3 ms·
> Of course the West would still try to dispute it Yeah, that's what I just said. > the world saw through WMDs in Iraq And Iraq got bombed anyway, it's a gre
by BrazzVuvuzela 5y ago
> Of course the West would still try to dispute it
Yeah, that's what I just said.
> the world saw through WMDs in Iraq
And Iraq got bombed anyway, it's a great example of how the actual validity of a casus belli doesn't matter.
- sudosysgen 5y ago>Yeah, that's what I just said. In that case I don't see how we disagree. Of course it does matter. The invalidity is why the entire world was opposed to the US doing so. If the US wasn't in such a dominant economic and strategic position at the time it would have had to pay a much larger price.
- BrazzVuvuzela 5y agoMy sub-point is America would deny the validity of China's invasion of Taiwan regardless of whether China's accusations against Taiwan were accurate or not, meaning the accuracy of such accusations isn't relevant. The outcome is the same. People in the EU might roll their eyes and say "ackshully china is right and taiwan really is making nuclear weapons", just as they once rolled their eyes at America's bogus claims about Iraq, but what would/did that change? A fat lot of nothing. But my main point is that if Taiwan wants nuclear weapons they can make their own, so there is no sense in America giving nuclear weapons to Taiwan. And if America did, that would provide China with 'valid' casus belli anyway. I think PRC spies would be no less aware of plans to import nuclear weapons than plans to make them.
- sudosysgen 5y agoWell it's not about what they would to America, it's that they wouldn't help America economically or otherwise. The USA and Japan alone against China in a Taiwan situation may simply lose.