I don’t want to go to war with any country. I am also willing to refute misinformation about any country. Those two things constitute 99% of what “defending” means in this context.
Why limit yourself to China? Just say, “In North Korea the government forces everyone to eat each other’s brains and we need to invade to get them to stop,” I’ll say that’s not true and we shouldn’t, and now you can attack me for “defending North Korea.” Surely there’s worse countries than China out there for you to pick from.
I picked China from skimming your comment history. Have you defended North Korea? jfc
Discredit the truth by burying it in lies. China did take Hong Kong and suppress protesters against their will. Same with Tibet. They want Taiwan but going after that right now could give Trump a just war and they’d rather see the US shoot itself in the foot in the international space. The more extreme stuff against China may just be propaganda that China itself created to discredit the more reasonable claims. The same way that the US government spread rumors about aliens at Area 51 to discredit the sighting of spyplane testing.
I picked China from skimming your comment history. Have you defended North Korea? jfc
Like I said, I’ll “defend” literally any country on earth. You have 195 to choose from! If I haven’t “defended” them yet, just spread misinformation and say we should start a war, and I will. I care about the truth, not some liberal purity test.
China did take Hong Kong
More like the UK returned Hong Kong to China after the lease agreement they had forced upon it through colonialism expired.
Same with Tibet.
You mean the slave-owning theocracy that was historically part of China, was never internationally recognized, which is also claimed by Taiwan?
Incredible that you have to go back 70 years and that’s the worst you can come up with.
They want Taiwan
What you personally speculate might happen in the future is not a mark against China.
They’ve “wanted Taiwan” for decades, just as Taiwan “wants” the mainland. And for decades, peace was maintained through the doctrine of strategic ambiguity, whereby Taiwan was not formally recognized as independent but was allowed to operate as such. US politicians, rather than maintain that peaceful compromise, have recklessly decided to start deviating from that status quo (because they’re psychotic warmongerers looking to manufacture threats).
If you actually care about Taiwanese independence, then what exactly is wrong with the status quo of de facto independence? Why are our politicians choosing to rock the boat?
But I highly doubt you even knew what strategic ambiguity was, much less that our politicians deviated from it. Because the media rarely really reports on that part or frames it as an escalation. They only report on China’s response to it. And that response is then used to frame China as being aggressive out of nowhere. They do the same thing with any country they don’t like. It’s kind of like how European countries will condemn Iran for retaliating but won’t condemn the US for starting the war.
The more extreme stuff against China may just be propaganda that China itself created to discredit the more reasonable claims
In that case, stop spreading Chinese propaganda, you tankie 😉
The truth is, China does pose a threat to the US. But that threat is economic and diplomatic. China has emerged as a reliable trading partner that stays out of conflicts, while the US burns itself out fighting in every corner of the world. Every year, neutral countries are becoming more aligned with China and formerly US-aligned countries become more neutral, and this trend did not start with Trump.
You want to counter China, you have to start playing the diplomatic game more seriously and stop trying to solve every problem through force. Whenever the US does something like attacking Iran, or invading Afghanistan, or even seizing Venezuela’s foreign reserves, there are countless little countries that see it happening and wonder if they’ll be next.
Trying to resolve the rivalry with China through military force would be absolutely insane. And yet, that seems to be the course of action our rulers are committed to. It’s terrifying to think that anyone would consider WWIII and nuclear armegeddon a viable solution.
I don’t want to go to war with any country. I am also willing to refute misinformation about any country. Those two things constitute 99% of what “defending” means in this context.
Why limit yourself to China? Just say, “In North Korea the government forces everyone to eat each other’s brains and we need to invade to get them to stop,” I’ll say that’s not true and we shouldn’t, and now you can attack me for “defending North Korea.” Surely there’s worse countries than China out there for you to pick from.
I picked China from skimming your comment history. Have you defended North Korea? jfc
Discredit the truth by burying it in lies. China did take Hong Kong and suppress protesters against their will. Same with Tibet. They want Taiwan but going after that right now could give Trump a just war and they’d rather see the US shoot itself in the foot in the international space. The more extreme stuff against China may just be propaganda that China itself created to discredit the more reasonable claims. The same way that the US government spread rumors about aliens at Area 51 to discredit the sighting of spyplane testing.
Like I said, I’ll “defend” literally any country on earth. You have 195 to choose from! If I haven’t “defended” them yet, just spread misinformation and say we should start a war, and I will. I care about the truth, not some liberal purity test.
More like the UK returned Hong Kong to China after the lease agreement they had forced upon it through colonialism expired.
You mean the slave-owning theocracy that was historically part of China, was never internationally recognized, which is also claimed by Taiwan?
Incredible that you have to go back 70 years and that’s the worst you can come up with.
What you personally speculate might happen in the future is not a mark against China.
They’ve “wanted Taiwan” for decades, just as Taiwan “wants” the mainland. And for decades, peace was maintained through the doctrine of strategic ambiguity, whereby Taiwan was not formally recognized as independent but was allowed to operate as such. US politicians, rather than maintain that peaceful compromise, have recklessly decided to start deviating from that status quo (because they’re psychotic warmongerers looking to manufacture threats).
If you actually care about Taiwanese independence, then what exactly is wrong with the status quo of de facto independence? Why are our politicians choosing to rock the boat?
But I highly doubt you even knew what strategic ambiguity was, much less that our politicians deviated from it. Because the media rarely really reports on that part or frames it as an escalation. They only report on China’s response to it. And that response is then used to frame China as being aggressive out of nowhere. They do the same thing with any country they don’t like. It’s kind of like how European countries will condemn Iran for retaliating but won’t condemn the US for starting the war.
In that case, stop spreading Chinese propaganda, you tankie 😉
The truth is, China does pose a threat to the US. But that threat is economic and diplomatic. China has emerged as a reliable trading partner that stays out of conflicts, while the US burns itself out fighting in every corner of the world. Every year, neutral countries are becoming more aligned with China and formerly US-aligned countries become more neutral, and this trend did not start with Trump.
You want to counter China, you have to start playing the diplomatic game more seriously and stop trying to solve every problem through force. Whenever the US does something like attacking Iran, or invading Afghanistan, or even seizing Venezuela’s foreign reserves, there are countless little countries that see it happening and wonder if they’ll be next.
Trying to resolve the rivalry with China through military force would be absolutely insane. And yet, that seems to be the course of action our rulers are committed to. It’s terrifying to think that anyone would consider WWIII and nuclear armegeddon a viable solution.