Well one could say that the USA is to blame. They shouldve given the island back to Japan after the war. And the KMT wouldve only been some fringe party in Sulawesi or something? Then at least no conflict with the big bad China. I lean towards the KMT (when the other choice is the DPP) but big bad China is a force to be reckoned with.
Big Bad China = the new BBC
You’re both right, of course. That would probably make them more dangerous and willing to go on an adventure to take people’s minds off of problems on the mainland.
There isn’t really an easy out. If it were possible to route them militarily that would be awesome, but if that were ever a possibility that ship has long since sailed.
Political integration? I’ve always felt this option may be the best depending on the circumstances. If China truly developed into a multi-party democracy along a federal system such an option wouldn’t be half bad. Somehow I don’t think that’s likely. Not in the medium term, anyway.
It’s going to take some clever politicking to maintain the status quo (and dream upon a star, wishful thinking - Independence?) during the coming century, whether China implodes or not.
I have often wondered why Taiwan wasn’t made a protectorate that was gradually steered towards independence as was the case with numerous territories after WWI and WWII.
Edit: Hey, Taffy! Good to see you around (the forum at least), mate! 
Yeah, I sometimes wish we had let Japan keep Taiwan and Korea, and let Japan keep its military, too, so that Japan, and not the U.S., would be responsible for handling any kind of mess happening in this region.
Sounds appealing. But, they would probably have incorporated half of China again by now…
Would’ve been interesting how they would have handled the Soviets, though. 
The Soviets , at least on the eastern front will have to turn Japanese 
If Taiwan has the capability to swiftly and decisively destroy the Chinese military, depending on which party is power, Taiwan would be A)declaring independence because there’s nothing China can do about it, or B)trying to recover the mainland.
That’s why the US is mindful not to let Taiwan have too much weapons, and wrote specifically in the TRA that arms sells to Taiwan shall be of defensive nature. They don’t want Taiwan changing the status quo just as much as China.
Don’t hold your breath on this one. China has been through much worse(ie. great leap forward, cultural revolution), and did not implode. Don’t expect it to happen at a time when China is now more prosperous than ever.
Gee, I dunno. Because CKS wanted Taiwan to be part of the ROC? Of course as things turned out, before Taiwan could be handed to the ROC, CKS and his army got routed on the mainland. I wonder what would happen if the CCP did not create the PRC but instead continue to use the name ROC as the name for China. Would Taiwan have been handed back to China at the SF peace treaty as scheduled?
CKS and his goons only came over to Taiwan after Taiwan had been handed to the ROC. Hence the question. Obviously.
That’s assuming the PRC remains prosperous and continues to grow at an unprecedented rate. And not taking into account the large disparities in wealth not to mention a a huge demographic problem looming on the horizon.
So CKS had nothing to do with the drafting of the Potsdam declaration? Frankly I’m amazed at your lack of basic historical knowledge. While CKS and his troops was handed control of Taiwan, what made it happen was the Potsdam declaration, which said Taiwan shall be returned to China. And the Potsdam declaration was issued by…none other than CKS, among other allied leaders.
But then of course Taiwan was not “officially” handed to China(you hear this from the TI supporters a lot.) That was suppose to happen at the SF peace conference in '51 but didn’t due to ROC and PRC both claiming to be the real China.
So CKS had nothing to do with the drafting of the Potsdam declaration? Frankly I’m amazed at your lack of basic historical [color=#FF0000]knownledge[/color].[/quote]
Frankly, I’m amazed at your lack of basic spelling knowledge. See. I can do it, also. Unnecessary, isn’t it?
Honestly, why, without knowing a person IRL (however fleetingly), and after jumping to conclusions, would you resort to childish insults in what I can only imagine was a misguided attempt at trying to make an erroneous point?
I challenge you to show me were I said or even inferred that. And between Harry S. Truman, Winston Churchill and CKS who do you think would have had the biggest say in the terms of the agreement when it was drawn up?
Besides, your point is moot because all it did was outline the terms of surrender for the Empire of Japan as agreed upon at the Potsdam Conference. Which stated that, if Japan did not surrender, it would face “prompt and utter destruction.”
And how big a role do you think CKS had in the Potsdam conference, besides not being there (the sole participants at the conference having been the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States)?
The “among other allied leaders” were simply Harry S Truman and Winston Churchill. And the terms of the declaration had already been agreed upon by the US, GBr and the USSR at the Potsdam Conference.
Hence, before the declaration was issued by CKS, Harry S Truman and Winston Churchill, the terms could have been agreed upon differently. That it was handed to the ROC in the Declaration after the terms had already been decided upon at the conference has nothing to do with CKS.
And, what made it happen was the two atomic bombs the US dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the terms already outlined at the Potsdam Conference (and to a lesser extent, the Cairo Declaration of 1943).
Surely you mean, in addition to the fact that it is argued by TI supporters that the Declaration is only a statement of intent, and a non-binding “press release”, as it is not in the official treaty archives of either the United States or Japan, so it is not deemed to be a treaty by the involved parties. And I suppose you also meant, yet neglected to mention, the additional argument of a 1959 court case in the United States, where the US State Dept. was specifically quoted as maintaining that: " . . . that the sovereignty of Formosa has not been transferred to China . . . " and that “Formosa is not a part of China as a country, at least not as yet, and not until and unless appropriate treaties are hereafter entered into. Formosa may be said to be a territory or an area occupied and administered by the Government of the Republic of China, but is not officially recognized as being a part of the Republic of China.”
Which brings us back to what I originally wondered about:
As already pointed out, he didn’t really have any say in the matter. And even if you wish to argue that he did, Churchill and Truman could quite easily have overrode him, and before that Churchill, Truman and Stalin could already have decided to cede Taiwan to the US as a protectorate.
I’m assuming that had this eventuality been discussed CKS’ wish to have Taiwan as part of the ROC would have been well known (from the Cario Declaration’s time), and possibly the USSR would have wanted concessions that the US wouldn’t have been willing to make to make Taiwan a US protectorate. That is to say, if they discussed it at all.
CKS did have a say in the matter. Not as big as Statlin, Truman, and Churchill had, but it would be mistaken to think CKS, as president of the ROC, had nothing to do with the decision to give Taiwan back to China. You and all the TI people just wish the other 3 leaders had overrode CKS’s wishes and made Taiwan an independent country, which wasn’t even what the Taiwanese people wanted at the time. You should be thankful that CKS had retreated to Taiwan or else Taiwan would be part of the PRC right now.
Which all goes to shows that Taiwan is NOT an independent country, despite what the Taiwanese people say.
Nor is it legally a part of China. The technical legal status should be undetermined pending a plebiscite of the people of Taiwan.
Well, if the Dutch or the Germans aren’t going to build Taiwan any subs, then how about asking these guys?
I bet they’re not afraid of what the bullies in Beijing say…
pretty amzing, i never knew these things existed and did so well (relatively)
Bit of a grave dive to find a thread for this (move to more current thread if one running)
New domestic sub
Top story on BBC today! made in Kao.
Taiwans first sub
Appropriately numbered as 711
For some reason I keep thinking a Taiwanese clone of Subway in Taiwan.
FamilyMart didn’t win the contract
You know given how little we even know about this sub, and how it’s only unveiled just now (and nothing before this), there has to be some seriously good op sec going on at the shipyard.
Back when I was doing military they were talking about a huge arms deal with the US that included patriot missiles, and some outdated WWII to Vietnam War era subs. Better than what Taiwan has at the time (they had only 2 WWII sub, and not the good ones like the German U Boat either). From what I heard they allowed the missile but not the subs. There were talks of building their own sub, but there was practically a media black out on this matter since.
Probably still a media blackout
Somehow this guy was invited maybe he is some sort of specialist
Apparently the sub is similar to a type now used in Japan in some ways
Let’s hope it all works and isn’t subject to massive failure like the Frankenstein number 4 nuclear plant they don’t even want to start up now
Still the loss of a sub crew is a lot less than poisoning a third of Taiwan for thousands of years in the event of a catastrophe the number 4 can cause