https://yewtu.be/watch?v=plHRRFHZ_f0

Aka The U.S goes mask-off on the South China Sea, and Johnny Harris tries to equivalent China's actions to that of the U.S.

What can I say? On Harris himself, I suspect his moderacy is being used to co-opt a sort of good cop side of the pro U.S position, considering past videos. NED- National Endowment in Democracy, an international pro-U.S organization funded by the C.I.A to support color revolutions.

But on a more serious note: What do you suppose of the Philippine Sea debate, because I haven't gotten a clarified rationale and context on China's actions, from your side? And how would I counter claims of local Chinese aggression.

(reposted from r/Sino)

  • JuryNullification [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    The US military has been planning for war with China for at least a decade, with brass agitating for it to happen sooner than later because they knew China would surpass the US militarily. The problem with their line of thought was that they didn’t realize it had already happened.

    • Lemmygradwontallowme [he/him, comrade/them]
      hexagon
      ·
      1 year ago

      That's why I put it in captions, according to the video. I just wonder about the South China Sea issue, in regards to its other neighbors, because it makes it seem as if China was the sole aggressor but there's got to be some complexness with it.

      • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        Every nation that has a US military base on their land is a de facto aggressor against China. Beset on all sides, of course they will do what they can to take strategic islands.

        • Lemmygradwontallowme [he/him, comrade/them]
          hexagon
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I would you to give me evidence that these countries are not simply passive allies.

          I mean even the Philippines, which, under Duterte's former term, have major things to lose if they take sides fully against China, considering their formerly friendly mutual economic relations, especially in the Belt and Road initiative, and considering the fishing claims as well. http://www.beltandroadforum.org/english/n100/2019/0428/c22-1336.html

          • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]
            ·
            1 year ago

            I'm not sure I understand what you mean - in what possible way could allowing the most militant, warlike nation on the earth to base their offensive hegemonic operations out of your nation be passive? If there's a guy threatening to kick in your door and murder your family, would you consider your neighbor his "passive ally" if they let him build a hunting blind on their front lawn for the violent guy to hang out in?

            • Lemmygradwontallowme [he/him, comrade/them]
              hexagon
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I mean understandable, but what about the fishing and territorial rights claims in the South China sea, exactly, since I've heard about some lopsided marine "clashes" between local fisherman boats and Chinese navy ships? Edit: in relation to exclusive economic zones, https://peacepalacelibrary.nl/south-china-sea-islands (This also does note other countries' claims, which might rival bit of China's claims, including the second most expansive, Vietnam)

              For me, it doesn't seem as aggressive and intimidating as an issue, compared to the U.S setting up military practices and war games in front of China's shorelines, instead from rogue Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, and other Pacific isles.

              Edit: Sorry, if this comment came in a rush.

              • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]
                ·
                1 year ago

                It is in the US's interest to stoke discontent and rivalry between their vassal states and China, because a unified Asia would be able to resolve issues such as fisheries and territorial rights without US involvement. The presence of those bases means the US can respond/provoke/attack China easily - without those bases the US would be extremely limited in their access to the region except from carrier groups and extremely long flights with numerous in-air refuelings on the way there and back. The existence of those wargames is only allowed because of those bases.

                • Lemmygradwontallowme [he/him, comrade/them]
                  hexagon
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  When I talk about the "clashes" though, I mean as controversial as this, for example https://www.npr.org/2019/06/29/737268828/chinese-trawler-hits-and-sinks-filipino-fishing-boat (Granted I don't know necessarily if this was a Navy ship or not, that did the hit-and-run on a fishing boat to sink, whether intentionally or not)

                  and this https://youtu.be/U_d6vJ52RW4 ("China Coast Guard reportedly drives away Filipino fishing boat near Ayungin Shoal")

                  I say this, because I haven't heard any reasoning or perspective from the Chinese Coast Guard, probably again due to media bias.

                  I still think the damn U.S bases in the Philippines ought to go, since it only emboldens the United States and its allies to go on the offensive.

                  • nat_turner_overdrive [he/him]
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Well the first one is about a chinese trawler, so those are just regular chinese people who aren't acting in any official capacity. Doesn't really seem relevant - Americans in boats do dumb aggressive shit all the time. The second one is a blurry video without any real context of what might be a Chinese Coast Guard vessel easily a quarter mile away. I don't think there's any take-away from that video other than an allegation without any video proof. Also, hop into a fishing boat and get close to a US military vessel - they'll do more than putter around a quarter mile away from you, regardless of whose seas they're in.

      • geikei [none/use name]
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        in the end of the day no matter the situation in SCS no neighbour is gonna take the US side in a conflict outside of mayyyyybe Phillipines. Simply because

        Show

        Their whole development and economy is completely and utterly joined at the hip with China and that has only accellerated despite the new cold war

    • Tachanka [comrade/them]
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      What's bonkers to me about this suicidal "war with China" that our bourgeoisie are all so openly bloodthirsty for is that, hello, they have four times as many people as the USA, and the USA increasingly depends on China for their shit

      US imports from China have been on the increase over the past two decades, even as a percentage of total economic activity, so adjusting for population increase, etc.

      Show

  • Tachanka [comrade/them]
    ·
    1 year ago

    can we not? can we just not have world war 3? can we, like, not engage in suicidal wars with nuclear powers because they don't share our opinion on economics? can we, like, not destroy what's left of the climate with cluster bombs and depleted uranium munitions? can we, just, like, quietly let our empire decay and, i don't know, get over it? Just move on? Not destroy the whole fucking world because hegemony go bye bye?

    spoiler

    Show

  • CthulhusIntern [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    A war with China would probably involve the entire world. And the map of the sides would look like The Same Map.

    • Teekeeus [comrade/them]
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      look like The Same Map

      Idk, with the exception of king charlie's kangaroo island I'm not sure any international community members in the pacific want an actual hot conflict with china

  • Sephitard9001 [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    Remembering that time Harris described Libya as "NATO went in to protect pro-democracy protestors and for reasons we don't know and can't explain, the mission inexplicably became regime change" shrug-outta-hecks

    • Lemmygradwontallowme [he/him, comrade/them]
      hexagon
      ·
      1 year ago

      You mean the video on U.S intervention, where he tries to say "we were bad but now we're good", and perpetuates Russiagate, in relation to Guatemala coup of 1950s?

      • Sephitard9001 [he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah it's the "Let's talk about EVERY** U.S. coup!" video

        *only successful ones

        *only ones we have evidence (declassified documents where the CIA admits it) for

        • Lemmygradwontallowme [he/him, comrade/them]
          hexagon
          ·
          1 year ago

          It's like the same methodology the U.S does to claim it has waged war against any other countries, if not none at all. https://time.com/3399479/war-powers-bush-obama/

          yet they have the fucking gall to call out Russia for declaring its 'special military operation'.

  • captcha [any]
    ·
    1 year ago

    From what I heard a while ago, the Chinese state department thinks keeping the 9-dashed line is foolish and needlessly reckless but powerful regional politicians in southern China are die hard about it because of local fishing industries.

    Basically everything about the south China sea conflict boils down to fishing rights. Everyone, China, Vietnam, the Phillipines, even Malaysia are making the most exaggerated claims to the south China sea to secure fishing rights. National security matters are secondary.

    • Albanian_Lil_Pump [he/him]
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m no fish expert, but surely these mfs can build giant fish farms right. I swear if the world is thrown into nuclear hellfire and communists turn on each other over fucking fish

  • Albanian_Lil_Pump [he/him]
    ·
    1 year ago

    china involved in regional conflict but wants to cooperate with the US to advance business interest

    biden-alert the orientals have challenged us