this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
2 points (75.0% liked)

World News

37438 readers
482 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Blake@feddit.uk 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Holy shit, you’re telling me that both sides in a civil war think they should have full control of the country they’re in a civil war over? Hang on I need to sit fucking down my head is spinning

[–] TomHardy@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No, I think you need to read my comment and your's again. You say appeasement politics will lead to no good, so... you protect the ROC's claims instead, which is even appeasing more that just leaving China. I caught your illogical argument, and distilled it to the meaningless content that it was. Now you pretend stupid to run away from that illogical claim. But you can't win against me, who studied at Oxford, Nato boy

[–] Blake@feddit.uk 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

you can’t win against me, who studied at Oxford, Nato boy

This is the most unbelievably embarrassing thing I have ever read on Lemmy. Honestly, if you regret writing this, please let me know. I will amend my comment to erase the fact you ever wrote it.

you protect the ROC’s claims

Please cite evidence of my support of Taiwan’s territorial claims. If you believe that opposing CCP imperialism means that one must also support Taiwanese territorial claims then you have made an incorrect assumption - and a converse error on your part does not constitute a failure on mine.

I’m very sorry that I refuse to defend the strawman you so thoughtfully prepared for me. By all means, whack away at him. I would suggest that you take your own advice, by the way, and read my actual comment and respond to the text of what I wrote, not some imagined subtext your Oxford-educated brain conjured to allay your cognitive dissonance. Oh, and one last thing - whatever your parents paid for that education, unfortunately it would appear to have turned out a poor investment.

[–] TomHardy@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Then get prepped, cause I did my postgraduate at MIT as well. There are no smarter guys than those graduating there. I knew you would now claim "where did I said we need support Taiwanese territorial claims mimimi". Did you read the article and what it is about? What is the US and what is China's point of conflict? Tell me, how can you say "we can't appease China blabla..." to do what? Taiwan is the exact part of their sovereign terrorial claims. Opposing them on the fact that Taiwan becomes/remains independant is exactly enabling the territorial claims of the state on that island, ROC.

And now you backpedal, "I'm commenting on the article but in fact I do not support US point of view and argue without the context of any article we comment on!!!1! Its my isolated opinion from those events and blabla" or "Actually I meant we should oppose China but also make demands on Taiwan's contitution and put conditions on their clams blabla...". I know that if you would understand any of this conflict or history you wouldn't actually call under the article of US warmongering, encirclement and violation of the One-China policy regarding China's claim of Taiwan, an act of "CCP imperialism". But know you backtrack and try to slip away like a oily snake. There is no escape from my superior arguing skills, and you're critic of appeasing hypocritical is false even on the level of formal logics.

whatever your parents paid for that education, unfortunately it would appear to have turned out a poor investment.

This is the real strawman in this thread.

[–] blazera@kbin.social -1 points 2 years ago

oh my god he's got the 1's mixed in with exclamation marks, god thats old school childish

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Civil war is when two sides of a nonviolent conflict peacefully negotiate reintegration.

Better send weapons to Taiwan!

[–] Blake@feddit.uk 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Here’s a question for you: would you support a Chinese military invasion of Taiwan?

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No, but if it weren't for Western provocations that would never have been on the table. What do you think giving weapons to Taiwan does? China will not tolerate an arms buildup in Taiwain, it will attack as a result. That's not good and I don't support it, but that's the material reality that you refuse to accept.

[–] Blake@feddit.uk 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

If the Taiwanese state would never capitulate and reintegrate peacefully with the CCP state, which is their claim, then wouldn’t that make an invasion of Taiwan inevitable, regardless of weapons?

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Never is a long time and, with the right incentives, that stance can be changed peacefully.

[–] Blake@feddit.uk 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Assume that it wouldn’t, though - I could just as easily say “with the right incentives, the United States could elect a communist president and transition to a people’s republic”, so let’s take them at their word that never means never and go from there, shall we?

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Okay, then China could peacefully try and fail for a million billion years. That still doesn't actually necessitate invasion.

But also that assumption is kinda nonsense so I think it can be safely discarded. Forever is a long time.

[–] Blake@feddit.uk 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You’re not engaging with my argument because you know fine well what the outcome would be. I think we’re done here.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I definitely answered your hypothetical? If the Taiwanese state would never capitulate and reintegrate peacefully with the rest of China, then China could peacefully try and fail to reintegrate for a million billion years. That's it. Nothing else has to happen.

I think your argument is dumb, but that definitely addresses it.

[–] Blake@feddit.uk 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Oh, my apologies, you’re quite right, I initially misread your message, sorry about that - thank you for your answer and I appreciate your consistency. I appreciate you arguing in good faith and I understand your position.

I disagree with you, I think you have an altogether a bit too optimistic perspective of the CCP, but I understand why you would be inclined to feel that way.

My point is, I think it’s pretty clear that Taiwan stands no chance whatsoever in a hot conflict with the Red Army - I hope that’s something that we agree on. I am sure that Taiwan is also very aware of that fact.

So what threat is posed by providing conventional munitions to Taiwan? If they were used in aggression, they would guarantee their own demise. Do you really think that they would be so desperate to strike a meaningless blow against the CCP that they would trade everything to accomplish that?

If so, why would these weapons change anything? They could have sacrificed everything for a single meaningless act of violence long before now. It’s not like Taiwan is being supplied with nuclear weapons, is it?

Providing Taiwan with conventional weaponry only accomplishes one thing: making an invasion of Taiwan less compelling.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Taiwan stands no chance right now, but how many billions of dollars in weapons would it take to change that calculus? Ukraine is fighting off Russia despite being in a much worse position because of the endless funnel of weaponry from the West, so it seems that if Taiwan can dig itself in and arm itself to the teeth it can become a legitimate threat. China will be forced to deal with having a hostile enemy as a neighbor, and even if Taiwan didn't openly invade they could still become a serious regional threat to China and Chinese interests.

Think about the Korean peninsula for what the future might hold.

[–] Blake@feddit.uk -1 points 2 years ago

A threat to CCP interests it may be, but that wouldn’t justify a military invasion that would kill a shitload of people, would it? It would have to be sinking food or medicine shipments with coastal guns or something equally abhorrent to justify such an act. And again, that would absolutely be valid justification for an invasion, so they wouldn’t do it. How can you claim to be one of the good guys when you justify a military invasion and the deaths of thousands of innocents as “just a fact of how things will turn out”.

[–] RuthlessCriticism@hexbear.net -2 points 2 years ago

There can be a revolution in Taiwan.