Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Taiwan to Deploy ‘Bee Eye’ Radars Near Chinese Mainland

thedefensepost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 151 posts

Re: Taiwan to Deploy ‘Bee Eye’ Radars Near Chinese Mainland

#61

Post by acgt »

samcheng wrote: post #59
acgt wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I meant is to start a conflict (intentional or unintentionally) to get US military involved. Just watch the local news commentors there. It is definitely been constantly discussed.

Some US news commentators talk about supporting Russia's invasion of Ukraine. That doesn't mean it's official policy. https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-russia-ukrain...

I understand your point. But ambiguity has deterred a formal Taiwan president from declaring independence. "Aggression" may not be the right choice of word, but this is what I meant, "the leash is gone" in the original post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2003/12/11/t...

Re: Taiwan to Deploy ‘Bee Eye’ Radars Near Chinese Mainland

#62

Post by inglor_cz »

melling wrote: post #17
mensetmanusman wrote: post #2

Unfortunately, China will likely attack Taiwan unless Russia is humiliated.

Russia has too much artillery to be humiliated. They are shelling everything and rolling over the dust. “Russia isn't fighting a campaign of attrition, it's waging a war of oblivion.” https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-61634050.amp

Russia has already been humiliated. The allegedly second strongest army in the world could not defeat a much smaller neighboring country quickly and had to retreat from the proximity of Kyiv and Kharkiv.

They do still have their artillery, though, and they are trying to take Donbass. In a very piecemeal fashion, very slowly. They have learnt something from their spring failures.

The result of this war depends on how fast can the Ukrainians re-arm completely to Western weapons, including artillery. It does not make sense to send tons of heavy Western guns there, if there aren't enough trained soldiers to operate them and enough trained technicians to fix them.

This is the bottleneck, not the raw number of weapons; people tend to treat weapons as magic, but they only work in combination with skilled soldiers and a functioning supply chain.

The Ukrainians are learning fast - people generally learn fast when their country is on fire - but the process will likely take months.

Re: Taiwan to Deploy ‘Bee Eye’ Radars Near Chinese Mainland

#64

Post by WillPostForFood »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #15
fartcannon wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about what they did in Hong Kong? They changed the rules once, what stops them from doing it again? History clearly means nothing.

Deviations in agreements is not a thing exclusive to China. Agreements in international politics are made for a purpose. Perhaps to keep peace, or to protect some interest, etc. If the situation changes such that that purpose can no longer be served — especially if that purpose is an extremely important core interest — then any country will seek to deviate from agreed upon behavior. For example, the US clearly agreed…

The US policy was more nuanced than you suggest. The US never agreed to One China, the US just said it wouldn't challenge it. This is the exact text of it in the 1972 Shanghai Communique.

the United States acknowledges that Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States does not challenge that position.

Re: Taiwan to Deploy ‘Bee Eye’ Radars Near Chinese Mainland

#65

Post by FooBarWidget »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #64
FooBarWidget wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deviations in agreements is not a thing exclusive to China. Agreements in international politics are made for a purpose. Perhaps to keep peace, or to protect some interest, etc. If the situation changes such that that purpose can no longer be served — especially if that purpose is an extremely important core interest — then any country will seek to deviate from agreed upon behavior. For example, the US clearly agreed…

The US policy was more nuanced than you suggest. The US never agreed to One China, the US just said it wouldn't challenge it. This is the exact text of it in the 1972 Shanghai Communique. the United States acknowledges that Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States does not challenge that position.

I will agree that the One China Policy issue is more nuanced than that. But we should also recognize that the Sino-British Joint Declaration issue is more nuanced than "China broke an agreement"

Re: Taiwan to Deploy ‘Bee Eye’ Radars Near Chinese Mainland

#66

Post by [deleted] »

stale2002 wrote: post #54
melling wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claiming only 20% of the country is humiliating? I suppose they can fortify that and come back in 10 years and take the rest. Remember when Hannibal destroyed the Roman armies? That sure was humiliating. What happened next?

It is yes. Because their initial goal here was instead to go in and overthrow the government in a couple days, while not expecting any significant international response. There is a huge difference between their initial expectations, and what actually happened. And now they are in too deep to undo their mistakes.

[deleted]

Re: Taiwan to Deploy ‘Bee Eye’ Radars Near Chinese Mainland

#67

Post by therealcamino »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #15
fartcannon wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about what they did in Hong Kong? They changed the rules once, what stops them from doing it again? History clearly means nothing.

Deviations in agreements is not a thing exclusive to China. Agreements in international politics are made for a purpose. Perhaps to keep peace, or to protect some interest, etc. If the situation changes such that that purpose can no longer be served — especially if that purpose is an extremely important core interest — then any country will seek to deviate from agreed upon behavior. For example, the US clearly agreed…

"For example, the US clearly agreed on the One China Policy but they are now changing it. Because the US no longer values the original purpose that the One China Policy served."

If by that you mean the US agreed that Taiwan should be a part of the PRC, that's never been true. It was just a condition of establishing relations with China that the US officially pretend that Taiwan isn't an independent nation. But everyone understood that the actual belief and policy of the US was that Taiwan has a right to independence. There hasn't been any change there.

Re: Taiwan to Deploy ‘Bee Eye’ Radars Near Chinese Mainland

#68

Post by travisgriggs »

samcheng wrote: post #23
melling wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia has regrouped and moved past the “humiliation“ event. Russia has 10 times the artillery as Ukraine and they are putting it to work. The West is simply not providing enough to Ukraine Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians will eventually die, and they could lose. https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-risks-losing-artillery-war-...

Even if Russia manages to level a few more cities, it's hard to see the past three months as anything but a humiliation of Russia's military might. The damage to Russian military international respect (fear, even) has already been done.

For me, the humiliation comes to Russian society/governance in general. It’s pretty clear that Putin just wants to be another Czar. And the prevailing “well, what are you going to do” fatalism in Russian society means it’s just going to go on. Post 1990, as a child of the Cold War, I naively believed that “change was afoot.” That there was a desire amongst eastern countries to move beyond mideval behavior. It took a few years, but we’re right back to “I wanna be the boss forever”. People malign Putin for this. I have lost faith in the general Russian system at large that just keeps making one Stalin, kruschev, Putin after another. That the Russian system cannot move beyond this, is to me the real humiliation.

Re: Taiwan to Deploy ‘Bee Eye’ Radars Near Chinese Mainland

#69

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

melling wrote: post #28
antux wrote: post #19

China is always overstepping their bounds and needs to be checked by the superpowers of the world. Without checks and balances, they will continue to bully the neighboring countries by force and deception.

China, Russia, and the United States are the only 3 superpowers. China already has a larger economy in terms of PPP. It passed the United States in 2017. Russia appears to have bigger plans beyond Ukraine: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-38099842 Also, people seem to be a month behind on what Russia is doing in Ukraine. https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2022-06-10/ukraine-a...

> people seem to be a month behind on what Russia is doing in Ukraine.

What are you talking about?

https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offens...

Re: Taiwan to Deploy ‘Bee Eye’ Radars Near Chinese Mainland

#70

Post by melling »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #69
melling wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China, Russia, and the United States are the only 3 superpowers. China already has a larger economy in terms of PPP. It passed the United States in 2017. Russia appears to have bigger plans beyond Ukraine: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-38099842 Also, people seem to be a month behind on what Russia is doing in Ukraine. https://www.stripes.com/theaters/europe/2022-06-10/ukraine-a...

> people seem to be a month behind on what Russia is doing in Ukraine. What are you talking about? https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offens...

So, you and I both posted the same information about the current assessment.

Thanks. It’s great to discuss the current situation

“Ukrainian officials are increasing the urgency of their requests for more-sophisticated Western-provided weapons systems amid reports of growing Russian artillery superiority”

Post reply on HN