.

..\

中國解放軍不是吃素長大的

.

Why Should American Soldiers Die For Taiwan?

台灣人過於一廂情願,總是認為如果中國攻擊台灣,美國就會出兵保護抵抗,戰爭爆發時美國膽大妄為介入台海戰爭,這樣一來台灣老百姓可能就是完全陪葬,筆者並不是危言聳聽,不要低估中國解放台灣,血洗台灣的豪情壯志,美國及外國軍事介入,那樣就是台灣的末日降臨.反正人殺完喇,建築物被戰爭損毀,日後戰後的重建對於中國是小菜一碟,人民可以從中國遷居3000萬補充,重新建設中國台灣省

台灣同胞必須審慎的思考和平統一或是接受美國援兵,

開啟戰爭任君選擇...

.美國的阿兵哥是效忠於星條旗的.不是效忠台灣的鈔票? 

..

稚嫩的美國阿兵哥,會為台灣犧牲打仗保護台灣抵抗中國?

.

.自從美國總統BIDEN.信口開河,說會保護台灣,如果中國攻擊台灣,美國的智庫已經掀起熱烈論述,台灣議題再度成為美國各界討論的話題,傳聞目前台灣外匯存款將近3000億美元,存在美國,黃金儲備300噸亦同,如果海峽兩岸爆發戰爭,那麼一來上述台灣的外匯存款及黃金儲備,極為可能轉換成為軍費支出,由美國直接使用,讓美國出兵營救台灣?

無需國會討論通過與否,直接由美國總統下達作戰令,出兵營救台灣? 與台灣關係法絲毫無關.美國大兵會台灣受死嗎? 

換句話說就是美國的阿兵哥會為台灣而戰嗎?

當中國以武力攻擊台灣之時,美國會出兵保護台灣為台灣而戰? 美國的阿兵哥願意冒險領取戰爭加級,到台灣與中國解放軍作戰?

無怪乎戰況評估第1天開戰死亡人數高達24萬?

其中包括台灣人美國人及中國人.

傳聞美國太平洋司令部,已經展開新一輪的電腦兵棋推演,因為海峽兩岸情勢急速變化趨向於"熱戰".換句話說就是開戰的準備作業,無論是否爆發海峽兩岸的戰爭台灣的老百姓永遠是受害者,因為開戰之時,美國與中國的轟炸機飛臨台灣上空進行大規模轟炸任務,如果中國解放軍登陸成功,也許美國派遣101空降師進行援兵協助台灣的阿兵哥,進行抵抗中國解放軍,因為當時中國的火箭軍部隊,早已利用東風家族的導向飛彈系列,完全摧毀台灣的陸海空基地,剩下來的就是大規模倆棲登陸戰及空降部隊的第2輪戰鬥任務,美國評估戰況是否增兵協助台灣,要視察台灣阿兵哥的戰鬥能力與毅力,換句話說就是抵抗能力,其實就是測試美國的要求,台灣的阿兵哥必須撐起2週的戰爭熱期,否則一切免談,因為美國大兵不會平白無故的送死,為台灣而戰的理由與原因並不充分,即使那些美軍中的鷹派人士與好戰份子,急於建立軍功為將來的昇遷而替台灣賣命,魂斷他鄉況且戰爭加級並不明確.

.

Calls by U.S. leaders to extend security guarantees to Taiwan against an aggressive China are on the rise. American pundits have likewise been eager and disturbingly casual about offering up U.S. service members to go and die for Taipei.  Before taking another step down this dangerous path, however, these leaders need to consider just how willing Taiwanese are to die for their own country.

Until we have more concrete evidence that the Taiwanese are doing all they can for their own defense, all talk of America risking war with China for their benefit needs to come to a halt. There is no justification for sending American men and women to die on the seas and in the air around Taiwan when the citizens of Taiwan are themselves cool to the idea of dying for their own country.

First is the classic “show me your checkbook and I’ll show you your priorities.” The United States places great value on protecting its citizens and global interests, as evidenced by the fact that we spend more on national defense than any nation on the planet, upwards of 3.5% GDP annually.

As recently as 2016, Taiwan was spending an anemic 1.6% GDP on defense, and next year is expected to be only slightly better, at 2.1%. Evidence suggests that constant boasts by U.S. opinion leaders that the United States should give security guarantees to Taiwan leads the island’s leaders to conclude they don’t have to spend money on their own defense because they believe we will provide it for them.

Second is the extent to which the citizens are willing to serve in the armed forces and risk their lives in defense of their country. In the United States, our all-volunteer force constantly produces sufficient numbers of service personnel to fully man the Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, and Coast Guard. We don’t always meet the recruiting goals but we always have sufficient numbers of personnel.

In Taiwan, by contrast, the armed services are significantly understaffed. So few Taiwanese are willing to sign up for military service, in fact, that earlier this year frontline combat units in the Taiwan military were assessed as being manned at a shockingly low 60%.

The Taipei Times newspaper conducted research a few years ago into the attitudes of the recruitment-age youth in Taiwan, finding that large numbers were “(a)pathetic toward the military and averse to service.”

One former Taiwanese Marine seemed to capture the reason for the apathy well: “I think it’s unlikely that we will go to war. If there’s no real enemy to fight against, I don’t know why military training is necessary.” Reuters reported in 2018 that 1,000 reservists over the previous three years had been charged for “dodging mandatory training.”

It is clear that considerable numbers of Taiwanese people either do not believe the threat from China is real, don’t believe their country could defeat China if it did attack, or just don’t want to “waste time” serving. Such a dynamic harkens back to the recent situation in Afghanistan where large numbers of Afghan troops would rather make deals with their enemy than to fight to the death in a fight they don’t think they could win. It therefore made no difference to the outcome that American troops did fight for them over a 20 year period.

Similarly, when the Russians annexed the Crimea in 2014, they did so without firing a shot because, like the Taliban did earlier this year, the Russians made deals with the defenders of The Crimea and likewise told them it would be pointless and futile to die fighting – when they could instead come to work for the victorious Russians. There is little reason to think some version of the same dynamic would not also exist in Taiwan if the Chinese were to attack.

If the government of Taiwan is not willing to adequately fund its military, if the Taiwanese men and women whose lives would be on the line in a war with China aren’t willing to fight for their country, it would frankly be immoral to force American men and women to die in their place for Taiwan’s defense. It is time U.S. opinion leaders and government officials stopped being so eager to offer up American troops to go into harm’s way for the benefit of another country and start being concerned for the welfare of our troops’ lives.