Give it a rest Gerard.
Taiwan and China thread.
- Thread starter dowie
- Start date
Give it a rest Gerard.
That was you in this case, I pointed out several posts back that the Canadian airforce tried that approach already, balloons can take hits from multiple rounds and not fall from the sky, it took them several days, better targeting or not it's still inefficient, you're just getting tetchy now and it's rather silly.
Taiwan and China thread.
A ******* missile to shoot down a balloon? Talk about overkill. :cry: They are actually quite difficult to bring down.
forums.overclockers.co.uk
Yup, will be interesting to see what they'll release publicly about it.
I remember just after Bush was elected China ended up bringing down a US Spy plane after some Chinese flighter pilot got too aggressive and ended up killing himself by accidentally crashing into it resulting in the US plane carrying out an emergency landing. China then interrogated the crew and charged the US to ship the transport back + demanded compensation for their dead pilot who caused the whole thing.
The amusing thing is there are probably some people out there who'd think that's a reasonable idea. Shooting the balloon with cannon isn't a totally unreasonable idea in itself but it's been tried before; massive balloons like that can survive having multiple holes put into them but if the notion that it will rapidly deflate is someone's imagined/preconceived reality then even if you show them evidence otherwise they can still find it hard to accept as seen earlier. Likewise, there are people out there who perhaps think that cars really do instantly explode like in the movies if you shoot a gun at them and it hits the fuel tank.
I reckon if someone were to crowdsource the US public for suggestions on taking it down you'd get all sort of ideas from giant nets to say someone from Texas offering to lasso it from his Cessna.
I do wonder perhaps if these sorts of incidents were to become more common, should the US and others develop a cheaper solution of some sort to bring these balloons down, advanced air-to-air missiles are expensive (apparently circa $400k for the one used) and ideally used against other aircraft in a war with China situation... maybe a big laser or giant flying pin could be the solution after all!
I'm not sure I'd pay too much attention to Zero Hedge tbh. AFAIK there hasn't been an incident like this recently, previous incidents were likely far less egregious, in this case, the balloon transited across a big chunk of the US and was clearly visible, then again they could track it and anticipate its path/limit what it was going to be able to collate + it would have been risky to shoot down over land.
So given the two recent UFOs are probably also some sort of Chinese spy aircraft (presumably smaller balloons?) you've gotta wonder how many others have slipped through the net in the past few years before the recent big spy balloon was discovered.
It seems the recent two were perhaps only picked up after the US changed some parameters as a result of the recent big balloon incident and statted looking at slower-moving objects:
It's a bit of a funny situation for China too if these are more balloons as they can't really control them, if they've been regularly sending up smaller balloons over the US without being detected for a while now then perhaps there are a few more already in flight that they can't do anything about? Or perhaps that was the case with the second UFO here.
It seems the recent two were perhaps only picked up after the US changed some parameters as a result of the recent big balloon incident and statted looking at slower-moving objects:
It's a bit of a funny situation for China too if these are more balloons as they can't really control them, if they've been regularly sending up smaller balloons over the US without being detected for a while now then perhaps there are a few more already in flight that they can't do anything about? Or perhaps that was the case with the second UFO here.
Last edited:
China says US balloons breached airspace at least 10 times
"It's not uncommon for the US to illegally enter the airspace of other countries," says a spokesman.www.bbc.co.uk
So now they blame US for doing the same, with 10 balloons vs their 1 lol
Total cope to try and deflect a bit no doubt... just so they can muddy the waters at the UN etc.. if need be.
So what? What is your point?
That's just a fudge to pacify the PRC, they treat Taiwan mostly as being independent but have to keep a fudge in place primarily because of the PRC/CCP.
You sound like a typical tankie, can guess what your views on Ukraine will be too. If China invades Taiwan then China is starting the war not the US, the US has no desire to start a war with China and the hostilities in that region right now are being caused by China.
It was Japanese for 50 year from 1895 onwards.
Ireland had been attached to the Kingdom of England and then later the United Kingdom for longer, is that really a good reason for invading a country? Should the UK invade the Republic of Ireland on that basis?
Bit of a strange concept I know but perhaps what the people want is relevant in these situations.
Again, so what?
And again that's just a fudge the US maintains because of the PRC/CCP hostility to Taiwan.
Well, so far your views seem to overlap with those of the standard tankie...
OK so Washington is apparently evil but you seem to be completely ignoring some people, perhaps the people who matter the most here, those people actually living in Taiwan. Why do you ignore their wishes? (I guess the same could be asked re: Ukraine too as you have the same blindspot there too.)
What do the opinions of people in China have to do with it?
You still don't seem to grasp the point that it's surely a matter for the people of Taiwan.
This is just waffle, you haven't addressed the point at all - so what if 95% of Taiwan's population is Han Chinese?
You've made some vague reference to history (again) but it's still unclear what you're actually trying to argue.
This all just diverts from the key point you keep on missing which is what Taiwan actually wants!
Speaker technology hasn't really changed too much over decades, you could manufacture those in some other country too... it's not like say semiconductors.
China already has an aging population/upcoming demographics crisis.
Yikes, the one-child policy is gonna hurt a bit there, construction is a huge part of their economy but they seem to have a bit of a demographics time bomb re: population.
Also perhaps a minor effect in addition to the one-child policy but they've perhaps got a slight mismatch resulting from cultural issues/preferences on top too... a few too many boys vs girls.
Taiwan would be very costly for them and the yuan is already a reserve currency along with USD, EUR, GBP and JPY. It's not going to replace the USD as a global currency though as they're not willing to give up on their lack of transparency etc.
Yeah, see also why do we have NDFs in FX.
^^^ "Engrish" spotted, are you Chinese by any chance?
It's not comparable to Scotland as Scotland actually is part of the UK and voted to stay just a few years ago, you could compare it to Ireland perhaps? They're not part of the UK and in the case of Northern Ireland, they can vote to leave if they want to too.
Taiwan has its own separate government and has been governed separately for decades, it was never under the control of the CCP, the last foreign power to rule it was Japan and unless the people of Taiwan choose to vote otherwise then why should that change?
Nope, it's never been ruled by the CCP, you don't have to go back to any time period as you're unable to cite any time when it was governed by the CCP.
It never belonged to the PRC and you're wrong re: the lease too; there was no 99-year lease on HK island, you're getting confused with the 99-year lease on the new territories. HK Island was given to the PRC because it wasn't practical to split from the new territories, the CCP didn't want to extend the lease on the new territories and they threatened to cut the water off. The UK had no choice but to give it up.
It's got naff all relevance to Taiwan though.
You're not very good at this, first you made a flawed analogy with Scotland then you get basic facts wrong in your next reply.