this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

World News

32301 readers
405 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

China creates conflict with all its neighbours and tries to steal their territorial waters.

China threatens the existence of an independent Taiwan.

China commits literal genocide against Uyghurs

And it’s the US starting shit this time? Give me a fucking break imperialist sympathisers.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So first, the US having military bases surrounding China is tied into why they disagree with their neighbors. They allowed the US on the boarder so it makes sense they aren't stoked about it. The US has at least 750 military bases around the world in 80 countries. The next closest country has 145 bases and thats the UK. If we want to reference imperialism, then starting with the US is the most practical based on this alone.

In addition, only 12 countries consider Taiwan as an independent country. Regardless if this is correct, the actions the US has recently taken with Taiwan is without question increasing tension in an already tense situation.

Furthermore, following the numbers on the Uyghur women being forced to have contraception implants would mean each woman has 8 impants. This makes absolute zero sense. The fact the US media's primary source on the Uyghur situation is an outright lunatic does help make it all add up though.

All in all, it takes two to tango for sure. Yet the US seeing it's global power drastically decline makes their moves less obfuscated and vividly more desperate.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ah, there's the lemmy.ml tankies trying to obfuscate China's human rights abuses.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

If you're concerned about human rights, why gloss over the US being notorious for human rights abuse? They have the largest prison population ever, comprised primarily of minorities who were obscenely experimented on during MK Ultra. Plus the prior and current treatment of Native Americans or the 6,000,000+ innocent citizens killed in the war on terror. The US is no longer even classified as a first world country. But it doesn't matter cause the news said the US is definitely the best choice for the world police.

Are you for bombing Mexico to stop the opioid crisis too? While the idea is gaining traction stateside, it takes minutes to understand of the 14,000+ pounds of fentanyl seized at the Mexican boarder in 2022, over 90% was from US citizens. But logic is totally overrated when it comes to international law I guess.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Clearly everyone should just let China do whatever they want to avoid war, if we appease them by expanding their territorial claims and avoiding conflict then surely everything will be fine. The politics of appeasement has historically been very successful.

Edit: Stop replying please, I don’t want to waste any more time arguing with y’all.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also "appeasement" is a made up post-hoc explanation for the western Allies' actions before WW2, blaming the supposed naivete or lack of spine of the leaders for simply allowing the Nazis to make expansionist moves uncontested, rather than it being an intentional policy to get out of their way and try to direct them eastwards against the Soviet Union.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Absolute banger of a comment

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

These are the territorial claims of the government on Taiwan, from a state the US and much of the Western world support or at least de facto like to defend in Asia. They never made any remarks regarding Taiwan's claims with 18 other countries. If the US supports peace in the Asia Pacific (besides looking at a map and asking why the US has even a say about Asia in the first place), then surely Mainland China must be supported, as by protecting & legitimizing Taiwan's constitution, you're approving this shit in Asia.

But let me guess, neoliberal countries get a pass from the crackerverse?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 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

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

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

Better send weapons to Taiwan!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year 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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 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?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year 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?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year 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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year 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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year 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”.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

It is the USA that has been the target of appeasement. Every expansion, every death squad, every war crime, every black site, every assassination, every war of aggression, every single time the world appeases the USA.

If you think the USA is appeasing China, your head is screwed on backwards. I know it's a common trope for abusers to feel offended and attacked when their victims standup for themselves, and I know you probably stand with the victims and see through the abusers' bullshit. You need to do that with the USA.

Abu Ghraib - appeased.
Nord Stream 2 - appeased.
Solemaini - appeased.
Iraq - appeased.
Iraq 2 - appeased.
Vietnam - appeased.
Laos - appeased.
Cambodia - appeased.
Korea - appeased.
Hiroshima - appeased.
Nagasaki - appeased.
Guantanamo - appeased.
Libya - appeased.
Syria - appeased.
StuxNet - appeased.
Pulling out of nuclear treaties - appeased.
Refusing to be accountable to ICC - appeased.
Refusing to sign landmine treaty - appeased.
Agent Orange - appeased.
Napalm - appeased.
White phosphorus - appeased.
Depleted Uranium - appeased.
Yugoslavia - appeased.
Afghanistan - appeased.
School of the Americas - appeased.
Wiretapping the entire US civilian population - appeased.
Wiretapping every embassy through Siemens supply chain attack - appeased.
NATO expansion - appeased.
Economic shock therapy kills millions - appeased.
Training terrorists - appeased.
Airlifting terrorists into other countries - appeased.
Environmental devastation - appeased.
Sending expired vaccines - appeased.
Refusing to send vaccines - appeased.
Refusing to follow the predefined protocol for sharing vaccine research - appeased.
Iranian regime change - appeased.
Color revolutions - appeased.
Extracting trillions from Africa - appeased.
Child separation - appeased.
Toddlers in solitary confinement - appeased.
Forced hysterectomies - appeased.
Collective punishment of civilians - appeased.
Support for Israeli apartheid - appeased.
Iran-Contra - appeased.
Fast and Furious - appeased.
CIA drug trafficking - appeased.
Haitian assassination - appeased.
Bolivia - appeased.
Nicaragua - appeased.
Pinochet - appeased.

I can keep going if you want.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Whatabout, whatabout, whatabout.

You realize that if country A does something bad, "Country B did something bad too!" is not actually a defense of country A's behaviour? Indeed, it just implies that you agree that that behaviour is bad.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Moron vibes.

China isn't doing something bad. The USA is an aggressor in the region and has been for decades. The USA took over for the French in Vietnam, and that goes back a long time. The USA took over from Japan in Korea, and that goes back awhile too. The USA is the active aggressor here. The idea that China pushing back against USA aggression could ever be considered appeasement is completely illogical.

What China is doing is not capable of being appeased. It would be like saying that if Nazi Germany left Poland alone because Poland was fighting back then Germany would be guilty of appeasing Poland. It's moronic beyond fucking belief.

No. It's not whataboutism, it's evidence that your argument is illogical. The USA cannot possibly appease China because the USA is the one being appeased the world over. The USA is the Fourth Reich. When China opposes it, China is doing its part to create a future where the USA no longer can hurt the supermajority of the world's people.

Fuck your liberal brain rot.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Military exercises on their own territory as recognized by the United Nations and almost every single country on Earth? What is the issue here?

The Taiwan Province is an inalienable part of the People's Republic of China:

And this is recognized by the United Nations ever since 1971 after UNGAR 2758.

Source, page 546: https://web.archive.org/web/20230503050030/https://legal.un.org/unjuridicalyearbook/pdfs/english/volumes/2010.pdf

Video of the votes happening: https://invidious.projectsegfau.lt/watch?v=sfOIEjuXFyU

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If this is bad behavior than what do you call the countless military exercises the US does all over the world as a show of force against other sovereign nations?

The reality is that doing a military exercise in your own backyard is required for national security. Look at a map some day. Tell me what's wrong with China doing exercises off their own coast.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No these were off Taiwan's coast.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Which is a) literally off the coast of China and b) internationally recognized as China's sovereign territory

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

no, it's off the coast of Taiwan, and there is no international consensus on Taiwan. Most countries have distinct foreign relations with Taiwan separate from China.

also, you know, caring what the people of Taiwan want, if that's remotely a possibility for you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are a large number of things that are factually incorrect with your position.

  1. Taiwan is a small island off the coast of China. By virtue of its size, the coastal waters of mainland China contain the island of Taiwan. By virtue of its distance from the mainland, if the island were not present, off the coast of the mainland includes off the coast of Taiwan. The island of Taiwan is about as far from mainland China as Key West is from Florida. Activities off the coast of Key West are considered activities off the coast of Florida and not of some other state.

  2. The nation of China has included the island of Taiwan from centuries. When two different political groups fought a civil war for control over the nation, the losers fled to the island of Taiwan and declared themselves the government of the nation of China in exile. At no point did either group decide that the mainland and the island were part of different nations or nations unto themselves.

  3. The historical reason many nations have distinct relationships with Taiwan is historically relevant here. The reason is because most nations were anti-communist, refused to acknowledge the communist government of China, and still wanted to exploit China. So, they recognized the KMT as the government of China - not of Taiwan but of China, because the nation of China includes Taiwan. The reason they did this is because they had been dominating China for 100 years and believed the KMT would act as their vassals and believed the CPC would not. So, imperialists who were dominating China protected the losers in the civil war. Had they not intervened, the losers would have been captured. UK and USA creates a dependent puppet government while it conducted a mass murder campaign for decades. All the whole, no one said Taiwan was a separate and new country, not even the KMT on the island of Taiwan.

  4. The UN has a seat on the security council for the nation of China. The KMT was the political body occupying that seat on behf of the nation of China. When the CPC won the war and took over the nation of China, the UN continued to assert that the KMT was the rightful government of China, the nation that includes the island of Taiwan. Eventually, no one could sustain the bullshit anymore and the CPC, the political group in charge of the nation of China, took the seat at the UN.

Thus, the world sees Taiwan as a province of the nation of China and the CPC as the political government of the nation of China. The people of Taiwan, that is to say, the survivors of the 40-year reign of terror where it was a crime punishable by death to even talk about the CPC as the government of China, some of these people now wish to figure out a way to secede. Why do they wish to secede? Because the UK and USA have invested decades and trillions and in creating conditions that make this a reasonable position. Like Hong Kong, the West has established significant finance capital and high tech operations that give an elite upper crust a very high quality of life and the middle class a quality of life like a wealthy European nation. In addition, the West has spent 40 years propagandizing and manipulating the people on the island under the banner of protecting the KMT from the evil commies.

So yes. There is a secessionary movement. It is explicitly motivated by desire to be economically dependent on the West. But it is a secessionary movement to become something other than a province of the nation of China, which means it assumes from the get go that Taiwan is not an independent nation.

Your utter lack of historical understanding is appalling, especially in light of your position that military response by the West is justified.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
  1. Taiwan is a sovereign nation with its own coastal waters. Does Singapore not have rights to its coastal waters? Taiwan is about 50 times larger than they are.
  2. Weird how nations becoming independent had a history of not being independent beforehand, this is a non-point at best, pro imperialism at worst.
  3. I dont care how you feel about countries reasons for having foreign relations with Taiwan separate from China
  4. this isnt relevant to Taiwan's sovereignty who gets to have the seat of 'China' at the UN.

I also dont appreciate the notion that the people of Taiwan just have no free will and are all brainwashed. That's a very lazy approach anyone can take against anyone they think has the wrong opinion. You can pull up any material from western sources supporting Taiwan and call it proof of manipulation. And I can point to China posturing its military against Taiwans will outside its waters for daring to have a US official visit them as intimidation to manipulate their opinions. Taiwan has been exposed to both sides, and this is what they want.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
  1. If Taiwan were a sovereign nation, then its coastal waters would be coincidental with China's, so again, your claim is spurious. But as Taiwan is not sovereign, has never claimed sovereignty, and has never been recognized as an independent sovereignty, the point is moot.
  2. Pro-imperialism is supporting the European-imposed order. Taiwan's separation from the mainland was a European intervention - literal imperialism. Ending the separation is, by definition, anti-imperialism. Could Taiwan secede from China eventually? Sure. Not now, though, when secession from China guarantees nuclear encirclement by imperialists.
  3. I don't have feelings about countries' reasons for Taiwan relationships. I am just reporting history. You can make stupid claims about feelings but it doesn't change the fact that your argument has no basis in reality.
  4. The relevancy is to disprove your saying that Taiwan isn't recognized internationally as a part of the nation of China.
[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Fuck the United States. They’re easily the worst, most imperialist nation on the planet. But we’re capable of more nuance than “any country in opposition to the US can do no wrong”

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you not believe in supporting the lesser evil? I thought libs loved that shit.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m not a lib. And no, I don’t believe in supporting the lesser evil. I don’t support any evil.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m not a lib.

Oh sorry, you're an ultra, my mistake.

How is it idealistically opposing everyone everywhere and never accomplishing anything?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why do you try to attack an identity you’re assuming that I hold, rather than addressing my actual arguments? Could it be because you’re incapable of actually successfully arguing against the points I’m making?

And no, I’m not an “ultra”, though it’s quite a vaguely defined term, I’m not opposed to all of the structures that ultra-leftists are traditionally opposed to. Keep guessing, though. You’ll probably get it eventually. The world is a nuanced place and you shouldn’t try to shove everything into a convenient box to make it easier to deal with. That’s lib behaviour. You should know better.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Your argument seems to be that we should oppose all sides equally, regardless of context.

Do you even support anything?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

My argument is that neither side should invade the other and that they should peacefully coexist. I support peace, balanced reconciliation, and the end of capitalism.