Boom now that's how you lathe
still hilarious that this is all over :good-morning: nancy
like ive never seen a single clip of her putting together a cohesive sentence lmfao
She is still embarrassed from fucking up her Taiwan overtures in the 2000's that went nowhere.
This is all to save her imagined place in the history of defending democracy or some shit, there is no strategy here.
I honestly can't imagine her being self aware enough to feel embarassed or she would have retired a long long time ago
like the entirety of nancy pelosi's parts of this video play in my head every single time she is mentioned and it's hard for me to imagine she isn't just constantly embarassing herself every second of every day https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0DE1M5wpgY
I guess we'll all get to meet each other in prison when they come to get us in the draft
Whoever fragged the highest ranking US officer gets bragging rights in that situation.
bloomberg saying taiwan is no longer on the itnerary... not sure if that means she's skipping it or if they think that not putting it on the itinerary will fool China https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-31/pelosi-s-asia-itinerary-skips-mention-of-taiwan-stopover
Honestly I think the USA blinked when the military advised Biden that they can't guarantee her safety and he talked about it publicly.
Let’s rehearse: how would her majesty’s supporters spin this as an absolute win should she actually chicken out
we all get to live and breathe another day without nuclear war, pretty sick
yeah but why on earth did she bother with this bullshit in the first place?
No idea what she's doing there or who she's meeting. But in a spin message to supporters they would act like it was essential or something
So her pr will have to find a sweet spot where the stunt is essential but not essential enough to actually do, all the while without making it sound as though the US may waver on its “promises” to the Taiwan
She called China's bluff and made them blink, thereby invalidating the need to actually go.
I think Biden's too senile to paint portraits of the soldiers he's killed like Bush has.
He should be good as long as none of the soldiers look like a clock.
Here we are, huffing pure ideology, baby brained as fuck, believing that if China murders a civilian aircraft full of a diplomatic attache, the people who were killed by the first shot will be the ones who started the war.
Well the good news is that China ain't doing shit. They don't hold Taiwan and they know it. They won't survive a nuclear exchange with the US and they know it. I can't wait for tomorrow to come and go so I can try to forget the dumbest this website has ever been on a topic.
:downbear:
Haven’t commented on this site in well over a year but had to make a new account just to acknowledge how bad this take is
Maybe if you hadn't left you would have shaken loose all this reddit like behavior by now.
Ain’t no way ur talkin about reddit behavior after saying cope and seethe
"seethe and cope" is straight up 4chan bullshit. You'd think the wreckers would learn to be more subtle by now.
I've seen it used on this site before , not super often though
Engages in toxic debate nerd bullshit then whines about "reddit like behavior"
Too obvious
"I'm right because I made the most aloof sounding insult at you" is the core of the reddit debate bro personality and is 100% of what you've been sending my inbox buddy
Says the dork who took a bit thread and decided it was a concrete geopolitical analysis of an ongoing situation, while preceding to reveal a mangled pro-US bent to an obvious hostile series of actions by the United States
There's no debate here dipshit you showed your ass with the first comment, your lucky all you got was "aLoOf INsULtS" now kick rocks troll
They won’t survive a nuclear exchange with the US and they know it
neither would the U.S.
The US is less dense and has more nukes.
China isn't going to go nuclear against the US.
China will play the long game and use belt/road to spread Chinese soft influence for the next 20-30 years at least.
China doesn't have the nukes to saturate bomb the US like Russia.
Chinese nuclear stockpile is mostly defensive. Their nuclear anti-ship weapons are limited to ~2000 km.
Why waste money building and maintaining weapons you will never use?
:think-about-it: but the US would catch up with China's infrastructure
the U.S. would literally cease existing if 100 fucking nukes dropped on it, but okay
"blah blah blah 100 nukes isn't a lot" dude lmao the U.S. is hanging on by a thread as it is
What is up with this dumb-dumb idea that China would start the war by shooting her plane down
The war would be triggered when China parks a cruiser in front of a US cruiser and the dipshit Qanon brained commander of the US cruiser decides to say fuck it and start shooting at the Chinese cruiser
But don't worry I think your still cool for being sooo above it
Is it a rare occurrence for US and Chinese carriers to be near each other?
Kind. China only has 2 commissioned carriers, one of which is primarily a training ship. Moreover, China doesn't go around waving it's dick in everyone's face like the US does, so those carriers don't stray far from home.
When US carriers come to wave their dicks in China's face, those ships are within range of dozens of airfields and probably thousands of missiles. It's like waving your penis a centimeter away from an active meat slicer and thinking you're winning.
No matter where they are specifically around Taiwan the US ships would still be in range of Chinese airfields and missiles so I'm hoping it would go without incident as it has till now
It's only gone without incident because China exhibits a level of calm and restraint that countries like the US and UK could never possibly match. Just imagine the amount of shrill screeching from the Brits if the PLAN did a freedom of navigation patrol to their illegally occupied islands in the Chagos Archipelago.
I guess I should have invented a completely platonic hypothetical where the actors behave in the exact reversal of how they're being set up in reality. Silly me basing my analysis on the actual thing happening and the threats being made in response.
At least I'm not inventing completely unrelated scenarios to paper over my magical thinking
Oh shit. I have to explain how the US is being aggressive when China is the one threatening to fire first. Wait! What if there are boats!
lmao fuck yourself telling me to shut up
Magical thinking is when you account for navies....in a political conflict...over an island...in the middle of the ocean. You're very smart
And lmao fuuuck outta here trying to play dumb with US bullshit over Taiwan, it has always been a red line and when you have pentagon officials openly talking about using Taiwan as a launch pad for "future and inevitable operations in the region" your goddamm right its a Chinese red line
By the way, shut up nerd :)
Yup. Magical thinking is when you invent an entire series of events that (one would say magically) reverses the order of aggressor to match your preference. China isn't threatening a US head of state for visiting another country. They're... uh... what if boaty shooty?!
Lmao baby brain
Have fun with that.
I have the advantage of my position being provable.
Either China starts a world war and we all die, or I come back here tomorrow fully vindicated by time.
You're all very stupid for arguing with me. And you'll never be in a position to say that yourself.
let me just fire up usaf.com and get my points card out to book a normal civilian flight
Gonna bust out dictionary.com here in a second if I keep getting these big brain responses
What do you think 'civilian' means? What is Nancy Pelosi's military rank? What branch of the military does the US congress fall under?
An official visit of her in Taiwan along with visits to southeast asian countries is a diplomatic visit of a high ranking standing US politician to it which is an escelation and breakaway of the status quo. She can visit after she retires without issues but this is an official US delegation and a visit to Taiwan is something that breaks away from the 92 consensus and that hasnt happened in 20+ years and is indeed a challenge and an act of agression against Chinese sovereignty. Its a clear push towards political secessionism of Taiwan and towards closer ,even military, US-Taiwan alliance and it represents a stance of the US government and military on the issue. She isnt an indivisual or civilian deciding to visit taiwan
:blob-no-thoughts: China and Taiwan are two totally independent countries with no unresolved conflicts
If any military conflict arises around Taiwan in the future it will be one the US has sought and inititated , not the Chinese. I guess Nato holds the minority of the blame for the Ukrainian war as well ? Very nice takes here lol
Taiwan has been shelling the Chinese coast? What kind of comparison is this?
Twist yourself into knots explaining how the side that initiates lethal force is not the aggressor in a conflict. There's little that can be said in response to that kind of pure ideology.
Twist yourself into knots explaining how the side that initiates lethal force is not the aggressor in a conflict.
lmao you are a fucking moron
muh LeThAl FoRcE
so if Venezuela fires any shots in retaliation to being under fucking siege via sanctions it's "the aggressor" nice big brain shit dummy
"Do business with me or I will murder you"
Snorting ideology off a dead hooker
Muh lethal force
Meanwhile sanctions :awooga:
Eat my whole ass
"So what you're saying is if someone does something I don't like and I murder them, I'm the asshole???"
Yes, dummy. That's what I'm saying.
Dont take moves away from the status quo (that was only allowed to your secessionist ,colonized by fascists, chinese territory due to imperialism and intervention from the US ) and towards what would surely be the creation of a protectorat fully controled by an insane military enemy superpower 100 miles of our shore that will make you a giant military base or we will conclude the civil war for you
Ukraine and Donbass also werent part of Russia. I can find differences that rebalance the analogy as well.
Also its utterly baby brained to judge who is the agressor in a situation like this and who is initiating a conflict by who fires the first shot. In the grander conflict the US has always been the agressor and interventionist in the Taiwanese issue and it pursuing a change in status quo is an escelation of agression against China. The only reason Taiwan exists as an entity in the first place is US intervention and agression in the erea.
Ukraine and Donbass also werent part of Russia
??
Also its utterly baby brained to judge who is the agressor in a situation like this and who is initiating a conflict by who fires the first shot.
"It is utterly baby brained to say that 1 equals 1. 1 does not equal one. The aggressor of a conflict cannot be determined by the person who first acted with aggression."
I can't deal with these replies. Once the topic becomes China all of the critical thinking on this website seems to evaporate into billowing fumes of ideology
There is a difference between positioning yourself for a conflict and starting a conflict. Or I guess there isn't if :zizek-preference:
The aggressor of a conflict cannot be determined by the person who first acted with aggression
The aggressor of an extremely compex geopolitical and historical conflict that has existed and perpetrated only throught the imperialist presence and intervention of the great satan dozens of thousands of miles from its shores cannot be determined by the
personGEOPOLITICAL ENTITY who first fires the first shot with ammo yes. From the chinese POV and the pov of anyone with half a materialist analysis the US has been the aggressor on this conflict through the very befining when their military agression and intervention created it to now where they are unilaterlay pursue a break of the status quo. Even if you narrow down the scope to where China is the one that first kills someone that still doenst make them the agressors if you arent a lib. Just as if the DPRK was the one that fired the first shot in the Korean war (they didnt) they would still be in their right to do so and justifiable agressors in the definition of the world that just includes this actions. Its insanity to asign blame for the starting of a conflict to the person first pulling a trigger in a field no matter how many decades of brutal interventionism and agression exists on all levels . But thats just "staging a conflict" according to some weird liberal view of the world so its ok i guessAlso the US has blew up a plane to kill even more important Chinese politician than Pelosi within living memory as well as bombing their embassies in multiple countries. Can we extend the US -china proxy confict and generalize it a bit and have multiple actions of death inducing agression by the US and none by China ?
The aggressor of an extremely compex geopolitical and historical conflict
What convenient complexity that arises from "The guy who shot the gun" needing not to be the aggressor. Oh please tell me what the materialist would say. Because these are not simply words to indicate you're on the right side of an opinion. These are words that actually represent meaning.
Surely the rest of the paragraph isn't simply restating your premise over and over. Surely any allusions towards the other side being aggressive would implicate threats to down a diplomatic aircraft. Or at least be substantive enough to respond to in any way.
Can we extend the US -china proxy confict and generalize it a bit and have multiple actions of death inducing agression by the US and none by China ?
If you want to make yourself feel better, you can do as you wish. But we're talking here about China threatening to murder a diplomatic attache.
China won’t shoot her plane down, it’s a stupid and needless provocation nonetheless.
Agreed. Although personally I think One China Policy is and always was one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of and it's a lie that deserves to die.
Good luck with that. China will be the world power or at the very least dominant regional power and they wont drop it and its well within their rights to not do so. Taiwan would have been liberated half a century ago by the cpc like the rest of China if US fleet intervention didnt happen and thats the only reason Taiwan existed and exists in the first place. Its part of their territory that was occupied by the fleeing losing fascist side of their civil war and is protected and proped up by western imperialism as an geopolitical outpost. Any moves to break it away completely (and as a result turn it into a giant Okinawa military base for the US) should be opposed and if the US is pushing and initiating that process it is the one that initiates any conflict as well
That's true of great number of post on this website. Our posting is not influencing things at the major government level
It reflects their own insecurities. But they are so close, and China is so much larger than Taiwan that it is hard to imagine a future where Taiwan is fully sovereign and independent. Even if China renounced its current policy it could still dominate Taiwan through other means.
I was thinking that too, the only down side and you know it to be true.. they will make a bronze statue of Pelosi and they will talk about how she's an American hero for along as the current govemrnt exists
Fuck i thought this fucking bullshit was happening tonight and I thought since we're not dead yet we'd be okay, fuck
