A next battle ground for another in the succession of US losing wars, at no expense to itself!

And closer to home, now the Solomons have given the middle finger to the US, where to now for a looming Australian losing war?

London to a brick on, PM Mummy’s Boy will be missing in action!

Dan

Taiwan was never part of the Communist People's Republic of China.

Thank you Jack for this interesting information.

However, there is no need to depend on history: here are free people who wish to remain free and there is the monstrous CCP which wants to devour them - surely we should support freedom regardless of past-centuries trends!

I think we need to think about what it means to 'own' property.
It means that someone is in possession of something, and has exclusive use of it?
In this modern overcrowded world, our right to that exclusive use must be both enforced and defended.

As long as those in Taiwan can defend Taiwan, they will continue to 'possess' and use their country.
By themselves they might be hard pressed to prevent a powerful and determined aggressor from moving in and taking over.
However, the US of A is there to support Taiwan.
That circumstance deters potential aggressors.

When an aggressor does force possession of another 'country', for how long should we consider it theft?
I suggest 99 years sounds about right.
After that amount of time, almost the entire population has changed.
None are responsible for anything that took place before their time.
So recriminations should cease, and new 'boundaries' should be accepted?
It is foolish to propagate or perpetuate a baseless feud?

Such feuds do nothing but promote divisiveness.
There are those in Australia who would do well to heed that fact?

Dear Ipso Fatso,

«I think we need to think about what it means to 'own' property.»

I like that: it is wise indeed to go back to the basics.

«It means that someone is in possession of something, and has exclusive use of it?»

What then does "possession" mean?

Nobody has exclusive use of anything.
For one, the land is also used by many animals, birds, insects, fungi, etc.
Also, the very fact of us discussing something is also a 'use' of that thing.
Taking satellite photos? Using information from weather stations to predict typhoons? Breathing the air and pollen that come from there? These are all uses!

Enforcing the impossible, is... impossible.

«As long as those in Taiwan can defend Taiwan, they will continue to 'possess' and use their country.»

Taiwan need not be defended (mankind has not enough hydrogen bombs to sink it) - it's the people who live there who try to defend themselves from an evil Chinese regime, and anyone who cares should help them.

«When an aggressor does force possession of another 'country', for how long should we consider it theft?»

This is not a case of theft because no one can "possess" a country: aggressors can only oppress and persecute the people who live there, and that would be wrong no matter how long they do so.

«After that amount of time, almost the entire population has changed.»

So is it then OK to oppress and persecute their descendants?

«None are responsible for anything that took place before their time.»

I agree, but what matters here is not the past, but the future fate of the good Taiwanese people who want to remain free.

[continued...]

[...continued]

«So recriminations should cease, and new 'boundaries' should be accepted?»

Any "recriminations" are none but a pretext by aggressors, like the wolf upstream who condemns the lamb downstream of polluting his water.

'Boundaries' are not real, but can be temporarily set as a means of self-protection.
Ultimately, all Chinese people, without boundaries, ought to be freed from their oppressing regime, not just the people of Taiwan.

«It is foolish to propagate or perpetuate a baseless feud?»

Yes, but what we have in Taiwan is not a feud, but bullying: acts of aggression by the strong and evil against the weak.

«Such feuds do nothing but promote divisiveness.»

Divisiveness, as in setting oneself apart from evil-doers, is very good!

«There are those in Australia who would do well to heed that fact?»

While we should not harbour any feuds, we actually do not have enough divisiveness in Australia - we need more!

Yuyutsu

There is more to life than Niki boots mate!

We could probable make room for forty million refugees from the losing war in Ukraine, but realistically, another thirty million Han Chinese from Taiwan is sending Chinese in the wrong direction.

Australia should be the example I would think; with a little over two percent of the Taiwanese population true indigenous, the argument against a Chinese take over of Taiwan is very thin on the ground, it’s over before it starts, and has been for too many years.

It’d be like the UN insisting on all immigrants past and present get out of Australia and hand it back to a similar two percent of Australian Aborigines, the rightful owners we are told continually and repeatedly by PM Mummy’s Boy and his green slime cohorts!

Dan

Dear Dan,

Of all OLO members, you should know best who the earth belongs to: God alone!

“The land must not be sold permanently, because the land is mine and you reside in my land as foreigners and strangers.“ [Leviticus 25:23]

I don't give a hoot about indigenousness or otherwise - there are PEOPLE there in Taiwan, happy families, people who live in freedom, people who worship God: assuming you would hate being enslaved yourself and barred from worshiping God, would you allow your neighbour to be enslaved by the evil CCP and ordered to worship this Xi monster alone? Have you no mercy?

“But the Lord said, "You have been concerned about this plant, though you did not tend it or make it grow. It sprang up overnight and died overnight. And should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left—and also many animals?"“ [Jonah 4:10-11]

Yuyutsu

Mmm. Yes but.

The Kurukshetra War will be left in the shade of the cataclysmic war over Taiwan.

And I’m not God, but I can easily see for myself , land rights of the Chinese intruders of Taiwan who now claim land ownership and project the theft as a “right” , (which your argument backs up), are not the real reason for US aggression are they.

As usual, we are fed a lie backed up with jingoistic propaganda aimed at making the you and i’s of this world willing captors and sacrificial lambs to the inevitable slaughter as consequence.

And since I’m a firm believer that my own land rights in Australia have been usurped by the greed of Capitalism, branding me as an immigrants son, a usurper of Native title, I care SFA about private land ownership issues in Taiwan.

The only God to capture Bidens interest, is the batten of US hegemony over the world, carried to It’s inevitable doom by this fool insistent on dragging everybody with him.

There is no win for us in backing US Capitalist interest in Taiwan. Chiang Kai-shek has been resurrected from the ashes, and he actually had a brain!

Dan

.

Here are the facts as I understand them :
.

November 26, 1943
The Cairo Declaration :

President Roosevelt, Generalissimo Chiang Kai-Shek and Prime Minister Churchill, together with their respective military and diplomatic advisers, have completed a conference in North Africa. The following general statement was issued:

“The several military missions have agreed upon future military operations against Japan.

The three great Allies expressed their resolve to bring unrelenting pressure against their brutal enemies by sea, land, and air. This pressure is already rising.

“The three great Allies are fighting this war to restrain and punish the aggression of Japan.

They covet no gain for themselves and have no thought of territorial expansion. It is their purpose that Japan, shall be stripped of all the islands in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied since the beginning of the first World War in 1914, and that all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa, and the Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China. Japan will also be expelled from all other territories which she has taken by violence and greed. The aforesaid three great powers, mindful of the enslavement of the people of Korea, are determined that in due course Korea shall become free and independent.

“With these objects in view the three Allies, in harmony with those of the United Nations at war with Japan, will continue to persevere in the serious and prolonged operations necessary to procure the unconditional surrender of Japan.”
.

Potsdam Declaration
Proclamation Defining Terms for Japanese Surrender
Issued, at Potsdam, July 26, 1945 :

“Article 8 :

The terms of the Cairo Declaration shall be carried out and Japanese sovereignty shall be limited to the islands of Honshu, Hokkaido, Kyushu, Shikoku and such minor islands as we determine.”

.

(Continued …)

.

.

(Continued …)

.

The status of Taiwan was to become uncertain after events in 1945. While the Republic of China forces in Taihoku (today's Taipei) accepted the surrender of Japanese troops in Taiwan, the province was put under the administrative control of the Republic of China (ROC) in 1945 by the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration, no treaty made specific references to Taiwanese sovereignty. The position of the People's Republic of China (PRC) is that the ROC's (Taiwan's) sovereignty was transferred to mainland China (which became the PRC in 1949 following the communist revolution) under the terms of the Potsdam Declaration.
.

In 1952, Winston Churchill said that Taiwan was not under Chinese sovereignty and the Chinese Nationalists did not represent the Chinese state, but that Taiwan was entrusted to the Chinese Nationalists as a military occupation :

UK Parliament
May 4, 1955 :

http://www.taiwanbasic.com/hansard/uk/uk1955as.htm
.

Anthony Eden, who was PM of the UK from 1955 to 1957, said in 1955 that there was a difference of opinion on which Chinese authority [the PRC or the ROC] to hand it over to.
.

Chiang Kai-Shek died in 1975. The Kuomintang (KMT) lost the presidency of Taiwan and its legislative majority in the 2016 election and is now in the opposition. The KMT opposes de jure Taiwan independence, Chinese unification under the "one country, two systems" framework, and any non-peaceful means to resolve the cross-strait disputes.

Originally placing high priority on reclaiming the Chinese mainland through Project National Glory, the KMT now favours a closer relationship with the PRC and seeks to maintain Taiwan's status quo under the Constitution of the Republic of China (ROC). The party also accepts the 1992 Consensus, which defines both sides of the Taiwan Strait as "one China" but maintains its ambiguity to different interpretations.

.

Dear Dan,

«The Kurukshetra War will be left in the shade of the cataclysmic war over Taiwan.»

In absolute numbers of casualties, yes, but not as a proportion of world-population. Anyway, if that is what needs to happen then let it rip. I consider death to be better than slavery.

I cannot and will not speak on behalf of the Americans: whatever their reasons (if any) for protecting Taiwan (if indeed they mean it and will), I know mine, which I addressed in my previous post - and they go well beyond questions of land-ownership.

I have no interest in "backing US Capitalist interest in Taiwan" - I only want to back Taiwan and its good people.

Labor and the LNP will sooner or later be pressured by the US into Australia "lockstep" following the US into another war. This time for an endless defence of Taiwan.

Truth be known Taiwan is too far to send our submarines. The Collins cannot do a round trip (transits then time on station) that far.

So we'll be sending a couple of destroyer/frigates and a supply ship.

All easy meat for China's DF-21D anti-ship missiles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DF-21#DF-21D .

Maybe 500 RAN dead - and for nothing.

Like the US led us into Afghanistan, for nothing in the end. It took the Taliban 3 days to takeover. That was after US, Australia and other trusting allies withdrew the majority of troops from Afghanistan after that endless US led war.

Best to support the agreed US-Taiwan status quo, ie. the Taiwanese do the fighting. Others supply ammo - as in Ukraine.

Here is our agreement with the PRC regarding Taiwan :

JOINT COMMUNIQUE OF THE AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT AND THE
GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
CONCERNING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF DIPLOMATIC
REL~ATIONS BETWEEN AUSTRALIA AND CHINA

The Australian Government and the Government of the People's
Republic of China, in conformity with the interests and common desire
of the two peoples, have decided upon mutual recognition and the
establishment of diplomatic relations as from 21 December 1972.

The two Governments agree to develop diplomatic relations,
friendship and co-operation between the two countries on the basis of
the principles of mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity,
mutual non-aggression, non-interference in each other's internal affairs,
equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful co-existence.

The Australian Government recognises the Government of the
People's Republic of China as the sole legal Government of China,
acknowledges the position of the Chinese Government that Taiwan is a
province of the People's Republic of China, and has decided to remove
its official representation from Taiwan before 25 January 1973.

The Government of the People's Republic of China appreciates
the above stand of the Australian Government.

The two Governments have agreed to exchange Ambassadors as
soon as the administrative formalities and practical arrangements have
been completed, and to provide each other with all the necessary
assistance for the establishment and performance of the functions of
diplomatic missions in their respective capitals on the basis of
equality and mutual benefit and in accordance with international law
and practice.

For the Australian Government
(signed) Alan Renouf
Australian Ambassador to France

For the Government of the People's Republic of China
(signed) Huang Chen
Ambassador of the People's Republic of China to France

Paris, 21 December 1972

http://pmtranscripts.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/original/00003119.pdf

.

Thanks Banjo

The key part, which Australia agreed to, which is still legally in force, being:

"The Australian Government recognises the Government of the
People's Republic of China as the sole legal Government of China,
acknowledges the position of the Chinese Government that Taiwan is a
province of the People's Republic of China..."

The rest at http://pmtranscripts.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/original/00003119.pdf

"The Australian Government recognises the Government of the
People's Republic of China as the sole legal Government of China,
acknowledges the position of the Chinese Government that Taiwan is a
province of the People's Republic of China..."

So what's wrong about it?

ACKNOWLEDGING can be quite different than agreeing.

Yes, Australia understands and agrees that the position of the Chinese government is such-and-such - big deal... even the Chinese themselves know that this is not true!

Beijing hardly said, "Taiwan is an integral part of China," until in 1972 Nixon and Kissinger went to meet with Mao Zedong. Since then China has come to say so often and with self-assurance.

In 1871 over fifty Japanese fishermen were killed by indigenous Taiwanese. The Japanese government demanded indemnity but Beijing replied that Taiwan was not under its jusridiction.

Both Taiwan and Korea began to develop and industialise themselves under Japanese rule. Japan's economic infrastructure investment in Taiwan was massive, not the US post-war investement. The average annual economic growth rate in Korea during the thirty-five years of Japanese rule was over three percent. Its populatin almost doubled and its GDP far more than doubled. I am afraid reasons for Korean animosty toward Japan should be found somewhere else, not in Japan but in Korean cultural pathology.
There are, roughly speaking, two political forces in Taiwan. those who came from China (Chinese) and those who have been there all the time (Taiwanese). The former makes up the Kuomintang Paty and the latter the Minjin Party. Lee Teng-hui (Li Ting-hui) was tht first Taiwanise President. The present President comes from the Minjin Party.