Pelosi did the right thing
- Thread starter stollcpa
- Start date
She made plans to go. Whether right or wrong she couldn’t cancel after China threatened the US.
No argument from me on that point. I just hope it was done in consultation with the Administration. I'd actually be shocked if it wasn't.
It’s all about the perception that the Biden administration is not owned by China! Her trip is strictly theater.
Public diplomacy is all theater. But you can't ignore the message they're sending, that Taiwan won't be treated like Crimea.
This was all planned with the Biden phone call. Just like the Pauly P trial tomorrow.
Last edited:
Perhaps so.
I'd like to know what substantive purpose her visit has though. If she's there just because the Chinese said "don't", then I think that's foolish. Going just because they said "don't" is more like a petulant child doing what dad says not to.
The original reason for going doesn’t matter after China threatened. We really want China telling the House Speaker where she can go?
I think this is the correct answer. Her original plan to stop was incredibly irresponsible if it wasn't done in coordination with the administration. That said, after it leaked and China responded, she had no choice but to follow through.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
Nancy Pelosi’s trip to Taiwan highlights America’s incoherent strategy
The Biden administration’s policy is a mess
"This is a sensitive period for China’s leader, Xi Jinping, who faces big domestic challenges while preparing for a Communist Party congress at which he is expected to secure a third five-year term as the party’s leader, violating recent norms. Mr Xi has nurtured an aggressive form of nationalism and linked “reunification” with Taiwan to his goal of “national rejuvenation”. Now is a dangerous time to test his resolve just for the sake of it.
Another problem is Ms Pelosi’s apparent lack of co-ordination with Joe Biden. When asked about her plans, the president cited military officials who thought the trip was “not a good idea right now”. Once it was leaked, he faced only bad options: bless Ms Pelosi’s travels and risk a confrontation with China; or prevent her from going, caving in to Chinese threats (and opening himself up to Republican criticism). True, Congress is a separate branch from the executive, but Taiwan policy is too important for turf wars. In the end Ms Pelosi has made Mr Biden look irresolute and lacking in authority.
Worst, Ms Pelosi’s trip risks exposing how unsure the administration is of its Taiwan policy. If, heaven forbid, the visit escalates into an international security crisis, the fault will lie with China. But the situation will also test Mr Biden and his team, who are already dealing with the war in Ukraine. Are they prepared?"
Last edited by a moderator:
I see it something best expressed thusly...
So while I agree she probably didn't discuss semi conductors (and I wouldn't want her to probably), her mere presence is a sign (#3 to the throne) that the USA isn't ready to let Taiwan go to the wolves.
It could just be a coordinated play with China to diffuse any thought China might have eyes on Taiwan. A Realpolitik draw 4
I am in the camp you are I think. I don't know what the original thought behind the trip was and how good of an idea it was to go in the first place, BUT after China's reaction she had to go. F China.
Ya, not sure we'll ever know what this was really all about but it's wild to see. Gauntlet thrown. Super interesting it was a Speaker of the House. we sent a person with an uber politically charged role right into China's most politically charged situation. It's kinda like announcing to the world that China's role as a strategic adversary is now at the very center of US internal politics.
Last edited:
Sooo . . . you do realize that China could dictate whether she goes to Taiwan either way, don't you? (If China says "don't go" and she feels compelled to go to satisfy the public opinion of US 'middle school' - level jingoistic politics, then China could easily manipulate that to happen. And yes, they're clever enough to do that. Heck, MTIOTF is, and he's not even experienced in international diplomacy.)
And if China kills one of the Marines escorting her in their "retaliation" for Pelosi's provocation, is that going to be worth it? (Are you going to call the marine's parents?)
That's why I'd like to know the purpose of her visit . . . I'd like to know what the US is getting out of her going to Taiwan to gauge for myself whether the juice is worth the squeeze . . . and the potential for one or more Marines to be killed. Is the purpose of her trip worth the potential for war? I'm not saying it is. I'm not saying it isn't. I'm saying we don't know. And that's bad.
Last edited:
Heck Sope let’s just cede world dominance to China. Bend over every time they jump
Up and down and threaten us.
Otter looks fatter than me.I see it something best expressed thusly...
So while I agree she probably didn't discuss semi conductors (and I wouldn't want her to probably), her mere presence is a sign (#3 to the throne) that the USA isn't ready to let Taiwan go to the wolves.It could just be a coordinated play with China to diffuse any thought China might have eyes on Taiwan. A Realpolitik draw 4
Nice try.
You might oughta respond to what I actually wrote next time, instead of wrapping yourself in a flag . . . it's unbecoming of you.
Love the term is the juice worth the squeeze.
Why does it matter why Pelosi went to Taiwan? Why shouldn’t US officials be able to go anytime Taiwan is okay with it?
If Tiawan were to shut down tomorrow, the US (and most of the world) would instantaneously come to a screeching halt. F China. Tiawan IS a strategic partner who we shall not be shielded from. F China. America FIRST, America MOST! All others come along and share the ride.
Thank you.
Is the official visit to Taiwan for the purpose of furthering US interests? Then I think the calculus whether the visit's benefits outweigh the harm that the visit could do must be calculated.
Maybe you're spending too much time over on the football boards.
Unless you're intending to talk about the elder IU C brother here . . . but from the context of your post, I doubt it.
I don’t disagree. But after visit scheduled you can’t let China rattle sabers and not go.
We all know Pelosi is a drunk bumbling congresswoman so she probably made an incompetent decision to schedule trip.
I don't know about "drunk bumbling", but I'd trade you a Pelosi Speaker defeat for a McConnell GOP majority/minority leadership defeat straight up, and I think we'd all be better off for it.
I hear you.
What's the deal with the US' "one China" policy anyway? Seems to me that you're opposed to that policy. Is that correct?
BTW, Bob Menendez and Lindsey Graham are trying to get bipartisan legislation passed to eliminate the one China policy.
Menendez, Graham propose overhaul of US policy toward Taiwan
Senate lawmakers on Friday introduced bipartisan legislation to overhaul U.S. policy toward Taiwan, defining key American commitments to the democratic island’s defense against a Chinese military i…
thehill.com
Do you agree with this policy change?
Here's some background on the one China policy: https://www.csis.org/analysis/what-us-one-china-policy-and-why-does-it-matter
I agree there is a one China, and when the CCP can be relegated to the dustbin of history, then there could be a reunification of Taiwan with the mainland. Until such point, there should be no unification unless Taiwan elects to do so without coercion.I hear you.
What's the deal with the US' "one China" policy anyway? Seems to me that you're opposed to that policy. Is that correct?
BTW, Bob Menendez and Lindsey Graham are trying to get bipartisan legislation passed to eliminate the one China policy.
Menendez, Graham propose overhaul of US policy toward Taiwan
Senate lawmakers on Friday introduced bipartisan legislation to overhaul U.S. policy toward Taiwan, defining key American commitments to the democratic island’s defense against a Chinese military i…
Do you agree with this policy change?
Here's some background on the one China policy: https://www.csis.org/analysis/what-us-one-china-policy-and-why-does-it-matter
The U.S. made a huge mistake on China which goes back to the late 90's. Some people got really rich off of that mistake and now we and our children and our children's children are going to pay for that mistake. Hundreds of years from now this period will be studied for the abject stupidity of our foreign policy in building an anemic strategic adversary/enemy into a peer competitor and all in one generation.
We are moving into another cold war period. We should be extricate ourselves from the stranglehold that China has on us and our allies from an economic standpoint. And we must also start deciding where our lines are. Japan, South Korea, the Phillipines, Australia, New Zealand, and Taiwan are countries I think we should be willing to shoot over. We are losing our influence in the area. New Zealand is becoming much more China accepting (which is why sglowrider thinks they are better than Australia) and the Chinese are economically island hopping to push their military presence deeper into the Pacific.
We need to wake the hell up.
I could go for that if Biden wasn’t president. Republicans might need McConnell’s brinkmanship the last two years of Biden.
Pelosi for McConnell. Straight up.
No McConnell defeat, no Pelosi defeat.
So you prefer to have a "drunk bumbling" as speaker? O-Kay.
About which item?
Big one off the top of my head, start declaring certain business deals with China as a national security risk and disallow them. Restrict access of Chinese nationals to the U.S. university system. Encourage economic engagement with other Asian states to tie them ti us instead of China. Militarized the Pacific in the same manner we did Europe to contain the USSR. Aggressively move to remove them from places like Venezuela by destabilizing and supporting the overthrow of that government. Go back to the Abraham Accords to align Israel and the Gulf States + Egypt against Iran so that we do not need as much attention there.
We may have to accept some smaller stock returns in exchange for our soldiers lives.
the US has already "militarized" the pacific; we have more people and stuff there than anywhere else. more than double what we have in Europe. The US has special (and secret) intelligence sharing agreements with Australia, New Zealand, and Canada (plus UK, making Five Eyes group) . Japan is more integrated with the US than most NATO members. The G-7 B3W program was developed to compete against China for big infrastructure deals in the developing world.
china only has three military bases outside of china. they can't/ would never attempt to invade Taiwan until they can ensure imports can still make it to them. they are nowhere close to that point. secondly, they really need to export stuff too.
they are making "big theatre" of Taiwan kinda like we made "big theatre" of Cuba for all those years.
think I read a stat that said half of the university students that come here stay. I guess I'm with Kissinger in that you can be tough while keeping cultural exchange going.
Last edited:
If she doesn’t drink, she sure appears drunk at times. Maybe she’s just another too old over the hill senile politician.
She doesn't drink. There's no good reason to think she's a drunk. And many of those drunk appearances were manipulated.
It appears you are right if reporting is accurate.
She’s certainly looked bad in a few news conferences and interviews.
She’s another example of need for age limits and term limits.
What age would you consider "too old" to be in the Senate?
To run for President?
To be in Congress?
Would you presume to take that decision away from voters?
To be in the president's cabinet?
Would you presume to take that decision away from an elected president?
What term limits would you put on running for the Senate? Running for Congress?
Would you presume to take that decision away from voters?
Similar threads
