A generational civil war in which there has been no fighting. One country that has two geographically distinct regions controlled by two distinct governments.
Implicit in these statements are how they are lies.
Do I have to link articles in order to be arguing from a common understanding of reality? We do agree that China has been making military threats towards this trip, don't we?
Do we not agree on the basic facts of reality that this is a symbolic, diplomatic trip Pelosi is taking?
They're threatening to respond to symbolic gestures with lethal force.
Are you in marketing? Couldn't help but notice how you pivoted away from the current situation to put "China" and "peaceful" in the same sentence for no other reason.
The operative question is nothing less than whether China is willing to start a nuclear war to stop Pelosi from shaking some hands.
Symbolism matters only so far as it affects the material world. This symbol does not matter when measured against the extinction of all life.
Framing it as American provocation is fucking child schoolyard shit. It won't matter if it's actually used as an excuse. Everyone will be dead and unable to cast blame.
Yeah well OCP is a joke China has been telling on itself since it began. And a buildup of troops would be a different conversation entirely, but it's not one we're having right now. That's not what China is threatening war over.
It's not real in any way that doesn't stem from China demanding to be patronized. They do not hold Taiwan. They would provoke world ending conflict to change that fact.
I grant you this point that is tangential to the argument that began this conversation. A point I never really contested, as is clear from my self quote.
How is it just symbolic. It sympolizes but also IS it self an action of the US against the status quo with an official deplomatic delegation visit to Taiwanese territory as part of visits to US allied countries in the region, an action not seen or even thought of in a generation . It IS an important event that IS or at least WOULD BE a signifier of a new era for the issue on the US terms and by US decision towards secessionism and "independence" . That is if it was allowed to happen (cause if it was allowed it would become the normal new status quo after a couple of visits in a few years). And then what? ANother US action to push the issue even further that China should again not respond to according to you, leading where ?
"How is it just symbolic" is a bankrupt argument in the context of justifying a war. It's symbolic because it's bloodless.
You act like you want to die. As if you want China to instigate a world ending nuclear war rather than be insulted. That level of pride and ideology is dangerous.
If you think this isnt enough to start a war sure, but you can still believe that and believe that US is the agressor here and this action is an important escelation, just one that you think China should eat up and that it isnt worth fighting over. "Its symbolic because its bloodless" is a dumbass argument. You said its just symbolic to exclude it from being a serious and agressive unilateral escelation from the US and to describe it as immaterial . US military pact with Taiwan would be bloodless, Nato expansion was bloodless , a complete control of Taiwanese political and economic life will be bloodless. All of these will be next when deplomatic relations and visits from US politicians become the normal if China allows this and you are a moron if you think otherwise.
Every unilateral aggressive step of the US from creating this sitiuation , to keeping it alive for decades to escelating it away from the status quo now is bloodless. But its not the US ,with full understanding of Chinese positions, that is the agressor by unilateraly leading the situation into its breaking point ? Its Chinese pride i guess. What level of bloodless expansion and escelation should China start responding to and how in your opinion that would be effective in preventing a situation where you would justify their agression . (presumably US military being stationed all over Taiwan and it joining a Nato alliance). Or you think that that wont be the outcome regardless so no reason to worry
I have answered you already and you and i not wanting war over this or praying it doesnt escelate to isnt the same convo as to who would be and is the agressor in all this and as to how material or immaterial, symbolic or non symbolic this US action is , what it actualy means and what countering or not countering it means.
You’ve added ‘liar’ to your growing list of personal failings.
Damn i hope i can come back from this lol. This reads like a satire of how a redditor would argue btw, you should turn your account to that full time and provide more of a value to the website
When did you say that we should all die? When did you say that China should start a war over being insulted, or outmaneuvered diplomatically?
I guess I'm asking you what you're asking me because I understand your point and you don't?
You gave me a slippery slope of US actions that would involve only nonmilitary and diplomatic positioning that would worsen China's relative position. You implied I was wrong for not justifying the act of China declaring war and destroying all life on earth as a consequence of one of these steps. Your implication is correct. I would not start a war.
So if you're implying that's the wrong answer, why don't you tell me what the right answer is? Now can you stop fucking around and say out loud what your opinion is finally?
Everything i debated was within the convo of who is the agressor and the gravity and meaning of this stunts as well as a historical retrospective of the situation . And these things are only in conversation because you brought them up one way or the other and made statements about them. I simply see them as historical and geopoitical facts. If they make you uncomfortable and can only read them as saying "yes Xi you are right destory the plane and start a war" then it is your issue and inability to seperate you being right of not wanting WW3 over this to you being wrong about your analysis of the situation. These comments and debates arent a response or refute of you saying "damn i hope China doesnt attack the plane and starts WW3 over this" , cause simply both in your initial and other comments your statements and judgements were mostly beyond that. People have expressed that feeling and take dozens of times both in these days and in the last year on this site and it didnt devolve into this debates cause its a very understandable position and wish that most people have, even here and even me
Do we not agree on the basic facts of reality that this is a symbolic, diplomatic trip Pelosi is taking?
And what this sympolic trip of an official congressional delegation that has no precedent after the 90s consensus symnolises but a clear move against that and away from the status quo(that is supported by the majority of taiwanese people) and a US initiated political and deplomatic kickstart of secessionist route for the Taiwanese issue. Thats kind of action from the US is what China has stated that might understandably lead to escelation with military measures not off the table, not a random meaningless visit of a senile reptile lady to Taiwan in a vacuum
Not my first language so i apologize if a couple of the replies you get to your dumb opinions are harder to read than others. It would help to not just have reactionary and dumb takes , easy fix
Where do you see me wishing WW3 starts over this or wishing Chinese military action against Taiwan and the US . This has been purely a convo on the gravity of theses stunt , its implications and who is or isnt the agressor and about your historical or current misunderstandings of the general situation. Im pretty sure i value life more than you and i support the successfull Chinese threats and saber rattling over this that prevented a step towards a status quo closer to war. We retain a status quo further away from war now that Pelosi wont go than the one that opens up if she did and became the new normal and the Chinese flex and US blinking to it is the reason that this. It has kept the situation as still salvagable in the future without military confrontation of superpowers. Thats how the world works
"I value life more than you because I support threats of death that prevent nonviolent actions"
I'm done being insulted by someone so deserving of those insults themselves. You called me ignorant of history and current events? While being under the mistaken impression that Pelosi's trip was cancelled? I've taken you far too seriously up to this point.
Oh no you taken someone who shit on you on a niche leftist forum too seriously cause they challenged your dumb analysis over a situation to which you just responded with calling them omnicidal. Also Pelosi's visit to Taiwan is considerably less likely to happen now than it was half a day ago and im talking from that new presumtion
I made an unpopular observation and defended it against every idiot and emotionally rattled child that pursued the issue. You are correct that you took a shit.
There isn't an answer to this question that could possibly make a difference. Who cares? Symbolic of a planned US invasion of the mainland. If so, what? Now is it okay to end life on earth with a nuclear war?
I'd love for someone here to stop looking at my user page to see if I'm a wrecker and start actually saying some of these things out loud.
Reply to this comment if you agree that we should all die in nuclear fire if the US insults China with this visit.
A generational civil war in which there has been no fighting. One country that has two geographically distinct regions controlled by two distinct governments.
Implicit in these statements are how they are lies.
deleted by creator
I for one greatly prefer a paper war and see a meaningful distinction there.
deleted by creator
Do I have to link articles in order to be arguing from a common understanding of reality? We do agree that China has been making military threats towards this trip, don't we?
Do we not agree on the basic facts of reality that this is a symbolic, diplomatic trip Pelosi is taking?
deleted by creator
They're threatening to respond to symbolic gestures with lethal force.
Are you in marketing? Couldn't help but notice how you pivoted away from the current situation to put "China" and "peaceful" in the same sentence for no other reason.
deleted by creator
The operative question is nothing less than whether China is willing to start a nuclear war to stop Pelosi from shaking some hands.
Symbolism matters only so far as it affects the material world. This symbol does not matter when measured against the extinction of all life.
Framing it as American provocation is fucking child schoolyard shit. It won't matter if it's actually used as an excuse. Everyone will be dead and unable to cast blame.
deleted by creator
Yeah well OCP is a joke China has been telling on itself since it began. And a buildup of troops would be a different conversation entirely, but it's not one we're having right now. That's not what China is threatening war over.
deleted by creator
It's not real in any way that doesn't stem from China demanding to be patronized. They do not hold Taiwan. They would provoke world ending conflict to change that fact.
That's what is real.
deleted by creator
-Deep sigh-
You saw I wrote a sentence after that, right?
deleted by creator
The terms are such that they agree to pretend the de facto is not so. On its own terms it's not real. It's not a misconception.
Hey look I already said what you said here. Wow it sure is frustrating to have 2 out of 3 sentences completely ignored.
deleted by creator
I grant you this point that is tangential to the argument that began this conversation. A point I never really contested, as is clear from my self quote.
Because of the OCP. Taiwan would have been Okinawa-ed other wise military wise
How is it just symbolic. It sympolizes but also IS it self an action of the US against the status quo with an official deplomatic delegation visit to Taiwanese territory as part of visits to US allied countries in the region, an action not seen or even thought of in a generation . It IS an important event that IS or at least WOULD BE a signifier of a new era for the issue on the US terms and by US decision towards secessionism and "independence" . That is if it was allowed to happen (cause if it was allowed it would become the normal new status quo after a couple of visits in a few years). And then what? ANother US action to push the issue even further that China should again not respond to according to you, leading where ?
"How is it just symbolic" is a bankrupt argument in the context of justifying a war. It's symbolic because it's bloodless.
You act like you want to die. As if you want China to instigate a world ending nuclear war rather than be insulted. That level of pride and ideology is dangerous.
If you think this isnt enough to start a war sure, but you can still believe that and believe that US is the agressor here and this action is an important escelation, just one that you think China should eat up and that it isnt worth fighting over. "Its symbolic because its bloodless" is a dumbass argument. You said its just symbolic to exclude it from being a serious and agressive unilateral escelation from the US and to describe it as immaterial . US military pact with Taiwan would be bloodless, Nato expansion was bloodless , a complete control of Taiwanese political and economic life will be bloodless. All of these will be next when deplomatic relations and visits from US politicians become the normal if China allows this and you are a moron if you think otherwise.
Every unilateral aggressive step of the US from creating this sitiuation , to keeping it alive for decades to escelating it away from the status quo now is bloodless. But its not the US ,with full understanding of Chinese positions, that is the agressor by unilateraly leading the situation into its breaking point ? Its Chinese pride i guess. What level of bloodless expansion and escelation should China start responding to and how in your opinion that would be effective in preventing a situation where you would justify their agression . (presumably US military being stationed all over Taiwan and it joining a Nato alliance). Or you think that that wont be the outcome regardless so no reason to worry
I invite you to answer for me. When do you end all life on earth in response to nonviolent diplomatic positioning?
If you have an answer at all, you're a blood crazed animal.
I have answered you already and you and i not wanting war over this or praying it doesnt escelate to isnt the same convo as to who would be and is the agressor in all this and as to how material or immaterial, symbolic or non symbolic this US action is , what it actualy means and what countering or not countering it means.
Removed by mod
Damn i hope i can come back from this lol. This reads like a satire of how a redditor would argue btw, you should turn your account to that full time and provide more of a value to the website
Why are you asking me what im asking you ?
I guess I'm asking you what you're asking me because I understand your point and you don't?
You gave me a slippery slope of US actions that would involve only nonmilitary and diplomatic positioning that would worsen China's relative position. You implied I was wrong for not justifying the act of China declaring war and destroying all life on earth as a consequence of one of these steps. Your implication is correct. I would not start a war.
So if you're implying that's the wrong answer, why don't you tell me what the right answer is? Now can you stop fucking around and say out loud what your opinion is finally?
Everything i debated was within the convo of who is the agressor and the gravity and meaning of this stunts as well as a historical retrospective of the situation . And these things are only in conversation because you brought them up one way or the other and made statements about them. I simply see them as historical and geopoitical facts. If they make you uncomfortable and can only read them as saying "yes Xi you are right destory the plane and start a war" then it is your issue and inability to seperate you being right of not wanting WW3 over this to you being wrong about your analysis of the situation. These comments and debates arent a response or refute of you saying "damn i hope China doesnt attack the plane and starts WW3 over this" , cause simply both in your initial and other comments your statements and judgements were mostly beyond that. People have expressed that feeling and take dozens of times both in these days and in the last year on this site and it didnt devolve into this debates cause its a very understandable position and wish that most people have, even here and even me
And what this sympolic trip of an official congressional delegation that has no precedent after the 90s consensus symnolises but a clear move against that and away from the status quo(that is supported by the majority of taiwanese people) and a US initiated political and deplomatic kickstart of secessionist route for the Taiwanese issue. Thats kind of action from the US is what China has stated that might understandably lead to escelation with military measures not off the table, not a random meaningless visit of a senile reptile lady to Taiwan in a vacuum
Removed by mod
Not my first language so i apologize if a couple of the replies you get to your dumb opinions are harder to read than others. It would help to not just have reactionary and dumb takes , easy fix
Reactionary opinions like "everyone in the world should die before the motherland suffers an insult"?
My opinions are better than yours because I value life. I pity you for thinking my takes are dumb. Perhaps some day you will know better.
Where do you see me wishing WW3 starts over this or wishing Chinese military action against Taiwan and the US . This has been purely a convo on the gravity of theses stunt , its implications and who is or isnt the agressor and about your historical or current misunderstandings of the general situation. Im pretty sure i value life more than you and i support the successfull Chinese threats and saber rattling over this that prevented a step towards a status quo closer to war. We retain a status quo further away from war now that Pelosi wont go than the one that opens up if she did and became the new normal and the Chinese flex and US blinking to it is the reason that this. It has kept the situation as still salvagable in the future without military confrontation of superpowers. Thats how the world works
"I value life more than you because I support threats of death that prevent nonviolent actions"
I'm done being insulted by someone so deserving of those insults themselves. You called me ignorant of history and current events? While being under the mistaken impression that Pelosi's trip was cancelled? I've taken you far too seriously up to this point.
Oh no you taken someone who shit on you on a niche leftist forum too seriously cause they challenged your dumb analysis over a situation to which you just responded with calling them omnicidal. Also Pelosi's visit to Taiwan is considerably less likely to happen now than it was half a day ago and im talking from that new presumtion
I made an unpopular observation and defended it against every idiot and emotionally rattled child that pursued the issue. You are correct that you took a shit.
symbolic of what :blob-no-thoughts:
There isn't an answer to this question that could possibly make a difference. Who cares? Symbolic of a planned US invasion of the mainland. If so, what? Now is it okay to end life on earth with a nuclear war?
I'd love for someone here to stop looking at my user page to see if I'm a wrecker and start actually saying some of these things out loud.
Reply to this comment if you agree that we should all die in nuclear fire if the US insults China with this visit.