[ExI] US ?failed miserably? in wargame reportedly against China attack on Taiwan
avant at sollegro.com
Wed Aug 11 03:58:28 UTC 2021
> John, international rules differ from the rules of human
> interaction. An example is the well-known principle that weakness is
> provocation. When the value of any nation exceeds the cost to an
> attacker to take it, an attacker will take it.
I generally agree with John. Weakness can be feigned to provoke casus
belli. Sometimes the war machine has a mind of its own. Consider that
the war games in question happened almost a year ago.
> That well-known principle has a corollary: If the cost of defending
> any ally exceeds the value of that ally, the defending country will
> not defend that ally.
Your principle does not explain the 20 year long, $3 trillion
(including interest to date) quagmire in Afghanistan. The game is
being played on many levels and not always rationally it would seem.
> The USA sent a clear and powerful message to the world by revealing
> the outcome of those war games. The USA will not defend Taiwan.
> The cost of defending Taiwan exceeds the value of Taiwan.
For what its worth, the GDP of Taiwan is like $700 billion versus $20
billion for Afghanistan, and it has far greater strategic importance
in terms of both location and political capital. Consider that it is
the successor state of the former government of China in exile. If the
world harbors any hope of China becoming an actual democratic
republic, then it may lie in Taiwan.
> I can see why this is of particular interest to you John, for once
> China bites off Taiwan and several of the other eastern nations, it
> is only a matter of time before it sets its sights on the
> Philippines. China is both patient and ambitious.
China is already about 2/3rds of U.S. GDP and growing. If China
conquers Taiwan, and the tiger economies, then they will have
overnight economic parity. Then it might be time to learn Mandarin,
praise Mao, and mind your social credits.
More information about the extropy-chat