Talk:First Taiwan Strait Crisis


Khaliwarriors I won't claim to be an expert on this topic, I also understand something such as "who won?" can be a divisive issue when it comes to armed conflicts of ongoing disputes. My understanding however is that while the PRC backed down, they still retained sovereignty over the Yijiangshan and Dachen Islands. If that was the case, then the result of the conflict was at least a nominal PRC victory, though some may argue it was also a ROC/KMT strategic or geo-political victory. Irregardless, "status quo ante bellum", would not be correct as the PRC gained and maintained control over territory it did not hold prior to or "ante-bellum". Once again I won't claim to be an expert on this specific event and apologize if I'm incorrect regarding the course of events. My sources include: http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/feat/archives/2020/01/12/2003729106http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2014/06/16/2003592902OgamD218 (talk) 07:44, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The islands seized by the PRC in 1954-55 were of no strategic value. The remarkable "result" of the crisis was that both sides showed restraint and a major war was avoided. Declaring a "winner" of the conflict detracts from what both sides achieved.Brushkoff (talk) 19:41, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An edit on 05:55, 18 April 2005 deleted significant content and created a new chronology of events. The edit also changed the initial actor from the PRC to the ROC. The cited reason was: "Two different versions of the Strait Crisis existed, PRC version and ROC version." I am unaware of the version of events advanced by that edit, and neither of the article's cited sources contain that chronology. The result of the edit is also counterintuitive, as one sentence states that the ROC moved soldiers to Jinmen, and the next states that they shelled it. Further, the resulting version does not include the original timeline at all. Asymptopia 00:22, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There were no objections, so I removed the sentence that altered the chronology of events from that listed in the sources. Asymptopia 17:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"There are strong indications that Mao used the crisis in order to provoke the United States into making nuclear threats. He used these threats to pressure Stalin into giving PRC the atom bomb technology it needed to become a major world power."

Since Josef Stalin died on the 05.03.1953 whereas the crisis developed in 1954 this kind of motivation seems to be impossible. That's why I delete this passage from the text. --Shao (talk) 13:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]