|
Fojar38 posted:Ironically, you tend to see "China is a superpower and a really powerful and frightening existential threat" from the crowds that are the most hawkish on China. I think that these crowds are vastly overestimating Chinese power, but that pushback against the PRC from all angles is still warranted because you don't need to be all-powerful to still be able to cause major problems (like, say, global pandemics) In other news, German Empire largest threat to global world order, says British Foreign Secretary from his house in British Bombay.
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 03:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 16:24 |
|
|
Yeaaaaaaah it's a little one sided to be like, "And its good and proper for China to have pushback..." when by any reasonable metric the US has been a far worse threat to international peace with the invasion of Iraq; that's not whataboutism, that's just math; as bad as the pandemic is, its essentially an accident; an act of god because of capitalism; not a bioweapon. While the middle east has had millions of deaths.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 05:56
|
|
|
Purple Prince posted:In other news, German Empire largest threat to global world order, says British Foreign Secretary from his house in British Bombay. I mean, it wasn't the British who started the First World War so this analogy really sucks. Raenir Salazar posted:Yeaaaaaaah it's a little one sided to be like, "And its good and proper for China to have pushback..." when by any reasonable metric the US has been a far worse threat to international peace with the invasion of Iraq; that's not whataboutism, that's just math; as bad as the pandemic is, its essentially an accident; an act of god because of capitalism; not a bioweapon. While the middle east has had millions of deaths. This, just FYI, still a massive logical fallacy even if it's not "classic" whataboutism. The seriousness of the crimes of the United States has no bearing on the seriousness of the crimes of China. Drawing a comparison between the two can only serve to obscure the issue of either states' crimes. Vincent Van Goatse fucked around with this message at 06:19 on May 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:12
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Yeaaaaaaah it's a little one sided to be like, "And its good and proper for China to have pushback..." when by any reasonable metric the US has been a far worse threat to international peace with the invasion of Iraq; that's not whataboutism, that's just math; as bad as the pandemic is, its essentially an accident; an act of god because of capitalism; not a bioweapon. While the middle east has had millions of deaths. This is actually textbook whataboutism. You are attempting to steer the conversation away from Chinese actions and towards American ones in an attempt to mitigate the negative effects of Chinese policy and influence.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:15
|
|
|
And honestly the same is true of bringing up China in a discussion of American human rights abuses or war crimes. They are, outside certain narrow discussions of which the current thread is absolutely not one, completely separate issues.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:18
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:This is actually textbook whataboutism. You are attempting to steer the conversation away from Chinese actions and towards American ones in an attempt to mitigate the negative effects of Chinese policy and influence. You specifically cited a pandemic as a legitimate reason for China to receive pushback. When there's just no validity or comparison. The point is criticizing your own hypocrisy and blind spots as to what you are personally believing as worthy of facing a international response, and its bullshit.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:19
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:You specifically cited a pandemic as a legitimate reason for China to receive pushback. Considering the Chinese government's piss poor initial response enabled it to become a global pandemic in the first place, why the hell isn't it a legitimate reason?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:20
|
|
|
It's almost like as if we have multiple threads for discussing different countries in DnD, so if I wanted to talk poo poo about UK I could probably not use the China thread to start a discussion about how China is bad but the UK is doing far worse than China at some things and not the other thing
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:22
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Considering the Chinese government's piss poor initial response enabled it to become a global pandemic in the first place, why the hell isn't it a legitimate reason? I mean for one thing this simply isn't true. Kill All Cops posted:It's almost like as if we have multiple threads for discussing different countries in DnD, so if I wanted to talk poo poo about UK I could probably not use the China thread to start a discussion about how China is bad but the UK is doing far worse than China at some things and not the other thing A "thread" is not independent of the pre-existing social context which informs people's privilege, motivations, and decision making process when they make value judgements. In this case, I am responding to Fojar's assertion that it's good for China in the context of great power great game geopolitics to face pushback on something that is irrelevant to its actions as a great power, while other nations which have made vastly more destabilizing great power actions Fojar just ignores, is more than a little baffling in its stark xenophobia. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 06:26 on May 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:23
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I mean for one thing this simply isn't true. Ah, the classic DnD effortpost argument that makes me instantly side with you
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:24
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I mean for one thing this simply isn't true. Oh, well, if you say it like that I'm absolutely convinced.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:25
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Oh, well, if you say it like that I'm absolutely convinced. By all appearances China reacted faster and with more decisive measures than most western nations even accounting for the period of time in which the response was mismanaged by local officials, while several western nations to varying degrees have simply flirted with the idea of doing nothing, which risks prolonging the pandemic even longer. By this logic, any nation that mismanages the crisis would be the target of "pushback" and we can see how this very quickly becomes unworkable; so either there is a double standard or it is unworkable.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:30
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:A "thread" is not independent of the pre-existing social context which informs people's privilege, motivations, and decision making process when they make value judgements. In this case, I am responding to Fojar's assertion that it's good for China in the context of great power great game geopolitics to face pushback on something that is irrelevant to its actions as a great power, while other nations which have made vastly more destabilizing great power actions Fojar just ignores, is more than a little baffling in its stark xenophobia. I understand you want to love China to own the US, but those of us who are on the verge of losing access to the free internet when the Firewall curtain closes down on HK don't really think China getting even more power is a Good Thing, especially when they already ignore the calls of Human Rights abuses from global non profits and the various stern messages from EU.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:33
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:By all appearances China reacted faster and with more decisive measures than most western nations even accounting for the period of time in which the response was mismanaged by local officials This is literally the opposite of well-documented reality.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:33
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:This is literally the opposite of well-documented reality. I mean.. they reacted pretty fast and decisive when it came down to silencing that one doctor who put out the warning call for early signs of a pandemic that later died of COVID-19
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:35
|
|
|
Kill All Cops posted:I understand you want to love China to own the US, but those of us who are on the verge of losing access to the free internet when the Firewall curtain closes down on HK don't really think China getting even more power is a Good Thing, especially when they already ignore the calls of Human Rights abuses from global non profits and the various stern messages from EU. You seem to be having a conversation with a completely different person than me, since I didn't claim it was a "good thing" if China gets stronger; nor do I think it's relevant to the discussion about the pandemic to reply with a non-sequitor about the Chinese firewall.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:37
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:I mean, it wasn't the British who started the First World War so this analogy really sucks. Britain and France has a handshake agreement with Belgium and the Dutch, that was fairly old and fairly weak. Britain could have chosen to stay out of the war and it would have devolved into a few month long frontier skirmish and a quick resolution. And be4 someone pops up and goes well the Brits had a BEF the size of 4 German divisions, what Britain allowed was a huge flow of materials and resources combined with French colonies and ditch colonies so the material support was the major decider in how long the conflict could last. And this isn't some Nazi talkpoint about stab in the back etc. The war turned from pitter patter to world ending crisis when more countries entered the fray. Forget about the Nazis in the story and the post war events for a moment. We are looking at the pre 1914 world of diplomacy WAR CRIME GIGOLO fucked around with this message at 06:40 on May 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:38
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:A "thread" is not independent of the pre-existing social context which informs people's privilege, motivations, and decision making process when they make value judgements. In this case, I am responding to Fojar's assertion that it's good for China in the context of great power great game geopolitics to face pushback on something that is irrelevant to its actions as a great power, while other nations which have made vastly more destabilizing great power actions Fojar just ignores, is more than a little baffling in its stark xenophobia. Do you really need a point-by-point list of every destabilizing thing that China has done that has pissed everyone off supplied to you? The pandemic is just one example among dozens, including predatory economic policy, horrible human rights abuses (including the ongoing genocide China is perpetrating), militarization of international waters, constant overt military threats against neighboring independent democracies such as Taiwan, the clampdown on Hong Kong, the support for North Korea, etc. This isn't some theoretical or fanciful notion that I'm putting forward as evidenced by the fact that there is a significant coalition of nations aligning against China consisting of most of the world's democracies. You can hem and haw about how unfair it is for everyone to gang up on plucky little China but that doesn't change the fact that clearly, as evidenced by actions, there is an increasingly perceived need to push back against Chinese influence in the international community. Raenir Salazar posted:You seem to be having a conversation with a completely different person than me, since I didn't claim it was a "good thing" if China gets stronger; nor do I think it's relevant to the discussion about the pandemic to reply with a non-sequitor about the Chinese firewall. Welcome to the China megathread, where talking about the US invasion of Iraq is topical and the Great Firewall is a non-sequiter
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:42
|
|
|
Kill All Cops posted:I mean.. they reacted pretty fast and decisive when it came down to silencing that one doctor who put out the warning call for early signs of a pandemic that later died of COVID-19 Any rational look at the data and timeline of the coronavirus spread shows that it's pretty provably false that china has some unique "Germany started WW1" level of culpability when the time period between when the virus was first discovered and when local governments started implementing a response was less than a month; while various other nations despite full knowledge of the seriousness took vastly longer on the order of several months to respond. Fojar38 posted:Do you really need a point-by-point list of every destabilizing thing that China has done that has pissed everyone off supplied to you? The pandemic is just one example among dozens, including predatory economic policy, horrible human rights abuses (including the ongoing genocide China is perpetrating), militarization of international waters, constant overt military threats against neighboring independent democracies such as Taiwan, the clampdown on Hong Kong, the support for North Korea, etc. This would be changing the goalposts, the pandemic is all things considered, pretty stupid as the thing that gets "pushback"; the other reasons you cite if you want to talk about those instead won't get a challenge from me quote:This isn't some theoretical or fanciful notion that I'm putting forward as evidenced by the fact that there is a significant coalition of nations aligning against China consisting of most of the world's democracies. You can hem and haw about how unfair it is for everyone to gang up on plucky little China but that doesn't change the fact that clearly, as evidenced by actions, there is an increasingly perceived need to push back against Chinese influence in the international community. You are vastly overstating what's happening, which has been repeatedly pointed out to you. quote:Welcome to the China megathread, where talking about the US invasion of Iraq is topical and the Great Firewall is a non-sequiter The Firewall is a non-sequitor yes, in the context to the specific discussion I was having. Randomly demanding which Chinese philosopher is the best (Mo btw) in the middle of that, would be just as much a non-sequitor. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 06:49 on May 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:44
|
|
|
You...know that Chinese infection numbers come from the Chinese government and can't be independently verified right? Your evidence of CCP greatness rests on the assumption that the CCP is open and honest with the data on an extremely politically sensitive topic. This reasoning is circular to say the least. And considering how anomalous Chinese data is and how it doesn't match the trajectory of literally any other country (both ones that responded well and ones that didn't) you'd have to be insanely gullible to believe them. Raenir Salazar posted:You are vastly overstating what's happening, which has been repeatedly pointed out to you. Maybe you should actually supply some counter-evidence, because I've supplied plenty to support my position and so far you've supplied diddly-squat aside from "Hmm, I don't feel it's all that important." Fojar38 fucked around with this message at 06:51 on May 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:48
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:You...know that Chinese infection numbers come from the Chinese government and can't be independently verified right? Your evidence of CCP greatness rests on the assumption that the CCP is open and honest with the data on an extremely politically sensitive topic. This reasoning is circular to say the least. And you'd be tilting at windmills because there's no evidence per your previous posts on the topic suggesting that there were as much as hundreds of thousands to a million unreported deaths is just absurd. While the pandemic response measures have been widely reported on. Additionally and obviously in the context of this discussion which rests on when China decided at varying levels of government to respond appropriately is more important then the actual numbers because that is how you initially framed the discussion, you claimed that China was somehow so uniquely irresponsible, that they are to blame; when this falls apart at even casual scrutiny when the US, UK, Sweden and others decided to deliberately do nothing (and in the case of the US, have also been shown to be lying about the numbers). Fojar38 posted:Maybe you should actually supply some counter-evidence, because I've supplied plenty to support my position and so far you've supplied diddly-squat aside from "Hmm, I don't feel it's all that important." You never responded to those posts, I made them, you can go back and read the unabridged version a page back or so.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 06:56
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:And you'd be tilting at windmills because there's no evidence per your previous posts on the topic suggesting that there were as much as hundreds of thousands to a million unreported deaths is just absurd. While the pandemic response measures have been widely reported on. Additionally and obviously in the context of this discussion which rests on when China decided at varying levels of government to respond appropriately is more important then the actual numbers because that is how you initially framed the discussion, you claimed that China was somehow so uniquely irresponsible, that they are to blame; when this falls apart at even casual scrutiny when the US, UK, Sweden and others decided to deliberately do nothing. "The onus is not on the Chinese government to demonstrate honesty, but on others to prove them wrong." What a joke. No, I can't "prove" that they are lying because that's an impossible standard of proof and you goddamn know it. Most people, upon seeing the extremely implausible Chinese data however, have the common sense to know that they're being pissed on and told it's raining. I really don't know how anyone could convince you of anything if you're going to uncritically take claims from the Chinese government at face value to this extent. Something being "widely reported on" doesn't mean anything in itself if the "something" that is being reported on are unverifiable claims from a totalitarian regime. Why are you even reading this thread when you might as well just read the Global Times? Raenir Salazar posted:You never responded to those posts, I made them, you can go back and read the unabridged version a page back or so. What I was arguing in my post was that the world as a whole is irritated with China and there is pushback because of it. You didn't supply any contrary evidence, and even in areas where you couldn't bring yourself to disagree you still made an effort to minimize Chinese actions wherever possible, or try to deflect onto the US (ie "Huawei is just the new Mitsubishi!" or "Yeah China is loving up Africa but I don't see the USA doing anything?") I even linked you sources, some of which were very elaborate (like the ECFR report) that you clearly didn't even bother to read, because your counterargument consisted of some sort of garbled "Politicians, amirite?" nihilism combined with an assertion that European grievances are somehow being exaggerated or fabricated, ie the literal "fake news" defense. That's why I didn't address it then, and frankly the only reason I'm addressing it now is in order to hammer home why it's so irritating to argue with you when it feels like I'm the only one who has done my homework. I'm going to bed now, consider reading some of the sources I gave.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 07:14
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:"The onus is not on the Chinese government to demonstrate honesty, but on others to prove them wrong." What a joke. No, I can't "prove" that they are lying because that's an impossible standard of proof and you goddamn know it. Most people, upon seeing the extremely implausible Chinese data however, have the common sense to know that they're being pissed on and told it's raining. You're just spreading a conspiracy theory because it's convenient for your narrative, it has nothing to do with reality. Most importantly, it is damaging your ability to accurately perceive and credibly comment on events. It isn't that you can't "prove" it, that's a strawman since I never actually demanded such a standard; the fact is that there lacks even circumstantial evidence to backup the claims you made. quote:I really don't know how anyone could convince you of anything if you're going to uncritically take claims from the Chinese government at face value to this extent. Something being "widely reported on" doesn't mean anything in itself if the "something" that is being reported on are unverifiable claims from a totalitarian regime. Why are you even reading this thread when you might as well just read the Global Times? I specifically cited the fact that the lockdown measures China undertook were widely reported on, and were observable, by outside observers because China isn't a closed society, there's a non-trivial amount of people who travel to and from China, with cellphones, plenty of people even live in China, such as the guy who makes the youtube channel about traditional Chinese cooking; talking about the bush markets and showing what they're like. You're simply not engaging with the conversation that is actually happening, because it means not chasing your particular bugbear. quote:What I was arguing in my post was that the world as a whole is irritated with China and there is pushback because of it. And you said something that was honestly wrong in the midst of it which warranted push back. I am under no obligation to nod along to whatever legitimate points you have in your head, and didn't make in your post. You specifically and only in fact mentioned, the pandemic, you alluded to vaguely to "other things", I cannot respond to things which you do not write. quote:You didn't supply any contrary evidence, and even in areas where you couldn't bring yourself to disagree you still made an effort to minimize Chinese actions wherever possible, or try to deflect onto the US (ie "Huawei is just the new Mitsubishi!" or "Yeah China is loving up Africa but I don't see the USA doing anything?") Are you just, radically choosing to misunderstand the post or do you really just don't understand the point I was making in that post? There was nothing actually "minimizing" Chinese actions or "deflecting". quote:I even linked you sources, some of which were very elaborate (like the ECFR report) that you clearly didn't even bother to read, because your counterargument consisted of some sort of garbled "Politicians, amirite?" nihilism combined with an assertion that European grievances are somehow being exaggerated or fabricated, ie the literal "fake news" defense. There wasn't anything of factual basis to refute, only your assessment of them which repeatedly always zooms along instantly to the interpretation that most reinforces your pre-existing views. Aside from your conspiracy theories about the "real" death toll to covid19, this has never been about disputing facts of China doing X or Y; only your interpretation of international events which you constantly think, this time something of consequence will happen! Because most of the time it doesn't sound like you are remotely qualified to be making the claims you're making. quote:That's why I didn't address it then, and frankly the only reason I'm addressing it now is in order to hammer home why it's so irritating to argue with you when it feels like I'm the only one who has done my homework. I'm going to bed now, consider reading some of the sources I gave. Don't claim I didn't respond to your arguments when you didn't bother to read them, or as it turns out, to understand them on even a basic level. e: Additionally, you portraying it as a matter of "evidence" is a disingenuous bait and switch, when the issue is mainly one of frameworks, and my original posts on the previous page weren't about refuting whether China did X, but more the way you are engaging with them in a way that plays to your confirmation bias, and was more about providing an alternate point of view on those events and how your assessment can be wrong even if there's no dispute on underlying facts. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 07:42 on May 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 07:29
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Any rational look at the data and timeline of the coronavirus spread shows that it's pretty provably false that china has some unique "Germany started WW1" level of culpability when the time period between when the virus was first discovered and when local governments started implementing a response was less than a month; while various other nations despite full knowledge of the seriousness took vastly longer on the order of several months to respond. Hey, it's me, the Official Full Unabridged Coronavirus Timeline that ignores Li Wenliang and his role in forcing China to report to WHO about the pandemic. I guess talking about cover ups is irrelevant to this Coronavirus conversation, like how Chinese officials attempt to cover up the coronavirus origins by blaming the US Army. China is a developing country that has technology for people to report these things on after all, there's no way China could cover something up without the ire of it's populace. Nah, we should Definitely Trust China's Facts and Numbers on this. Anyway, sorry for derailing this thread by talking about China, let's get back to talking about Amerikkka
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 07:44
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:I mean, it wasn't the British who started the First World War so this analogy really sucks. No but British Foreign policy was shaped around winning "the great game" against rising industrial superpowers and maintaining British hegemony, even as that hegemony was starting to be challenged elsewhere. The foreign policy landscape of pre-WW1 Europe was pretty heavily warped by the massive imperial power sitting over the English Channel; read any French novel from the era to see how paranoid this made the other Great Powers. America's position wrt China is pretty much the same as Britain's before WW1, by design. The post-war compact was modelled on the Pax Brittanica, and so it's not really surprising that it's unravelling with similar consequences.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 07:46
|
|
|
Purple Prince posted:No but British Foreign policy was shaped around winning "the great game" against rising industrial superpowers and maintaining British hegemony, even as that hegemony was starting to be challenged elsewhere. The foreign policy landscape of pre-WW1 Europe was pretty heavily warped by the massive imperial power sitting over the English Channel; read any French novel from the era to see how paranoid this made the other Great Powers. In addition to this, this rolls back in with my post(s) on the previous page; where I make a point of observing that in terms of whatever alignment against Chinese geopolitical great power interests that may exist, how exactly do you disentangle it from the usual great power great game, self-serving geopolitical interests?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 07:52
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Randomly demanding which Chinese philosopher is the best (Mo btw) . I'm just scrolling through I got too much poo poo going on right now for an effortpost but, wtf? Not even close guy didn't even fly around on a magic cloud
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 08:37
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:There's also an amount of disillusionment with the West as liberal democracy seems be neither liberal nor a democracy in 2020 and with the collapse of the USSR a hope that China perhaps represents some new novel alternative to the age old question as to what is the best way for humans to govern themselves. How is authoritarian one party rule novel?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 08:37
|
|
|
Spoke Lee posted:How is authoritarian one party rule novel? I am referring to the beliefs of other people in that post, so I'm not sure if I am the correct person to ask; but I think considering that the USSR was also a one party authoritarian state that ended up collapsing, and couldn't possible be an example of "success" in the context of finding some alternative to both the USSR and the West, that would imply that isn't the aspect or attribute in question.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 08:44
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:In addition to this, this rolls back in with my post(s) on the previous page; where I make a point of observing that in terms of whatever alignment against Chinese geopolitical great power interests that may exist, how exactly do you disentangle it from the usual great power great game, self-serving geopolitical interests? I think, for example, Vietnam is not playing a self-serving geopolitical game by seeking closer relations with the United States. They already know what Chinese geopolitical great power interests mean for them and didn't enjoy the learning process.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 09:02
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:I think, for example, Vietnam is not playing a self-serving geopolitical game by seeking closer relations with the United States. They already know what Chinese geopolitical great power interests mean for them and didn't enjoy the learning process. They are definitely pursuing their rational self-interest by playing the geopolitical game though, orienting yourself with a power that will support you against another power is geopolitics 101 for smaller nations caught in the middle between other powers, not just in regards to China but it also has its own competing regional claims that overlap with Taiwan, the Philippines and so on. Notice how South Korea aligns itself with China whenever its convenient to give Japan the bird. Pakistan likewise, aligned itself with China because of its own geopolitical games with India, and so on. Additionally the Sino-Vietnamese played out in the context of the Sino-Soviet split, and largely as a response to Vietnam invading Cambodia, which I'm willing to grant was justified act of self defence against the Khmer Rouge, but they did enter into that geopolitical game. I say self-serving more specifically to the context of populist rhetoric by politicians for whom serves as a convenient scapegoat; which you can read up more of this sort of thing in Sovereignty Games, which talks about the sort of geopolitical laundering of politics for domestic consumption is quite the artform in Europe and beyond.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 09:25
|
|
|
I don't know how you can call the Chinese invasion of Vietnam no big deal when you were rightly castigating the US for invading Iraq earlier this very page. Then again, tapdancing around things was never my strong suit.
Vincent Van Goatse fucked around with this message at 09:38 on May 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 09:35
|
|
|
not many people know this, but america also invaded vietnam
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 09:38
|
|
|
fart simpson posted:not many people know this, but america also invaded vietnam And yet they're willing to work with America because they view China as a threat.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 09:39
|
|
|
South Korea aligning itself with China to give Japan the bird is pure political games, folks. Nothing to do with Japan killing and raping half the continent a little under a century ago. Anyway please listen to me drone on an on about this pointless bullshit and ignore everything bad about China, China only has 5000 years of doing Good Things oh forgot about this gem: Raenir Salazar posted:They are definitely pursuing their rational self-interest by playing the geopolitical game though, orienting yourself with a power that will support you against another power is geopolitics 101 for smaller nations caught in the middle between other powers, not just in regards to China but it also has its own competing regional claims that overlap with Taiwan, the Philippines and so on just casually accepting the nine dash line as a justified territorial claim 
Kill All Cops fucked around with this message at 09:42 on May 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 09:39
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:I don't know how you can call the Chinese invasion of Vietnam no big deal when you were rightly castigating the US for invading Iraq earlier this very page. Then again, tapdancing around things was never my strong suit. I never said it was no big deal, I was only providing additional context to make it clear that all nation-states (i.e Vietnam) act like nation-states, and do things that are in their interests, in relation and in proportion to their perceived geopolitical position and role. When you suggest that Vietnam, doesn't act in its own self-interest, with the implication that amoral power politics is only the realm of great powers, this is trivially not true. Vietnam had Laos and Cambodia as essentially puppet states for at least a decade and Laos is still under the political control of Vietnam.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 09:58
|
|
|
WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:Britain and France has a handshake agreement with Belgium and the Dutch, that was fairly old and fairly weak. Britain could have chosen to stay out of the war and it would have devolved into a few month long frontier skirmish and a quick resolution. And be4 someone pops up and goes well the Brits had a BEF the size of 4 German divisions, what Britain allowed was a huge flow of materials and resources combined with French colonies and ditch colonies so the material support was the major decider in how long the conflict could last. Are you Niall Ferguson?
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 10:01
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:Are you Niall Ferguson? I mean he didn't continue by loudly asserting "And thus Britain would maintain their empire in perpetuity, which is the only thing that matters", so probably not. But happy belated 164th birthday Chancellor von Bethmann-Hollweg. But I mean lol at the Treaty of London just being an "informal handshake" or a massive war between Germany and France/Russia being a "minor border skirmish". Like that would have happened whether the UK was involved or not. Mr Luxury Yacht fucked around with this message at 18:15 on May 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 16:15
|
|
|
So, apparently a few days ago the PLA decided to cross the Indian border and occupy an Indian army base. https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...89.cms?from=mdr
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 16:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 16:24 |
|
|
Xi's gonna reunite the empire, boys, and no one can stop him.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2020 17:15
|
|
