Pearl Harbor 2.0: China-Taiwan War

[Kokavkrystallos]

Pearl Harbor 2.0: China-Taiwan War To Drag NATO In Conflict; Fully Armed US Cannot Thwart Attack On Hawaii?​

As concerns over a Chinese invasion of Taiwan intensify, a paper released on April 15 by the NATO Defense College has warned NATO could become involved in a potential conflict involving Taiwan if fighting extends to US territory in the Pacific.

The report, “NATO and a Taiwan contingency,” from the research and education center located in Rome, is academic research and not an official stand of the European security bloc. However, analysts believe that since there isn’t much research about Taiwan’s position vis-a-vis NATO, it could be useful for strategic planning within the alliance.

James Lee, an assistant research fellow at Taiwan’s Academia Sinica’s Institute of European and American Studies, authored the report. It comes at a time when China has become more confrontational in its rhetoric against American military assurances to Taiwan.

Adm. John C. Aquilino, the outgoing head of INDOPACOM (the United States Indo-Pacific Command is the unified combatant command of the United States Armed Forces responsible for the Indo-Pacific region), recently warned: “All indications point to the (Chinese) PLA (People’s Liberation Army) meeting President Xi Jinping’s directive to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027,” Aquilino said. “The PLA’s actions indicate their ability to meet Xi’s preferred timeline to unify Taiwan with mainland China by force if directed.”

Hawaii Will Not Receive NATO’s Backing​

Hawaii is a US territory in the Pacific that houses some major military outposts in the region, including the Pearl Harbor naval base and the headquarters of the US Indo-Pacific Command, which overlooks adversaries like China and North Korea. It is, however, unprotected – unlike the other 49 states that make up the United States of America.

If an attack were launched on this strategic US territory, the members of the US-led NATO would not be legally obligated to defend Hawaii.

The United States, for example, would be required to defend Sweden – which recently joined the alliance — if Russia bombed the state. However, Sweden and 30 other NATO partners would not be legally required to protect Hawaii if an enemy such as China or Russia struck Pearl Harbor.

Hawaii residents are unaware that they are not protected by the collective defense clause enjoyed by NATO partners, according to David Santoro, president of the Pacific Forum, the group in Honolulu. CNN recently quoted Santoro as saying, “It’s the weirdest thing.”

Pearl Harbor 2.0: China-Taiwan War To Drag NATO In Conflict; Fully Armed US Cannot Thwart Attack On Hawaii?

As concerns over a Chinese invasion of Taiwan intensify, a paper released on April 15 by the NATO Defense College has warned NATO could become involved in a potential conflict involving Taiwan if fighting extends to US territory in the Pacific. Banned Under US-Russia INF Treaty, US Army Deploys...

www.eurasiantimes.com

(Well, now they know if they get on the internet! )

And imbedded in all this news is this - the exact reason why enemy nations view America as the aggressor.
Banned Under US-Russia INF Treaty, US Army Deploys ‘Most Formidable’ Missile System In China’s Front Yard

The United States Army sent its ground-based missile system ‘Typhon’ to participate in the military drills in the Philippines.

 

[Pommer]

Pearl Harbor 2.0: China-Taiwan War To Drag NATO In Conflict; Fully Armed US Cannot Thwart Attack On Hawaii?​

As concerns over a Chinese invasion of Taiwan intensify, a paper released on April 15 by the NATO Defense College has warned NATO could become involved in a potential conflict involving Taiwan if fighting extends to US territory in the Pacific.

The report, “NATO and a Taiwan contingency,” from the research and education center located in Rome, is academic research and not an official stand of the European security bloc. However, analysts believe that since there isn’t much research about Taiwan’s position vis-a-vis NATO, it could be useful for strategic planning within the alliance.

James Lee, an assistant research fellow at Taiwan’s Academia Sinica’s Institute of European and American Studies, authored the report. It comes at a time when China has become more confrontational in its rhetoric against American military assurances to Taiwan.

Adm. John C. Aquilino, the outgoing head of INDOPACOM (the United States Indo-Pacific Command is the unified combatant command of the United States Armed Forces responsible for the Indo-Pacific region), recently warned: “All indications point to the (Chinese) PLA (People’s Liberation Army) meeting President Xi Jinping’s directive to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027,” Aquilino said. “The PLA’s actions indicate their ability to meet Xi’s preferred timeline to unify Taiwan with mainland China by force if directed.”

Hawaii Will Not Receive NATO’s Backing​

Hawaii is a US territory in the Pacific that houses some major military outposts in the region, including the Pearl Harbor naval base and the headquarters of the US Indo-Pacific Command, which overlooks adversaries like China and North Korea. It is, however, unprotected – unlike the other 49 states that make up the United States of America.

If an attack were launched on this strategic US territory, the members of the US-led NATO would not be legally obligated to defend Hawaii.

The United States, for example, would be required to defend Sweden – which recently joined the alliance — if Russia bombed the state. However, Sweden and 30 other NATO partners would not be legally required to protect Hawaii if an enemy such as China or Russia struck Pearl Harbor.

Hawaii residents are unaware that they are not protected by the collective defense clause enjoyed by NATO partners, according to David Santoro, president of the Pacific Forum, the group in Honolulu. CNN recently quoted Santoro as saying, “It’s the weirdest thing.”

Pearl Harbor 2.0: China-Taiwan War To Drag NATO In Conflict; Fully Armed US Cannot Thwart Attack On Hawaii?

As concerns over a Chinese invasion of Taiwan intensify, a paper released on April 15 by the NATO Defense College has warned NATO could become involved in a potential conflict involving Taiwan if fighting extends to US territory in the Pacific. Banned Under US-Russia INF Treaty, US Army Deploys...

www.eurasiantimes.com

(Well, now they know if they get on the internet! )

And imbedded in all this news is this - the exact reason why enemy nations view America as the aggressor.
Banned Under US-Russia INF Treaty, US Army Deploys ‘Most Formidable’ Missile System In China’s Front Yard

The United States Army sent its ground-based missile system ‘Typhon’ to participate in the military drills in the Philippines.

Wow, the sky has been falling a lot lately.

 

[IceJad]

And imbedded in all this news is this - the exact reason why enemy nations view America as the aggressor.
Banned Under US-Russia INF Treaty, US Army Deploys ‘Most Formidable’ Missile System In China’s Front Yard

The United States Army sent its ground-based missile system ‘Typhon’ to participate in the military drills in the Philippines.

West Taiwan sure deploys lots of little pinks nowadays. BTW the Philippines is not China's front yard it's the Philippines period. They lost in the international courts mind you. So tell them to not be such sore loser and bugger off the Philippines' waters. At the same time do tell them to bugger off my country's waters as well.

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN24F1D8/#:~:text=KUALA%20LUMPUR%20(Reuters)%20%2D%20Chinese,in%20a%20report%20on%20Tuesday.

Also tell them to learn to draw properly. Their maps are atrocious.

Malaysia rejects new China map claiming entire South China Sea

Government says ‘complex’ dispute needs to be resolved through dialogue and urges swift agreement on code of conduct.

www.aljazeera.com

Also also tell them 50 cents is too little for propaganda.

 

[FireDragon76]

Hawaii isn't merely a territory, it is a state that has full representation in our government, and is therefore properly part of the United States.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Hawaii Will Not Receive NATO’s Backing​

Let's suppose this is true (I don't feel like looking it up) and see if it makes sense.

Hawaii is a US territory in the Pacific that houses some major military outposts in the region, including the Pearl Harbor naval base and the headquarters of the US Indo-Pacific Command, which overlooks adversaries like China and North Korea. It is, however, unprotected – unlike the other 49 states that make up the United States of America.

As noted below, Hawai'i is a state, not just some territory (the article seems to know that with it's "other 49 states" phrase).

If an attack were launched on this strategic US territory, the members of the US-led NATO would not be legally obligated to defend Hawaii.

The United States, for example, would be required to defend Sweden – which recently joined the alliance — if Russia bombed the state. However, Sweden and 30 other NATO partners would not be legally required to protect Hawaii if an enemy such as China or Russia struck Pearl Harbor.

Hawaii residents are unaware that they are not protected by the collective defense clause enjoyed by NATO partners, according to David Santoro, president of the Pacific Forum, the group in Honolulu. CNN recently quoted Santoro as saying, “It’s the weirdest thing.”

Does this make sense? First ask your who the other NATO nations are? Only Canada is even on the same ocean and it is very far away. Of the nations that are on the Pacific Ocean and could attack Hawai'i, only Russia touches any European NATO nation that could strike back. What could the do to most of the rest?

The US has other military alliances in the Pacific region. NATO is not needed there.

 

[Richard T]

Hawaii isn't merely a territory, it is a state that has full representation in our government, and is therefore properly part of the United States.

Yes, the article gets that wrong about hawaii as a territory. However, the reason NATO does not have to back up the USA on Hawaii the state, is because NATO was formed 10 years before Hawaii and even though Hawaii is a state, it is out of the geographical region that NATO covers. The same can be said of Taiwan or the any Asian conflict. of course NATO has discretion in this and some do think they would respond.

There are some true U.S. territories like Guam that serve as naval and defense hubs. So it is a bigger problem then just Hawaii.