What the fuck :yea:

  • newmou [he/him]
    ·
    3 years ago

    What even is their consent manufacturing line on “combating China”? Sure media say authoritarian China bad but it doesn’t seem like the State department/Pentagon/Biden are saying China needs to be fought because of some bogus humanitarian grounds. Are they saying China is what, like, strutting in international waters? Like if a reporter asked Jen Psaki or whatever “Why are we building international military consensus on ‘combating’ China?” what would she say? Straight up Cold War style “containing communism”? I feel like that doesn’t even make sense for them to say in this current political reality

    • mazdak
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      deleted by creator

    • snott_morrison [comrade/them]
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      I'm genuinely trending towards it being just a massive grift for military contractors. There's literally no good reason for the US to go to war with China, but the ever creeping "threat" of war justifies a never ending bonanza of public spending on weapons. Australia might be stupid enough to go along with war because we're such racist jigonistic shitbags, although there's plenty of military grifting happening there as well.

    • Awoo [she/her]
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      The propaganda I see them putting out consistently that China is engaging in an international scheme to takeover global governments via their "united front" work. The BBC recently put out a horrificly dangerous sinophobic documentary called " China's magic weapon " that basically claimed all Chinese people abroad are in on it. Students too.

      It is horrific. Serious warning. It will make you really really fucking angry if you watch it.

    • naom3 [she/her]
      ·
      3 years ago

      I think it might not be any different from their actual reason: a rising china represents a threat to us hegemony and dominance. Remember it’s basically unquestioned amongst a lot of americans that the us is a force for good and that, although the execution or efficacy of us interventions may be called into question, never the righteousness of the us’ dominant position. If china threatens that then there may be debate about the appropriate response, but not about weather they need to be stopped.