>If the absurdity lies in the lack of history Well of course it does, because China's claims to Taiwan are fundamentally historical. The US claim to the mainla

>If the absurdity lies in the lack of history Well of course it does, because China's claims to Taiwan are fundamentally historical. The US claim to the mainland US is not based on history but on de facto control, so history is not an injuction. But the PRC's propaganda line is "Taiwan is part of China" which is both presently and historically false. China captured Taiwan from the Dutch in 1662 and held it for two centuries before losing it to the Japanese. It is not quite as mad as Argentina's claim to the Falklands, but that's a low bar. With Macau or Gibraltar, a case can be made that they're owed back. With Taiwan it's dumb. >that is not at all what they wrote I responded to this: >For enemy it should have also actually done something I demonstrated "something".