Yes, because this activity is totally invisible to China and they will not ever notice F-35s, AH-64s, and American-made Air Defense weapons just magically showing up around their borders.
Deterrence doesn’t work if done in secret. If China intervened in Hong Kong militarily, Taiwan and our allies need to be able to credibly threaten the mainland with retaliation.
Why? I don't mean to come of as hash, but that is eerily similar to how we ended up in Vietnam. What happens when Taiwan (or whoever you think these other allies are ... Japan and South Korea, presumably) gets run over by a numerically superior - by an order of magnitude - Chinese Army?
And how does one "credibly threaten the mainland with retaliation" without nuclear weapons? Honest question.
> that is eerily similar to how we ended up in Vietnam
Vietnam involved American ground troops. Upgrading a country’s standing army is different.
(Tactical note. China has a huge army. It’s navy is humbler. Troop transport capacities are manageable with the right guns and logistical lines. Add to that the international waters separating Taiwan and China, and an invasion can be rendered untenable.)
that is eerily similar to how we ended up in Vietnam> how does one "credibly threaten the mainland with retaliation" without nuclear weapons?
This is a 20th century view of warfare that is supremely outdated. One thing to keep in mind is that there's been a radical change in the technology of warfare over the last ~15 years or so, and counting battleships and battalions isn't sufficient for gauging what "works" anymore.
>Troop transport capacities are manageable with the right guns and logistical lines.
I actually laughed. I guess we didn't have the "right guns" in Afghanistan.
>Add to that the international waters separating Taiwan and China, and an invasion can be rendered untenable.
And what happens when they call our bluff? We sink a transport ship? WWIII, that's what happens.
I know this is sarcastic, but it’s a telling marker of how unserious the US has gotten in terms of preparing for a full scale war that we’re even entertaining that idea.
Let them, let's see what they will do. I wonder who would win such a conventional war. Though I guess afterwards there would be no Hong Kong left protecting.
Certainly both would lose many lives. Why would any American want to die for this crisis? Why would you imagine China would give up or be unable to defend territory so near their mainland?
In a defensive war, probably China. They've got more tanks, more people, more manufacturing capabilities, lots of artillery and no doubt they've spent years preparing themselves militarily for such an event.
China has enough nukes for this to be a moot point. The outcome would be the same as if China decided to annex Hawaii -- an all out war with nuclear and other WMD.
No, but we should definitely subsidise defensive weapons sales to Taiwan and our other democratic allies in the region.