The bill is logical, it is reasonable, it is prudent and it is in total accord with the Taiwan Relations Act. There is no faulty logic that I can see, internal logic flaw that the gentleman from Indiana says there is. Reading the part of the bill that I think he is talking about, and that is the part of the bill that, following the study, says: "It is the sense of the Congress that the President, if requested by the Government of Taiwan and in accordance with the results of the study conducted under section 3, should transfer to the Government of Taiwan appropriate defense articles under the foreign military sales program under chapter 2 of the Arms Export Control Act for the purpose of establishing and operating a local-area defense ballistic missile defense system to protect Taiwan." That says in accordance with the results of the study. That obviously infers that the study has to be completed. We cannot transfer the articles until we have results, and so I think that is a reasonable, logical sequence that is manifest in the bill and I do not see any problem there.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing a bill related to defense articles for Taiwan during House floor debate.
Share
More from Andrew P. Hunter
My friends, this is the age of missiles. The people that we listen to so carefully in our hearings are the combatant commanders. Those are the guys who are in charge of running military operations in the case of an attack on the United…
I think what today's hearing and what this situation and NATO's eastern flank highlights is the fact that we don't have a tremendous amount of time to wait around for the next great Army to show up in 10 to 15 to 20 years.
Jimmy Saxton is a guy who probably has learned more about our Special Operations Forces and their needs than probably anybody else in Washington, D.C. He is the guy who is the chairman of the first Terrorism Subcommittee, which oversees…





