The U.S. isn't the E.U. . It's demonstrated time and time again willingness and ability to engage in conflicts to preserve its own interests. A Chinese invasion of Taiwan (which again, isn't going to happen b/c everybody is fine with the status quo) would without a doubt be met with U.S. forces in the air and sea. China's only hope here is somehow to win a quick and violent war in which the U.S. just says "this isn't worth it" by destroying lots of U.S. assets. What's scary to think is that even if this happens, the U.S. might say ok fine and commit entirely into a war with China. This could drag Japan, South Korea, North Korea, Australia, the Philippines, India, and other countries into a literal non-nuclear World War.

America is a very, very stubborn country. We spent like a trillion dollars and killed hundreds of thousands of people b/c of Osama Bin Laden over the course of a 20-year war and absolutely brutal insurgency. But I'm expected to believe that the United States wouldn't have the appetite for a conventional war? The one that all of its military might is built for? That the U.S. would not defend an ally and undue all trust in all alliances on the global stage? NATO is gone, in this scenario. The E.U. starts building up military forces b/c they can't trust that the U.S. will defend against Russian aggression. Etc.

There are a lot of cascading effects that are very bad for the U.S. and global stability compared to just buying stuff from other countries temporarily and checking Chinese aggression here.

On the other hand, the U.S. has a high potential for smashing Chinese forces in a quick and intense war. It's a gamble I think U.S. leadership is willing to take.

I don't see either side backing down. And China loses out in longer-term wars. So why bother when you can just keep things as they are and rattle sabers instead while trading with each other?

wow!!! in roy jones jnr's voice - ya'll must've forgot the us lost the vietnam war. it was supposed to be quick and easy right. same as iraq war ? nothing in war is ever quick and easy. and in war, who wins is not who has the biggest guns but who has nothing to lose. you think the us can afford to send more young men, to TW whilst the TW ain't willing to do that themselves.

I’m not following the point you’re trying to make. Defending Taiwan and sinking Chinese ships in modern combat is not even close to the same kind of war as Iraq, Afghanistan, or Vietnam where the population (in some respects) was against U.S. presence except in the case of Iraq where the U.S. demolished all of the Iraqi military in a couple of months when engaged in actual nation state level war. In this scenario I doubt a single soldier would be deployed except to Korea or Japan just in case. Certainly not to invade China or something crazy, and there’s little reason for any to be on the island of Taiwan where, as luck would have it, would be actively cooperating with American forces to repel an invasion.

Why would the Taiwanese not fight against an invasion of their country? Are they just wasting money buying missiles and planes to defend their island against China for no reason?

I think you just have a slant here and aren’t thinking about how these forces might interact. Comparing the invasion of Taiwan by China in 2021 to U.S. war in Vietnam is very confusing. Maybe you’re trying to make me angry by saying the U.S. lost the war? I mean they did “lose the war” in the sense of “why are we killing all of these people again? Let’s go home and stuff.”. But who cares anymore? This isn’t sports where we are keeping a score.