Manwe, Taiwan has nukes and can defend themselves. Also Taiwan-Chinese trade is big enough to outweigh a military confrontation. So, I think we're in agreement.
@Yan, Taiwan/China is an internal matter no different than the American Civil War. Ours was settled conclusively and relatively quickly (4 yrs give or take) but China takes a longer view. If China defeats Taiwan in the next 100 years, in the course of their 5000 year history, it will seem relatively quick.

"problem one, the taiwanese use them to regain control of mainland.
problem two, china responds to US provocation.
problem three, china launches a pre-emptive strike on taiwan"

Reason problem 1 won't happen, MAD.
Reason problem 2 won't happen, MAD.
Reason problem 3 won't happen, MAD.

The best argument I've heard for cutting the military budget in half:
https://www.quora.com/What-would-happen-if-the-U-S-decreased-its-military-spending-by-half/answer/Eric-C-Turnble

The best argument I've heard for maintaining the US military budget:
https://www.quora.com/Why-does-the-US-government-spend-so-much-on-military/answer/Jon-Davis-10

What UN military personnel do

The UN has been deploying military personnel for service in peace operations since 1948 when the Security Council authorized the deployment of UN military observers to the Middle East to monitor the Armistice Agreement between Israel and its Arab neighbours.

UN military personnel can be called upon to:

Protect civilians and UN personnel;
Monitor a disputed border;
Monitor and observe peace processes in post-conflict areas
Provide security across a conflict zone;
Assist in-country military personnel with training and support
Assist ex-combatants in implementing the peace agreements; they may have signed.

http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/issues/military/

"Manwe, Taiwan has nukes and can defend themselves. Also Taiwan-Chinese trade is big enough to outweigh a military confrontation. So, I think we're in agreement."

No, they don't have them currently. But yeah, China may not even attack them without nuclear missiles being present.

What UN military personnel cannot do.

Stop an invasion of taiwan by the chinese military

So Brad's justifications for maintaining/increasing levels of military spending include:
1. keep China down
2. access to rare earth elements
3. maintaining treaty commitments
4. being the world's policeman
5. access to oil
6. maybe something I missed
Some of these warrant more spending than others but none of them warrants spending levels anywhere near what they are now. If only Brad would just admit it.

@Hauta

"@Yan, Taiwan/China is an internal matter no different than the American Civil War."

wrong, it's VERY different. the South tried to split from the North, and the South had the human rights violations. furthermore, they participated in a vote, then decided to turn tail and run.

Taiwan has never had such ability to decide politics, and they do not live in a democracy nor a Republic. Also, Taiwan is moving AWAY from the country with human rights violations.

"Ours was settled conclusively and relatively quickly (4 yrs give or take) but China takes a longer view. If China defeats Taiwan in the next 100 years, in the course of their 5000 year history, it will seem relatively quick."

This... is not an argument for or against Taiwan being its own country. This is putting things into perspective if they lose. Perhaps it'd be best if China were to start losing provinces if they continue to treat much of their citizenry like slaves.

But that's not my decision: it's Taiwan's. they decided to leave, and the USA should support freedom, liberty and sovereignty, especially when the pussies at the UN won't

How do you explain U.N. troops fighting for the South Koreans in the Korean war but not being able to fight for the Taiwanese in a Taiwan-China conflict?

@Hauta

i DO want less military spending btw, i agree with that.

Manwe, Isreal and Taiwan are both sort of "pariah states" in their own neighborhood with existential threats facing them. They worked together on developing nukes and maintain a policy of nuclear ambiguity.

The First Taiwan Strait Crisis (also called the 1954–1955 Taiwan Strait Crisis, the Formosa Crisis, the Offshore Islands Crisis or the 1955 Taiwan Strait Crisis) was a brief armed conflict that took place between the governments of the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC), which by then fled and was based in Taiwan. The PRC seized the Yijiangshan Islands, forcing the ROC to abandon the Tachen Islands. The United States and the ROC Navies joined forces to evacuate ROC military personnel and civilians from the Tachen Islands to Taiwan. Though the Tachen Islands changed hands during the crisis, American news reports focused almost exclusively on the Kinmen and Matsu islands, which were the sites of frequent artillery duels.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Taiwan_Strait_Crisis

The Second Taiwan Strait Crisis, also called the 1958 Taiwan Strait Crisis, was a conflict that took place between the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC) in which the PRC shelled the islands of Kinmen and the nearby Matsu Islands along the east coast of the PRC (in the Taiwan Strait) to "liberate" Taiwan from the Chinese Nationalist Party, also called Kuomintang (KMT), and probe the extent of the United States defense of Taiwan's territory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Taiwan_Strait_Crisis

The Third Taiwan Strait Crisis, also called the 1995–1996 Taiwan Strait Crisis or the 1996 Taiwan Strait Crisis, was the effect of a series of missile "tests" conducted by the People's Republic of China (PRC) in the waters surrounding Taiwan including the Taiwan Strait from July 21, 1995, to March 23, 1996. The first set of missiles fired in mid-to-late 1995 were allegedly intended to send a strong signal to the Republic of China (ROC, commonly known as "Taiwan") government under Lee Teng-hui, who had been seen as moving ROC foreign policy away from the One-China policy. The second set of missiles were fired in early 1996, allegedly intending to intimidate the Taiwanese electorate in the run-up to the 1996 presidential election.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Taiwan_Strait_Crisis

Does anyone know what Brad is doing?

Hauta, officially Taiwan claims to have no nukes. But you say, unofficially, they do? I could buy that.

How do you explain U.N. troops fighting for the South Koreans in the Korean war but not being able to fight for the Taiwanese in a Taiwan-China conflict?

The United Nations Command (UNC) is the unified command structure for the multinational military forces supporting South Korea (the Republic of Korea or ROK) during and after the Korean War. After troops of North Korea invaded South Korea on June 25, 1950, the United Nations Security Council adopted Resolution 82 calling on North Korea to cease hostilities and withdraw to the 38th parallel.[1]

On June 27, 1950, it adopted Resolution 83, recommending that members of the United Nations provide assistance to the Republic of Korea "to repel the armed attack and to restore international peace and security to the area"
On 1 September 1950 the United Nations Command had a strength of 180,000 in Korea: 92,000 were South Koreans, the balance being Americans and the 1,600-man British 27th Infantry Brigade.
During the three years of the Korean War, military forces of these nations were allied as members of the UNC.[9] Peak strength for the UNC was 932,964 on July 27, 1953, the day the Armistice Agreement was signed:

Combat forces
South Korea – 590,911
United States – 302,483
United Kingdom – 14,198
Philippines – 7,468
Thailand – 6,326
Canada – 6,146
Turkey – 5,453
Australia – 2,282
New Zealand – 1,385
Ethiopia – 1,271
Greece – 1,263
France – 1,119
Colombia – 1,068
Belgium – 900
South Africa – 826
Netherlands – 819
Luxembourg – 44

@Yanik, no analogy is perfect. Ideally, America would put moral integrity and human rights first all the time, but we live in an imperfect world. It is more important for relations between America and China to be civil and to pretend that Taiwan belongs to China than it is to push the issue. Yes, Taiwan walks like a country and talks like a country so it is a country but it is unwise to rub it in China's face. Very unproductive.

ok Brad your copy and pasting skills are exquisite. anything else?

Manwe the UN forces in the Korean War were Koreans and Americans making up about ninety percent of the forces. so when you say the UN can take care of it that means the United States military.

So, you're telling me that the U.N. could assist Taiwan in fighting off China if they wanted to?

Does anyone know what Brad is doing?

showing that China will take taiwan by force if it is not prevented by the United States. That China will seize control of the south china sea by force if it is not prevented by the United States.

The U.N. does not have to use the same practices in developing its coalition today as it used 60 years ago. There's absolutely no reason the U.S. has to bear the brunt of the fighting.

so, you're telling me that the U.N. could assist Taiwan

no i am telling you that the United States would assist taiwan. the UN command was for Korea only and mostly a cover for American action there.

But it won't. Taiwan can most likely defend itself, and U.N. forces could even assist if it couldn't. China would not do anything to prevent passage through the South China sea if it stationed military forces there because of the economic retaliation the U.S. could conduct.

Brad, do you not believe that Taiwan has nukes?
Do you not believe that business interests between the 2 entities outweigh military interests?

@Hauta

"@Yanik, no analogy is perfect. Ideally, America would put moral integrity and human rights first all the time,"

not even ideally... that's literally the LOWEST standard, that we should always be obliged to follow

"but we live in an imperfect world. It is more important for relations between America and China to be civil and to pretend that Taiwan belongs to China than it is to push the issue."

oh yes, let these people feel the full repercussions of the eastern lion, so what? we can continue to get cheap products from their economy which is a command structured slave state, all the while destroying american businesses by proxying in foreign gov't backed monopolies into our relatively free market?

"Yes, Taiwan walks like a country and talks like a country so it is a country but it is unwise to rub it in China's face. Very unproductive."

"rubbing it in face" vs "not letting them seize the island by force"

excuse me if i think you're missing some nuances in this conversation

the only reason the UN command exists is that when the UN security counsel approved it, the soviet union boycotted the meeting and that china was taiwan not the mainland thus china approved the action. china mainland is on the council now and would veto any UN action.

why do you like China again? @ Hauta