Donald Trump risks China rift with Taiwan call

[Pale Man In Black]

Circumstantial evidence is there, believe what you want.

That was to another poster.

 

[Rod1]

I said, verbatim: They've been family friends since the early 80s.

You quoted an article that said one thing as a response.

If you are not willing to stand by sources you are quoting, then dont quote them.

 

[Pale Man In Black]

You quoted an article that said one thing as a response.

If you are not willing to stand by sources you are quoting, then dont quote them.

I am standing by it. He says he's known Ivanka since she was an infant. Sounds to me like they are on pretty friendly terms.
That same article quotes Marci as denying any talk of business ventures, the original point of contention, remember. Shifting the goal posts will not work

 

[Pale Man In Black]

...

 

[Rod1]

I am standing by it. He says he's known Ivanka since she was an infant. Sounds to me like they are on pretty friendly terms.
That same article quotes Marci as denying any talk of business ventures, the original point of contention, remember. Shifting the goal posts will not work

The article says that Macri and Trump are close, that what i was replying to.

Macri is a latin american politician who was uncovered by the press of his country.

Clinton also said that he never had sex with Monica Lewinski.

 

[Quipling]

This is what gets me. I already debunked the Argentina story a few pages back, and there is zero indication that the Taiwan conversation had anything do with his personal business. The boy who cried wolf keeps coming to mind.

You keep saying debunked, but repeating the defenses his campaign proferred isn't a "debunking."

 

[Pale Man In Black]

You keep saying debunked, but repeating the defenses his campaign proferred isn't a "debunking."

I said it once, pay attention. And it sure as hell is more substantial than anything that was provided by the ones claiming shenanigans, now isn't it?
You wanna be a stickler for details, yet you have nothing to say about the pure speculation of the claims I responded to. Interesting.
When did I quote anything his campaign proffered? I quoted Marci's own words. Try to keep up.

 

[Squarechoke]

1. If their plan is to conquer by immigration and birth rates, and you are actively encouraging it and subsidzing it... yeah it'll probably happen.

And like I said, it will be a peaceful Jihad. You will be conquered without a single battle. It's just a numbers game.

2. Look up the definition of assumption and read what you said again.

3. Hey, we don't have laws against questioning History. I'm proud of that.

4. Past behavior can predict future behavior.

5. Sure, I'll explain the math.

If the average swedish couple has 1.5 children we can model the function A=Pe^rt.

Now consider the migrants may have multiple wifes, have quicker generations (i.e. have children at the age of 16 if you guys are having children at the age of 30), and have more children... well it's obvious who is going to be running your country in 50 years. You are on your way out, theocrats are on their way in.

if it doesn't bother you, it doesn't bother me. Good luck.

You just keep coming on with your extremely superficial and selective reasoning, and clearly aren't man enough to own up to your huge factual mistakes I pointed out. I don't think we'll get much further.

 

[TheStruggle]

The same liberals crying because Trump wouldn't be tough on Russia now crying because China got their jimmies hurt?

 

[Blackened]

You just keep coming on with your extremely superficial and selective reasoning, and clearly aren't man enough to own up to your huge factual mistakes I pointed out. I don't think we'll get much further.

OK, sure. I was wrong. I'll admit it.

You man enough to admit you are going to be outnumbered in your own country?

Here, you can play with the numbers. Polygamy will be an interesting factor too. And don't forget to do a separate calculation for migrants that will continue to enter your country via immigration.

http://www.miniwebtool.com/exponential-growth-calculator/

I'm willing to bet in your country of 10 million people, you'll be outnumbered by the turn of the century and your government will be replaced with an Islamic theocracy.


Here are some facts to think about.



The Muslim population in Europe also is growing; we project 10% of all Europeans will be Muslims by 2050.

Muslims are younger than other Europeans. In 2010, the median age of Muslims throughout Europe was 32, eight years younger than the median for all Europeans (40). By contrast, the median age of religiously unaffiliated people in Europe, including atheists, agnostics and those with no religion in particular, was 37. The median age of European Christians was 42.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/07/19/5-facts-about-the-muslim-population-in-europe/

 

[WiolentOne]

Lol Trump is breaking boundaries like a boss.

He's the real maverick.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

no no fuck china, i'm tired of the media over blowing that paper dragon, an them acting like because its called the south "china" sea they automatically own it? Nope fuck off china

I think the question is will this cause a change in China's policy towards Taiwan.

Since the 70s it's been this weird situation where China kinda pretends Taiwan is one of their provinces and Taiwan pretends their independent.

If China decided that they wanted to make their view 100% real Taiwan most likely couldn't stop them.

If that became the case what would/should the US response be?

It could be case where Trump calls their bluff (they leave Taiwan alone) or China calls our bluff (we don't do anything in the face of Chinese aggression like Russia with Ukraine).

 

[Limbo Pete]

I think the question is will this cause a change in China's policy towards Taiwan.

Since the 70s it's been this weird situation where China kinda pretends Taiwan is one of their provinces and Taiwan pretends their independent.

If China decided that they wanted to make their view 100% real Taiwan most likely couldn't stop them.

If that became the case what would/should the US response be?

It could be case where Trump calls their bluff (they leave Taiwan alone) or China calls our bluff (we don't do anything in the face of Chinese aggression like Russia with Ukraine).

Our priority is always going to be with China imo. People applauding what they perceive here as Trump sticking it to China are very much mistaken. He goofed up and just didn't know the diplomatic situation imo..... and it is a VERY delicate one. He may posture against China- maybe- while President, but there is no way on God's green Earth we would ever put Taiwan ahead of them. If China decided to forcibly absorb Taiwan, which I don't think they would do unless our relationship reeeeeeally went to shit, there isn't much of anything we could do to stop it if they are dedicated and willing to pay whatever non-military costs we can engineer.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

Our priority is always going to be with China imo. People applauding what they perceive here as Trump sticking it to China are very much mistaken. He goofed up and just didn't know the diplomatic situation imo..... and it is a VERY delicate one. He may posture against China- maybe- while President, but there is no way on God's green Earth we would ever put Taiwan ahead of them. If China decided to forcibly absorb Taiwan, which I don't think they would do unless our relationship reeeeeeally went to shit, there isn't much of anything we could do to stop it if they are dedicated and willing to pay whatever non-military costs we can engineer.

Yup, and unfortunately I don't think Trump is able to handle the complicated and delicate foreign policy that Nixon and Kissinger were capable of.

Many people had the same fears with Reagan in regards to Russia but he did have HW and Schultz whof were very qualified.

 

[Limbo Pete]

Yup, and unfortunately I don't think Trump is able to handle the complicated and delicate foreign policy that Nixon and Kissinger were capable of.

Many people had the same fears with Reagan in regards to Russia but he did have HW and Schultz who were very qualified.

I agree. He needs a very strong diplomatic cabinet like Reagan had but alas, that isn't shaping up so far. Really, he is pretty much lightyears away from Reagan in many respects lol. His own personal deficiencies are going to be sticking out like a huge sore thumb.

I think this might manifest itself more obviously in other diplomatic situations, and the increasing tension between India and Pakistan comes to mind.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

I agree. He needs a very strong diplomatic cabinet like Reagan had but alas, that isn't shaping up so far. Really, he is pretty much lightyears away from Reagan in many respects lol. His own personal deficiencies are going to be sticking out like a huge sore thumb.

A president either needs to be very strong on foreign policy or have even keeled advisors.

Reagan had great advisors. HW was strong in the area.

We wasn't and he had to choose between leaning on either Powell or Cheney and he picked Cheney.....

My hope is that Trump picks Romney. I know he isn't a foreign policy guru but I think he has network to build a competent team around him and he's even keeled.

 

[GhostZ06]

I think the question is will this cause a change in China's policy towards Taiwan.

Since the 70s it's been this weird situation where China kinda pretends Taiwan is one of their provinces and Taiwan pretends their independent.

If China decided that they wanted to make their view 100% real Taiwan most likely couldn't stop them.

If that became the case what would/should the US response be?

It could be case where Trump calls their bluff (they leave Taiwan alone) or China calls our bluff (we don't do anything in the face of Chinese aggression like Russia with Ukraine).

well we couldn't get ships close to the Chinese waters with out serious issues. they'd probably pull the fleet back an have it guard china

 

[Limbo Pete]

A president either needs to be very strong on foreign policy or have even keeled advisors.

Reagan had great advisors. HW was strong in the area.

We wasn't and he had to choose between leaning on either Powell or Cheney and he picked Cheney.....

My hope is that Trump picks Romney. I know he isn't a foreign policy guru but I think he has network to build a competent team around him and he's even keeled.

Romney is hands down the best choice floated so far just by virtue of how competent and pragmatic he is in general. An even keeled person is a must for heading diplomacy. And I also think he could put together a capable staff. But i'd be worried that he would face conflict and pressure from others in the Trump cabinet closer to Donald's ear. I see a lot of potential for internal strife if Romney gets it. I could see him eventually quitting.

 

[The Beast Within]

"Taiwan's president is First Woman for office, elected on platform of expanding gay rights, most liberal in all of Asia. China is a marxist dictatorship. The Left's attack on Trump show they aren't liberals, just power hungry collectivists."

 

[HereticBD]

The same liberals crying because Trump wouldn't be tough on Russia now crying because China got their jimmies hurt?

Pretty much.

Oh my God, he's not sucking China's dick! This is against protocol! He's doing exactly what he said he would do! Code Red! Code Red!


Why can't Trump just do what Libs thought he would do, and be the status quo President they want?