally right. We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion now in slavery behind the Iron Curtain, "Give up your dreams of freedom because to save our own skin, we are willing to make a deal with your slave masters."

 

[Cowlesy]

It's a very interesting question, but as interwined as our economy is with China's, doing something to disrupt relations with us (and the rest of the world) like invading Taiwan would not be in their best interests. I guess one has to weigh how much the Chinese bureaucrats enjoy becoming wealthier due to their booming economy versus nationalistic tendencies.

The Chinese seem pretty greedy to me, and leads me to err on the side of commerce.

 

[VIDEODROME]

Makes me think of all the trouble Ireland had with England. My understanding is England reluctantly allowed south Ireland to be a Free State in the 1920s, but not a true independent nation after England finally couldn't stand dealing with their rebellions. It was a compromise.

Maybe Taiwan could for the sake of diplomacy compromise and "play along" with China's insistence they are a Chinese equivalent of a free state. For instance they could put up a Chinese flag next to their own on government buildings. Just enough gestures so that China can say they have had their way and in return let Taiwan have some leeway in their economic practices and government.

This is assuming most of this is about pride on the part of the Chinese government. My hope would be these gestures would satisfy that pride enough so they feel they got their way and they can drop this issue.

 

[fortilite]

China won't invade Taiwan, they would lose too much. On top of which, Taiwan is a good rallying issue for the CCP to maintain control. You don't get to keep the issue once you try invading the nation.

 

[Balden]

Whatever their motivations, the French helped us in our Revolution

Yes, but the French we're forced to help us, by a King. And they went bankrupt because of it.

 

[tomaO2]

This is the only aspect of Ron Paul's worldview I have trouble with. While Isreal can probably handle anything tossed at it, if they don't, they will be the victims of genocide by whichever muslim country defeats them. Also, while many invasions can end in quagmires, that is certainly not always the case. I also don't want Taiwan to become another Tibet. Tibet didn't/can't fight back effectively and the Chinese are sending citizens down to Tibet to get rid or the natives. In a few genrations there may be none left. The Dali Lama is not saying he will not reincarnate because if he does China will capture him. We can't save Tibet but we can prevent the same fate for Taiwan. It has to be the country doing so as well. Individual citizens can't save a country. We don't have that kind of resources.

Japan bombed Pear Harbour because of sanctions the US imposed. With Ron in charge, he probably would have not imposed those sanctions. With no bombing of Pear Harbour, Japan would have taken over China. Germany would have taken over Europe too. How can that sort of situation not represent a threat to the US?

The West banded together during the cold war. The most free and prosperous countries knew that they had to stand together or perhaps fall individually to the Soviets. They would have loved to attack every country individually if they could have.

Ron Paul wants to get out of Nato. I didn't see him complaining that the other countries should not help find Bin Ladin right after 9/11. We should likewise act in worst case senarios to them.

Intervention in all but that one respect is very appealing to me. Don't send money. Bring back the oversees soldiers but getting rid of all the defensive pacts? I don't claim we can or should defend every country but surely there are SOME that aught be protected and genocide should never be considered allowable by any country, at any time, for any reason. Allow the UN to fall even more into the hands of Dictatorships? They can already pass resolutions that are grossly unfair. The human rights section is a joke. I don't like the UN and dumping it sounds appealing but could that not end up being a threat if the wrong hands got too much control and were allowed to set the agenda? What if they do a UN resolution on Isreal without the USA to veto or help defend?

I don't know. It bothers me.

 

[RonPaulalways]

Taiwan is pretty much the only place that I kind of support US continuing its defense of. I think the US should provide no military protection for Israel, or Kuwait or any of the Arab shiekdoms for that matter. Israel is a power-hungry Jewish ethnocracy that displaced millions of native Arabs and to this day refuses to let them back in, and tiny oil-rich countries like Kuwait which are ruled by despots should be swallowed up by larger middle eastern nations so that their oil revenues can be shared among a larger number of people. Taiwan on the other hands is a nation built up by freedom loving people who want to be independent and not live in a collective. China wants it simply because of its hunger for more power and control.

 

[user]

It has to be the country doing so as well. Individual citizens can't save a country. We don't have that kind of resources.

This makes no sense at all if you think about it. If we don't have that kind of resources where is the country getting them?

Of course, what you're probably getting at is that it is unlikely every American taxpayer would contribute to defend Taiwan, and your answer to this is to force all of them to do so. That would violate their rights.

 

[Goldwater Conservative]

Yes, but the French we're forced to help us, by a King. And they went bankrupt because of it.

I know, but I brought the issue up from our perspective.

 

[SeanEdwards]

Our meddling in the conflict and taking a side distorts the relationship between China and Taiwan. We should remain neutral, while publicly calling for peaceful consensual resolutions to any disagreement.

In the event that China did invade Taiwan, our Congress would still have the authority to declare war on China in response. That's where the decision to intervene should reside.

 

[1000-points-of-fright]

Taiwan is small and rich. They could hire Blackwater.

 

[SeanEdwards]

China wants it simply because of its hunger for more power and control.

That's not a fair assesment of China. China has never been an expansionist nation. The leadership of China is much more focused on maintaining internal stability, and has always been that way. Their concern with Taiwan is that they fear acknowledgment of an independent Taiwan would embolden other separatist minorities within China and spark dissolution of the state. Something along the lines of the meltdown of the USSR is what they want to avoid.

 

[RonPaulalways]

---China has never been an expansionist nation. ----

China has not had the power to be expansionist until recently. They are expanding into Africa commercially right now, and this could be followed by military moves in a few decades. China's economy will be larger than the US in about 15 years, and will be militarily/technologically dominant in 35-40 years.

 

[Brutus]

In 35 to 40 years they'll all be 60 years old because of their one child policy.

 

[braumstr]

Of course, though its control was obtained through an entirely evil foreign policy, you cannot discuss this topic without seriously considering who is currently in control of the worlds energy supply.

 

[MicroBalrog]

---China has never been an expansionist nation. ----

China has repeatedly tried to conquer Vietnam, most recently right after the US got out, and had failed every single time.

They also tried, and failed, to conquer bits of Russia.

 

[SeanEdwards]

---China has never been an expansionist nation. ----

China has not had the power to be expansionist until recently. They are expanding into Africa commercially right now, and this could be followed by military moves in a few decades. China's economy will be larger than the US in about 15 years, and will be militarily/technologically dominant in 35-40 years.

China has had all kinds of opportunities to be an aggressive expansionist empire, and has pretty consistently rejected that concept in favor of turning inward. Chinese leaders have always been obsessed with maintaining internal stability of the state and not particularily interested in expanding Chinese influence abroad. There is no constellation of Chinese airbases and port facilities scattered across the globe like there are American ones. The Chinese empire had one brief period of naval exploration and colonization that only lasted for about the lifetime of one emperor, and was then totally abandoned.

Any aggression from China towards Taiwan will not be motivated by some imperialistic notion of taking over a valuable neighbor. It would be motivated by some idea of preserving Chinese national integrity and denying seperatist movements legitimacy. That's why American involvement inflames conflict across the Taiwan straits. The more the US government talks about ensuring an independent Taiwan, the more the Chinese leaders react negatively. If we just shut up about the matter, the Chinese leaders would probably be quite content to maintain the fiction of "one nation with two systems", which has been their policy towards Taiwan for like forever.