Xi denies 2027 Taiwan invasion plans, but analysts say island should remain vigilant
Xi denies 2027 Taiwan invasion plans, but analysts say island should remain vigilant
Mr Xi refuted reports that Beijing was planning for military action against Taiwan in 2027 or 2035. Read more at straitstimes.com.
You're viewing a single thread.
I recall people laughing at the US warning Ukraine that a Russian invasion was imminent.
In hindsight, it was imminent since they annexed Krimea almost 10 years ago.
Considering Russia's red lines were made very clear (and were crossed), I'm not sure why anyone is surprised.
China's red lines were also very clear, but then Pelosi decided to stomp right over them anyway.
It's rather concerning how today we're more concerned about protecting ideology than we are about maintaining world peace.
China doesn't get to dictate what Taiwan does.
Russia doesn't get to dictate what Ukraine does.
Very simple. The only ideology being pushed here is the delusion that one country should be able to dictate the actions of another to placate the ego of an authoritarian leader. Implying Russia or China were forced into doing anything is some DARVO bullshit.
The US gets to dictate what Canada does, though. We've had to put up with American bullshit for decades.
And they shouldn't, as you as you said it's bullshit. Same principle, just have the courage to be less selective about how you apply it
I mean, I agree in theory but in practice that's not how the world works. We don't live in an ideal world.
The US would never allow Canada to align with Russia against the US. Russia would never allow Ukraine to align with the US against Russia. China would never allow Taiwan to align with the US against China.
Same shit, different shitter.
Ok good, I'm glad we're able to find some common ground here. And here's another bit of common ground I think we have:
If, the government of Canada decide it was in its best interest to align with Russia and that's what the people of Canada wanted, and they tried to do this, and the US then said that Canada was rightfully part of its territory and it would prefer to use peaceful means of unification but would ultimately take Canada by any means necessary.....I would stand right next to you, I'd be angry with you and call out the moral bankruptcy and how the US has no right to do that. I'd probably even influence the way I voted in my country.
But here's the thing. That's a hypothetical scenario for Canada. The people of Canada and their way of life is safe. Me, and my family here in Taiwan? Not so much. And that's 100% because of the CCPs claim that they own us and will take us by any means. A claim they could revoke at any time.
The world isn't perfect, no, but that won't stop me from calling out this type of shit no matter who does it and it's certainly paper thin cover to hide behind if you're trying to justify that which you know cannot be morally defended.
Don’t bother, it’s just a tankie shill posting bad faith arguments from a 1d all account.
Yeah true, that's probably enough now that it's starting to go in circles. I don't know why but I'm still surprised that people could genuinely hold these views. Still, I always hope to learn something but ultimately it's probably a waste of time.
The US is literally funding the right-wing party in Canada to be more conservative, more extreme, less secular, and more friendly to US interests.
We can't do ANYTHING about it. We're already America's removed.
Would be interested to read more about that if you have sources. Like I said, I'm not afraid to criticise the US but that is no excuse for the actions of others.
It's important to remember that in the US, political aims are achieved by funding think tanks and political parties and "independent protests" rather than on funding the government at large. So, I'm attributing the actions of the decision makers in the US (Republican officials, key Republican decision makers) to American policy at large. After all, in a two-party system, the Republicans will eventually regain power and they will follow the policy of these key decision makers. It's rather odd that the decision makers in American politics aren't government officials, but I guess that's the wonders of a two-party democracy. You can say that Koch (for example) isn't an American government official, but then I'd ask you what defines a government official if not a high degree of influence over government policy.
On the Freedom Convoy protest bullshit:
How American right-wing funding for Canadian trucker protests could sway U.S. politics
U.S. Republicans vow to probe GoFundMe decision halting Canada trucker donations
On funding for Canadian "independent think tanks"
How a conservative US network undermined Indigenous energy rights in Canada
U.S. Republican Koch oil billionaires help fund the Fraser Institute. Why the Fraser Institute?
On direct funding to politicians ("bribes" or what have you)
The US funds the International Democrat Union, who directly gave Stephen Harper a cushy job after he was ousted as PM in 2015.
On blatant economic favoritism by the DOJ to crush Canadian businesses: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSeries_dumping_petition_by_Boeing
Maybe the Democrats are better, but from what I've seen all they do is not actively make things substantially worse.
The only way to not have crossed Russia's supposed red lines would have been for Ukraine to never exist in the first place.
No matter what was done Putin would have found some way to justify his invasion.
Russia's red lines were primarily "no foreign intervention into Ukraine." Considering that the US 4th Psychological Operations Group literally posted a video claiming that they organized and supported and "pulled the strings of" Euromaidan...
Tankie you for sharing your opinion. Always love to hear the latest take on geopolitics from a brand new account.
It's tankie to... Want to avoid war? Damn.
!
It's rather concerning how today we're more concerned about protecting ideology than we are about maintaining world peace.
!<
Agreed.