@Blackshoe I would suggest that Taiwan and the PRC are singing off the same song sheet with regard to the SCS claims, because the nine dash line is a 1947 Kuomintang invention
What’s China’s ‘nine-dash line’ and why has it created so much tension in the South China Sea? that the PRC carried on with.
They can sing the same song, but Taiwan doesn't have the vocal range to do the tune justice.
Or, to state the analogy in plain language, Taiwan may say the same things but (barring total collapse of the PRC, which I simply can't come up with as a possibility), their ability to actually dominate their neighbors is much more limited. IMHO, Taiwan could never get powerful enough to dominate, say, Vietnam in the SCS (the PI is another matter). They have to deal with the much more existential threat They could certainly threaten them, of course, but it would be on a much more peer-peer level.
Additionally, in the theoretical world where Taiwan is even as much of of a concern than the PRC when it comes to SCS disputes, I suspect that is a world where Taiwan has declared independence, ergo one where the ROC's political legitimacy is judged by different standards than merely "able to assert control over all the things that historically have been China's, or perceived as inherently 'China' ". I think they'll have to start thinking of themselves as something different than just "China". Admittedly, that's a lot of hypotheticals.
I would suggest that the reason that the US hasn't won any wars of late is because of politicians believing that they are generals, generals acting like politicians, and the political elite not bothering to think about what happens after the shooting stops. I would suggest arrogance on the part of the political elite, who started them, sent service people to bleed and die in them, and after the veterans came home and demoralised, didn't want to know them except at election time.
Hot Take: "The politicians and generals (but I repeat myself) let us down" is a really comforting thing for us in the defen(s/c)e field to say, but it also does not help us win wars, and frankly, allows us off the hook way too much. Our Flag/General Officers don't just become politicians in a vacuum; we are bureaucracies that end up prioritizing exactly the kind of people who are prone/liable to becoming politicians to advance in our bureaucracies, so we shouldn't be surprised when our leadership ends up being politicians. Also, I'm not sure the arrogance of the political elite is significantly different than that of the common people.
No matter what, though, it remains that in the US (and I can only speak to that country; you Commonwealthers may be different, though I suspect probably not significantly), we struggle as both a nation and a defense establishment and understanding that war can be both limited and unlimited (eg "Not every war is going to be WW2 again, and in fact, WW2 is profoundly unique in terms of US war experience and will never be repeated again), and given that, how should we orient ourselves towards fighting a limited war (and to what end) with China? Because frankly, I don't see a way to defeat* China in a limited war. I do see a way to defeat them in an unlimited war, but I don't think anyone wants to think too hard about that.
Caveat, as always, that I suspect I am more cynical and bitter than I should be.
ETA: and while I will probably talk more about this in the China Geo thread, I will note that some COVID-related developments have made me change some of my assumptions about PRC-US relations and tensions, so there's that.
*Defeat=achieving our national objectives-what are those, by the way?-while not taking unacceptable losses
