REQ: USA Congress Resolutions regarding Taiwan

Politics Taiwan Politics
1

I keep hearing Chinese people say that the United States would never defend Taiwan when it comes to it. Kerry said it himself too.

So is it true that there are congressional resolutions that restrict the USA President’s ability to NOT go to war should China attack Taiwan? Please link or source on said congressional resolutions and why this is even a debatable issue.

Thanks

2

For the United States to actually declare war, it needs to be declared by the President and ultimately approved by US Congress. As far as the United States sending forces to intervene militarily, the President already has his approval thanks to the TRA. If the President was to engage in a full-on war with the People’s Republic of China, he’d probably need approval… but anything short-term and limited is entirely his option.

I don’t think anyone’s suggested that the United States, or the American president, “can’t” defend Taiwan. I think the belief amongst some is that, under some circumstance, the United States won’t defend Taiwan… the US will choose not to intervene.

I’m sure any US president will think twice/three/four times before sending more American soldiers to die in east Asia, especially if it isn’t obvious American interests are at risk, especially if American soldiers are deployed in Iraq + Iran + Afghanistan, especially if the rest of Asia (including traditional American allies) are calling for restraint.

No American soldier is legally or morally obligated to die for the cause of Taiwanese independence. Thomas Jefferson said “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants”… but that doesn’t mean the Taiwanese tree of liberty must be refreshed with American blood.

3

SC -
What are the binding treaties?

4

SC -
What are the binding treaty agreements for US - Taiwan defense and who are the signatory nations?

5

So what are they dying for in Iraq??? Soldiers are legally obligated to follow their orders. If thats to fight and die, so be it. Moral obligations don’t come into it.

6

That’s for USA interest in oil.

7

[quote=“comfortably numb”]
So what are they dying for in Iraq??? Soldiers are legally obligated to follow their orders. If thats to fight and die, so be it. Moral obligations don’t come into it.[/quote]That’s what we like to call an “opinion”. Congratulations, you found one.

All I know is that the US government has sure spent a lot of time trying to convince the American people + the world at large that they had the moral right + obligation to overthrow Saddam’s government. Righteous reasons given include:

  • bring freedom + democracy to the Iraqi people,
  • defend the United States from another 9/11-style terrorist attack,
  • deny Saddam the chance to use weapons of mass destruction on his enemies.

At no point do I remember George Bush saying: “American soldiers are in Iraq because I ordered them to be there.”