The recent Forumosa “poll” shows Kerry well ahead of Bush here among members though there aren’t nearly enough responses to make the poll remotely scientific (actually none of the polls here are scientific for a variety of reasons, of course you all know that). However, assuming for the sake of argument that most Forumosans are against Bush, this would be confusing if MaPoSquid is right.
Is a vote for Kerry really a vote for reunification at gunpoint?
If so, can we see some concrete sources for believing this. To all who do believe this, will you leave Taiwan if Kerry is elected? Do you believe your lives are in danger at his possible victory?
If no, what are your sources? Has Kerry spoken out about Taiwan? Will he defend Taiwan as past presidents have been prepared to? Will he allow bloodshed?
My brain attempts to remember my life as a political science major…I seem to recall that American presidents since Nixon have traditionally been pro-Taiwan before election and pro-One China Policy after election, but I don’t know how accurate that is. Keeping the status quo has been the custom and practice, with the Taiwan Relations Act balancing the scales. Will Kerry tip them in China’s favor?
[quote=“gao_bo_han”]The recent Forumosa “poll” shows Kerry well ahead of Bush here among members though there aren’t nearly enough responses to make the poll remotely scientific (actually none of the polls here are scientific for a variety of reasons, of course you all know that). However, assuming for the sake of argument that most Forumosans are against Bush, this would be confusing if MaPoSquid is right.
Is a vote for Kerry really a vote for reunification at gunpoint?
If so, can we see some concrete sources for believing this. To all who do believe this, will you leave Taiwan if Kerry is elected? Do you believe your lives are in danger at his possible victory?
If no, what are your sources? Has Kerry spoken out about Taiwan? Will he defend Taiwan as past presidents have been prepared to? Will he allow bloodshed?
My brain attempts to remember my life as a political science major…I seem to recall that American presidents since Nixon have traditionally been pro-Taiwan before election and pro-One China Policy after election, but I don’t know how accurate that is. Keeping the status quo has been the custom and practice, with the Taiwan Relations Act balancing the scales. Will Kerry tip them in China’s favor?[/quote]
My guess is that, if Kerry’s elected, his policy will be indistinguishable from Bush’s. “Runification at gunpoint” is just nonsense.
In response to an ABC interview question on whether the US had an obligation to support Taiwan in the event of a Communist attack, President Bush stated:
[quote]
President Bush: Yes, we do, and the Chinese must understand that.
ABC: With the full force of the American military?
President Bush: Whatever it took to help Taiwan defend herself.[/quote]
In a speech by Kerry to the Senate in reply to Bush’s statement:
That’s good Comrade Stalin. I’m not entirely convinced that Taiwan is worthy of US support. It is not as if anyone here appreciates the fact that the status quo is maintained through the US. Certainly the elites will not fight for Taiwan - given that most never served in the military. When Pres. Chen even offered modest support of the war on terror, look at the local response?
Unless of course the US supports Taiwan because 1 out of 5 people (this number is pure speculation, but experientially seems correct) have a US passport or a green card?
I mean for Christ’s sake, after complaining for years that no-one would sell them weapons, Taiwan has now dragged its feet for four years and accuses the US of gouging them. The gouging actually comes from the local arms dealers that handle the transaction.
[quote]President Bush: Yes, we do, and the Chinese must understand that.
ABC: With the full force of the American military?
President Bush: Whatever it took to help Taiwan defend herself.[/quote]
Unfortunately Comrade Stalin does not qualify ‘Communist attack’, because if I recall correctly the US has made it clear that if China is provoked by Taiwan (by declaring independence for example) they may not help - as opposed to what the above quote says.
On the other hand stating that there is no comittment under ‘The Taiwan Relations Act’ does not automatically mean the US would not interfere.
From what I understand the US supports the Status Quo as it is, i.e. no agression by China, no declaration of independence by Taiwan.
Kerry was arguing that Bush should not make a blanket statement that says in all cases the US will defend Taiwan. The main part of the speech outlining Kerry’s views appear to be these parts:
[quote]For example, if China attacked in response to what it sees as a Taiwanese provocation, would we then respond? Apparently so, according to President Bush. Or if Taiwan declared independence, and China responded militarily, would we then come to Taiwan’s defense? Have we given Taiwan a card it wanted all along, which is the capacity to know that no matter what it does, the United States would, in fact, be there to defend it?
The answer to that question is the reason that we have carried this ambiguity through President Ford, President Carter, President Reagan, President Bush, the President’s father, and President Clinton.
In a subsequent interview on CNN, the President reiterated that we maintain the “one China” policy, and he hopes Taiwan will not declare independence. But he remained vague as to what we would do if Taiwan did declare independence and China attacked.
…
President Bush has said that the United States has an obligation to defend Taiwan. Certainly we want to help Taiwan preserve its thriving democracy and robust, growing economy. I have said previously that I think this is enough of a message to the Chinese, that no American President could stand idly by and watch while that democracy that has been gained is set back, by force or otherwise. Nevertheless, we need to press both Taipei and Beijing to reinvigorate the cross-strait dialogue, without any misinterpretations about our role. [/quote]
My point was just poorly put: “Communist attack” may include situations which were provoked by Taiwan (e.g. declaration of independence), so I would question if Bush wanted to include such. Maybe you don’t bother but I would consider it an important distinction to make.
Because if you read the whole interview it gives quite a different impression than only looking at the parts which you quoted since Kerry was actually critizing Bush for that statement which he saw as a uni-lateral shift of policies by Bush:
That all shows Kerry’s statement that you quoted in a different light and if it still isn’t clear then take note of this:
So summed up Kerry is not saying he won’t assist militarily, instead he questioned / criticized Bush’s statement and Kerry says it depends on the situation what action will be taken and that the decision is not that of the president alone to make.
So basically, the answer to the question earlier in the thread so far, “Is a vote for Kerry really ‘a vote for reunification at gunpoint’?” is “No.” Mostly because all Kerry’s been quoted as saying is the absolute truth, that the TRA does not oblige the US to defend Taiwan necessarily. Wow, what a surprise.
Where does Kerry stand on taiwan? right about here, on the head. got some shit on his shoe too.
US China policy is longstanding and has been built up over a long period of time. Kerry won’t change anything.
The problem is his guts if it comes down to the crunch. I saw today former Chinese foreign minister Qian whatever condemned Bush in no uncertain terms–China has endorsed Kerry! Scary.
Kerry’s already tied to the Communists through his personal financial dealings with Boston Capital & Technology and its relationship with PLA owned CITIC.
At least Kerry doesn’t fight to cut the taxes of firms that outsourced US labor to Communist countries.
Doesn’t Heinz sell ketchup in Taiwan and in communist countries? There is some refutable proof that Kerry through his wife’s company has ties with communists.
And yet Bush’s ties to Saudia Arabia aren’t enough to condemn him for?[/quote]
(cough cough) Since you’re living in Taiwan, don’t you think you ought to be more worried about China intentions and what whoever is elected tomorrow does in response? BTW, how much of their wealth do Kerry and the delectable Ms Heinz have due to their investments in oil stocks?
Not particularly. I live in Taipei-if the Communists attack, I’m screwed either way, whether Bush Jr gallops in on his steed with six-shooters blazing or Kerry sits on his ass taking a poll on who to support.
:bravo: