Originally Posted by
Dayuhan
The mutual defense assistance agreement would be relevant if either party was under attack or otherwise required defense. No attack, no need for defense, no relevance to the treaty.
The blog post you cited used the word "strife".
US commitments and interests were neither challenged nor compromised. The US, as I said above, would not get involved in a Japan/China issue without a Japanese request, which did not happen. You're making Himalayas of molehills; nothing of any lasting (or even transient) significance happened and there's nothing to get all puffed up and blustery about, unless of course puffed up bluster is your preferred state.
Fantasy, but if fear is your default state and you really need someone to be afraid of, I suppose China fills the need as well as anyone. The US really has no need indulge in chest-puffing confrontations over nothing; we know (and the Chinese know) exactly how vulnerable China is and what we could do in a real confrontation and there's no need whatsoever to play games over the meaningless. Posturing is for children.
Bookmarks