TSU supporters = Football hooligans?

Mr He’s right. I often put on a bit of body paint and drive around in a jeep. You don’t see the US government taking any notice of AAAAAAAAAAAAArgh…!

I see it as a dangerous trend, TSU protesting the USA, Presidential Advisor slamming the USA in the press.

At some point USA is going to react to these things and not to Taiwan’s advantage.

[quote=“ac_dropout”]I see it as a dangerous trend, TSU protesting the USA, Presidential Advisor slamming the USA in the press.

At some point USA is going to react to these things and not to Taiwan’s advantage.[/quote]

And so what?

You think that te US cares about the TSU guys? come on, AC you ought to do better than that!

[quote=“ac_dropout”]I see it as a dangerous trend, TSU protesting the USA, Presidential Advisor slamming the USA in the press.

At some point USA is going to react to these things and not to Taiwan’s advantage.[/quote]

you speak as though the US’s “protection” of taiwan is undertaken simply out of the goodness of their hearts, and can be withdrawn simply if some inflammatory words which are the by-products of taiwan’s domestic political disputes happen to irritate US officials. that is not true, and i suspect you know that full well. the US needs taiwan to remain free from chinese rule for a number of political and strategic military reasons. and all these reasons are rooted in the US’s OWN interests, not taiwan’s. so regardless of what angry diatribe is spit out of taiwan’s raging volcano of a domestic political scene, the US will continue to back taiwan insomuch as its own interests are still at stake.

and for someone who is admittedly a unificationist, why are YOU so concerned about staying on Dubya’s good side? wouldn’t shaky US support of taiwan expedite your long sought-after union with the glorious motherland?

very reasonable statements. perhaps you can preach your concern of hooliganism, mob violence, and need for social stability to the PFP and their fleet of bulldozers and mobs of vandals the next time they lose an election.

carson71,

The USA is interested in preserving PRC-USA bilateral relationship and not TI. Hence, these TSU supporters are not doing Taiwan any favors by provoking USA on the issue of USA policy.

I support eventual unification, which I never denied. But not abrupt unification. I see eventual unification as a position that can secure an international consensus among all major participants in the Strait Issue. The most stable of all the choice presented to ROC. A “win-win” situation as Covey, my “spiritual leader” would say.

I usually save the speech for people who over romanticize the events of 228 and Dangwai movement.

I would like to note an interesting irony on this thread.

In defense of these TSU supporters, many argue the case that these people are marginalized in ROC society and are beneath the notice of USA.

If that is the case, then what is the justification of the existence of the TSU and relevance of TSU supporters on Taiwan.

Isn

nice tangential argument (again). there’s a difference between people who “over romanticize” something and people who riot, destroy property, injure others - one is criminal, the other isn’t. so you are excusing criminals who engage in blatantly violent acts that you just preached against if they happen to fit your political taste. and you would attack those who “over romanticize” (oh the horror) events, who are not criminals, who are actually the victims of violence, because they represent a political reality you do not care for. well, at least if you are being hypocritical, you are honest about it.

looking through this thread, nobody claimed the TSUers are “marginalized” in society. you said that. what they said was what is the big deal of some TSU supporters painting their bodies and riding around in public. and that is true. and why would something like that affect taiwan-US policy? it wouldn’t. even you would admit that, right?

now, the issue of name-changing is a separate one, although i don’t know how/why you managed to try to link the two. i know you are not suggesting that the name change issue is tantamount to hooliganism. but are you attempting to lump multiple issues into one, attempting to say that since both these issues came from the same general green political spectrum, then people should view all such things with a single all-or-nothing mindset?

[quote] If that is the case, then what is the justification of the existence of the TSU and relevance of TSU supporters on Taiwan.

Isn

well if I was too look at the “UNFAIR” presidental election protests or can I call them riots… these protests/riots look more like football holiganism without the lager

Using these guys as a reference… and the guy (legislator who was PFP or KMT) who was on the back of a truck ramming a gate and endangering police… I would have to say that the guys in your pictures are not as holiganistic as you think

[quote=“ac_dropout”]
Isn

[quote=“Mr He”]Lots of football supporters who abhor violence and would never get into a fight with the supporters of the other team may dress up in the colors of their team, or will even put on a bit of makeup in the colors of their team.

That people do that is not the same as they go out and beat the crap out of the other side’s supporters in best KMT/PFP fashion.[/quote]
Please jog my memory. When exactly did this alleged crap-beating occur?

In my opinion this is highly subjective, one day the act of killing someone is wrong, the next day it is patroitic and you are given a medal.

One day your living in exile, the next day your leading a major political party on Taiwan.

One day tax evasion is wrong, the next day it is a cornerstone of a national holiday on Taiwan.

Do I sympathize with people who feel they have been “wronged” and act on it? Everyday. It is one of the base emotions that motivates me sometimes to achieve. But it is rarely something I would advocate using to galvanize political support, because it is the voice of aggrieve, something I believe should not be used in politics too much because it is gaining support through negative emotions.

I don’t believe Taidu is the solution to the Strait Issue. I don’t believe the KMT can be scapegoated for every problem of the pan-Green.

If you look at any incident out of context, it is irrelevant. However, I

Please jog my memory. When exactly did this alleged crap-beating occur?[/quote]

Here’s one

I beg your pardon?

The policy that most angers the US government and diminishes support for Taiwan among the power-brokers in the US is the policy of opposing the procurement of the weaponry that Uncle Sam wishes Taiwan to purchase so that it will be able to shoulder a more reasonable share of the burden of defending the status quo in the Taiwan Strait from the PRC’s military buildup and escalating outward assertiveness.

And which party is it that’s rallying opposition to those arms purchases and rabidly attacking US motives for pushing those sales? Oh yes, that’s right, it’s Jimmy-I’ll-kneel-or-do-anything-it-takes-to-get-my-hands-on-power Soong’s PFP.

Surely not even you, AC, can deny the truth of that! Therefore, your self-proclaimed most important rationale for supporting the pan-blues has evaporated into nothing, and you’d better switch your allegiance at once to America’s best friends in Taiwan, the DPP.

The USA over-priced the package. The KMT is correct in that we can negotiate a cheaper price.

Shoulder the responsibility of what? We’re Cuba and the PRC is the USA in this situation. There is no way ROC can win a direct arms race in this situation, we’ll bankrupt ourselves in the process like the former USSR.

In lieu of all that, the USA values the the stability of the Strait to preserve their bilateral relationship with the PRC, not TI as CSB believes.

This is one of the main reasons why the PFP performed so poorly in the elections. People want stability and their selfish antics of basically shutting down the capital turned off the electorate. James Soong should immediately resign and retire from Taiwan politics, move to Hainan island and collect his pension from Beijing.

I agree the package seems overpriced, but getting a cheaper price may not be easy.

I agree, so ROC is going to have to be creative. 1) Offensive missles are a lot cheaper than defensive equipment and make a good detturent. However, such weapons could be bad for Taiwan’s image. 2) A people’s armed militia, which trained regularly and would be able to pick up arms from a depot in the case of a Communist invasion, would also make the PRC think twice about the costs of invading and occupying Taiwan. Anyway, the point here is I agree an arms race can’t be won. The important thing is doing enough to make a military option very bitter for China. There are cheaper and more creative ways to do that.

[quote=“ac_dropout”]In lieu of all that, the USA values the the stability of the Strait to preserve their bilateral relationship with the PRC, not TI as CSB believes.[/quote]I think you’re wrong. USA wants both.

I agree, but in the world of globalization there are the economic and political front where a country can engage each other. Whereby lessening the effective and desire to engage on the military front.

Case in point, PRC engaged the USA economically and politically to reduce the propoganda of the “China Threat,” thus reducing tensions and opportunity to seek military solutions between the two countries.

Taiwan could follow the route of Singapore politically, have relationships with USA and ROC, while being on friendly terms with PRC.

I would have to disagree, with Powell statement of “not enjoying sovereignty” and the State Department recent comment of no “support” of unilateral name changes to government offices and companies, it seems quite obvious USA value PRC-USA biliateral relationship over TI that CSB has been advocating.

ah, i think I see why we disagreed. I meant TI = status quo, and that the US wanted to maintaina good relationship with China while maintaining Taiwan’s independence. I agree the US does not want anything provocative to happen.

“TI = Status Quo” is a pan-Green propaganda paradigm to make Taidu more appealing to the moderate center of Taiwan.

Unfortunately for Taidu supporter the center is also aware when politicians stray too far from status quo.

[quote=“ac_dropout”]“TI = Status Quo” is a pan-Green propaganda paradigm to make Taidu more appealing to the moderate center of Taiwan.

Unfortunately for Taidu supporter the center is also aware when politicians stray too far from status quo.[/quote]
I characterize it as an excellent factual description of the status quo, designed to calm the controversy and create a sort of description that at least pan-green supporters and moderates could accept, even if the far-blue groups would never go for it. It’s a way of soothing the far greens and making the issue less confrontational.

And I also agree that excessive name changing, even do a degree that falls short of breaking the “四不一沒有” policy, does not sit well with Taiwan’s center.

Naturally, neither does anything resembling unification. The KMT’s line is now that they promise not to change Taiwan’s status-quo for 50 years, and won’t rule out eventual independence as an acceptable goal.

The KMT has clearly 被綠化 been greenified-- partly so far.