5 ms·

counterpoint: The US is free at any time to stop invading other countries, trying to overthrow other countries, and enter into conflicts thousands of miles fro

by rsj_hn 4y ago

counterpoint: The US is free at any time to stop invading other countries, trying to overthrow other countries, and enter into conflicts thousands of miles from their borders. But really, it doesn't seem that they do. The US has invaded or attacked over 120 countries since 1991[1]. Absolutely none of them were a threat to the United States. How many countries has China invaded in the same period? How many has it bombed? Imposed sanctions on? Occupied? [1]https://sites.tufts.edu/css/mip-research/ https://sites.tufts.edu/css/mip-research/

CogitoCogito 4y ago
The US isn’t threatening to invade Taiwan. China is.
- rsj_hn 4y ago
  The article is about prospects of war between the US and China. According to official US policy, which is the One China policy, Taiwan and mainland China are the same country, and any disputes between the mainland and Taiwan is an intra-chinese dispute, not a dispute between two separate countries, and not anything that involves the U.S. at all. Now if, for some reason, Taiwan declares independence, then it will be up to other nations to recognize that declaration of independence or not. But that has not happened. Let me ask you, did you recognize the independence of Donetsk People's Republic, Lugansk People's Republic, South Ossetia, Kurdish Republic in Iraq, or The Republic of Tigray? Each of these had de facto control -- they have their own police, flag, they control their territory, etc. Some even have oil. These actually declared independence whereas Taiwan never did. But you will respond, other nations didn't recognize their independence, to which I will ask, who recognizes Taiwanese independence? Not even Taiwan. So what we have here is the phenomenon of a "breakaway region". That is, territory in one nation that is not under the control of the central government, but under local control in that territory, but which no one recognizes as an independent nation. There are many such breakaway regions in the world. Usually the central government tries to conquer the breakaway region, and sometimes it fails. This is generally not considered an "invasion". Do you think it was an invasion when Georgia tried to reconquer South Ossetia, or when Ukraine attacked the DNR and LPR or when Ethiopia attacked Tigray? Or did you view that as an internal matter, of putting down a rebellious breakaway region? Think carefully before you answer, as we are looking for consistency. What about Serbia and the province of Kosovo? Moldova and Transnistria? It does seem like there is a whole lot of cherry picking going on here, where if there is an enemy of the U.S. fighting a breakaway region, then we have to honor the bold independence movement, but when there is a friend of the US fighting a breakaway republic, then we condemn the evil separatists. In both cases, the US ends up fighting on one side of what is really a civil war we have no business involving ourselves in, and because we choose sides purely based on friend/enemy distinctions and not according to any consistent principles, it sure looks a lot like more international meddling. Therefore I reject any moral impetus that forces the US to get itself involved in trying to support or oppose separatist movements half way around the world, or to pick sides in civil wars. We lack the military capability, we lack popular support, and we need to stop adopting these self-destructive and globally destructive policies.
  - CogitoCogito 4y ago
    > The article is about prospects of war between the US and China. According to official US policy, which is the One China policy, Taiwan and mainland China are the same country, and any disputes between the mainland and Taiwan is an intra-chinese dispute, not a dispute between two separate countries, and not anything that involves the U.S. at all. The US has never recognized PRC claims to Taiwan. The US “One China Policy” does not include “Taiwan is part of PRC territory”. But I’ll admit the US policy is a bit vague and confusing so many people (including apparently you) don’t understand US policy in this matter.
    - Apocryphon 4y ago
      > The US has never recognized PRC claims to Taiwan. The US “One China Policy” does not include “Taiwan is part of PRC territory”. The U.S. does not have to do that to do what the GP says - "> According to official US policy, which is the One China policy, Taiwan and mainland China are the same country, and any disputes between the mainland and Taiwan is an intra-chinese dispute, not a dispute between two separate countries" - rather they have historically recognized the ROC's claims to Taiwan, and to the mainland as well, which of course is a diplomatic fig leaf at this point.
      - CogitoCogito 4y ago
        If we’re all clear that US policy does not consider Taiwan a part of China (i.e. the PRC), I don’t have more to add.
        Apocryphon 4y ago
        U.S. policy officially considers it as a part of China (i.e. the ROC). That is de facto not a viable reality for many decades now, but it is the de jure legal fiction. As such, your criticism of the GP is incorrect. Because they were correct in asserting "According to official US policy, which is the One China policy, Taiwan and mainland China are the same country", Washington just disagrees with Beijing which that same country is.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
stale2002 4y ago
US invasions have nothing to do with the fact that China is publicly saying that they want to invade the independent country of Taiwan.
- UltraViolence 4y ago
  The U.S. doesn't even recognize Taiwan as an independent nation, so your remark is moot.
  - stale2002 4y ago
    Its not moot, no. Because Taiwan has its own laws, taxes, border, and military, and this has been the case for 70 years. It is already independent because of those facts, no matter what words are written on a piece of paper. And, it is related, because china constantly makes threats to invade Taiwan.
    - UltraViolence 4y ago
      The U.S. betrayed Taiwan 50 years ago by accepting China's rule over Taiwan and ceasing to recognize it as an independent nation. Threatening to try to dissuade the Chinese from invading is the only thing Biden can do. When Xi finally gives the "go" he'll make up some excuse not to intervene militarily. He'll slap sanctions on China, for sure , but those will merely be a pinprick.
      - stale2002 4y ago
        You are ignoring the point. The original post you were replying to was attacking China for it's threats to invade, and was defending sanctions. That point is valid. So yes, sanctions against china are justified, which was the original context, and they are justified because of the points about China threatening to invade. > is the only thing Biden can do Actually, the US can continue what we have been doing for a while, which is continue to sell more and more weapons to Taiwan. The more weapons we give to Taiwan, the more invaders will die in any invasion. Maximizing their ability to increase invader death numbers, by continuing to do this, is also a good plan.

by rsj_hn 4y ago

CogitoCogito 4y ago

The US isn’t threatening to invade Taiwan. China is.

rsj_hn 4y ago
The article is about prospects of war between the US and China. According to official US policy, which is the One China policy, Taiwan and mainland China are the same country, and any disputes between the mainland and Taiwan is an intra-chinese dispute, not a dispute between two separate countries, and not anything that involves the U.S. at all. Now if, for some reason, Taiwan declares independence, then it will be up to other nations to recognize that declaration of independence or not. But that has not happened. Let me ask you, did you recognize the independence of Donetsk People's Republic, Lugansk People's Republic, South Ossetia, Kurdish Republic in Iraq, or The Republic of Tigray? Each of these had de facto control -- they have their own police, flag, they control their territory, etc. Some even have oil. These actually declared independence whereas Taiwan never did. But you will respond, other nations didn't recognize their independence, to which I will ask, who recognizes Taiwanese independence? Not even Taiwan. So what we have here is the phenomenon of a "breakaway region". That is, territory in one nation that is not under the control of the central government, but under local control in that territory, but which no one recognizes as an independent nation. There are many such breakaway regions in the world. Usually the central government tries to conquer the breakaway region, and sometimes it fails. This is generally not considered an "invasion". Do you think it was an invasion when Georgia tried to reconquer South Ossetia, or when Ukraine attacked the DNR and LPR or when Ethiopia attacked Tigray? Or did you view that as an internal matter, of putting down a rebellious breakaway region? Think carefully before you answer, as we are looking for consistency. What about Serbia and the province of Kosovo? Moldova and Transnistria? It does seem like there is a whole lot of cherry picking going on here, where if there is an enemy of the U.S. fighting a breakaway region, then we have to honor the bold independence movement, but when there is a friend of the US fighting a breakaway republic, then we condemn the evil separatists. In both cases, the US ends up fighting on one side of what is really a civil war we have no business involving ourselves in, and because we choose sides purely based on friend/enemy distinctions and not according to any consistent principles, it sure looks a lot like more international meddling. Therefore I reject any moral impetus that forces the US to get itself involved in trying to support or oppose separatist movements half way around the world, or to pick sides in civil wars. We lack the military capability, we lack popular support, and we need to stop adopting these self-destructive and globally destructive policies.
- CogitoCogito 4y ago
  > The article is about prospects of war between the US and China. According to official US policy, which is the One China policy, Taiwan and mainland China are the same country, and any disputes between the mainland and Taiwan is an intra-chinese dispute, not a dispute between two separate countries, and not anything that involves the U.S. at all. The US has never recognized PRC claims to Taiwan. The US “One China Policy” does not include “Taiwan is part of PRC territory”. But I’ll admit the US policy is a bit vague and confusing so many people (including apparently you) don’t understand US policy in this matter.
  - Apocryphon 4y ago
    > The US has never recognized PRC claims to Taiwan. The US “One China Policy” does not include “Taiwan is part of PRC territory”. The U.S. does not have to do that to do what the GP says - "> According to official US policy, which is the One China policy, Taiwan and mainland China are the same country, and any disputes between the mainland and Taiwan is an intra-chinese dispute, not a dispute between two separate countries" - rather they have historically recognized the ROC's claims to Taiwan, and to the mainland as well, which of course is a diplomatic fig leaf at this point.
    - CogitoCogito 4y ago
      If we’re all clear that US policy does not consider Taiwan a part of China (i.e. the PRC), I don’t have more to add.
      - Apocryphon 4y ago
        U.S. policy officially considers it as a part of China (i.e. the ROC). That is de facto not a viable reality for many decades now, but it is the de jure legal fiction. As such, your criticism of the GP is incorrect. Because they were correct in asserting "According to official US policy, which is the One China policy, Taiwan and mainland China are the same country", Washington just disagrees with Beijing which that same country is.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

stale2002 4y ago

US invasions have nothing to do with the fact that China is publicly saying that they want to invade the independent country of Taiwan.

UltraViolence 4y ago
The U.S. doesn't even recognize Taiwan as an independent nation, so your remark is moot.
- stale2002 4y ago
  Its not moot, no. Because Taiwan has its own laws, taxes, border, and military, and this has been the case for 70 years. It is already independent because of those facts, no matter what words are written on a piece of paper. And, it is related, because china constantly makes threats to invade Taiwan.
  - UltraViolence 4y ago
    The U.S. betrayed Taiwan 50 years ago by accepting China's rule over Taiwan and ceasing to recognize it as an independent nation. Threatening to try to dissuade the Chinese from invading is the only thing Biden can do. When Xi finally gives the "go" he'll make up some excuse not to intervene militarily. He'll slap sanctions on China, for sure , but those will merely be a pinprick.
    - stale2002 4y ago
      You are ignoring the point. The original post you were replying to was attacking China for it's threats to invade, and was defending sanctions. That point is valid. So yes, sanctions against china are justified, which was the original context, and they are justified because of the points about China threatening to invade. > is the only thing Biden can do Actually, the US can continue what we have been doing for a while, which is continue to sell more and more weapons to Taiwan. The more weapons we give to Taiwan, the more invaders will die in any invasion. Maximizing their ability to increase invader death numbers, by continuing to do this, is also a good plan.