3 ms·

This analysis applies equally to all kinds of incredibly destructive revanchism, such as Nazi Germany's claims on the Sudentenland or Russia's claims on Ukraine

This analysis applies equally to all kinds of incredibly destructive revanchism, such as Nazi Germany's claims on the Sudentenland or Russia's claims on Ukraine. It has never once been righteous.

jonhohle 3y ago
Ukraine is recognized by the UN as independent from Russia since 1945. It’s also not a stretch to consider NATO expansion as one of the primary motivators for the current conflict. Of course there’s no justification for Nazi Germany’s expansion, but it’s not as simple as saying Axis Bad/Allies Good. The environment that led to Nazi Germany was, among other things, set in motion by US involvement in WWI. All of this land dispute and conflict was not unfamiliar to the constitutional framers 150 years before all of that happened, which is why non-interventionism was an early ideal for the US. When you take a country to someone else’s war there will always be unintended consequences. Edit to add: what legitimate claim to sovereignty does Taiwan have? Because they say so, it’s true? Try taking a piece of land you own and succeeding from the country where it resides and then tell us all how it goes. I have no interest in supporting the PRC. I’m just trying to view things apolitically. What right does Taiwan have to be liberated from China more than Hong Kong or even areas that were never under any dispute? IMHO, Hong Kong had more right to independence, but that right was achieved through colonialism, not their own resistance. I’d love to see the PRC evaporate today, but that’s not the reality of the situation. And again, IMHO, the best way for Taiwan to achieve its independence is to become ungovernable and too politically and finically costly for China. That’s a tall order, but also something to think about when sending money to the PRC for every item that says Made in China on it. Also edited to add: at what point would you consider political borders immutable? It’s far less common since 1945, but prior to that borders were pretty malleable. Should the US give Alaska back to Russia? Should Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico, Texas, etc. be their own independent systems again? Israel be dismantled and then mantled again as we go back through history restoring old borders until we are all nomadic, independent family tribes fighting for natural resources? Wasn’t the UN already set up to be the arbiter of these changes?
- AbrahamParangi 3y ago
  Turns out I didn't even need to wait for China to start a war.
  - jonhohle 3y ago
    tl;dr - if the shoe fits… As an American, I’m saying there would be as much of a war between Taiwan and China as there was between Hong Kong and China if there was not external intervention. China would just roll in and declare they’re in charge. There would be a few weeks or maybe even months of possibly violent protests, but nothing that would be considered a war. It would suck for the people of Taiwan in the same way things suck for anyone taking advantage of unenforced authority. Should we side with Taiwan because China is bad and anything that hurts them is good? That’s a very simplistic and immature position. Why not just go into China and “liberate” all the people. Why does Taiwan get special treatment? I’m no fan of the PRC, but there are a million other strategies to taking them on that avoid massive death tolls over land that is internationally recognized as belonging to them. US nation building doesn’t work when the adversary is significantly less capable than the US. I have no faith that it would work better against China. By doesn’t work, I mean the “protected” people take more losses than had the US not “helped” and in the worst cases it fosters direct blow back by newly formed adversaries.

This analysis applies equally to all kinds of incredibly destructive revanchism, such as Nazi Germany's claims on the Sudentenland or Russia's claims on Ukraine. It has never once been righteous.

jonhohle 3y ago

Ukraine is recognized by the UN as independent from Russia since 1945. It’s also not a stretch to consider NATO expansion as one of the primary motivators for the current conflict. Of course there’s no justification for Nazi Germany’s expansion, but it’s not as simple as saying Axis Bad/Allies Good. The environment that led to Nazi Germany was, among other things, set in motion by US involvement in WWI. All of this land dispute and conflict was not unfamiliar to the constitutional framers 150 years before all of that happened, which is why non-interventionism was an early ideal for the US. When you take a country to someone else’s war there will always be unintended consequences. Edit to add: what legitimate claim to sovereignty does Taiwan have? Because they say so, it’s true? Try taking a piece of land you own and succeeding from the country where it resides and then tell us all how it goes. I have no interest in supporting the PRC. I’m just trying to view things apolitically. What right does Taiwan have to be liberated from China more than Hong Kong or even areas that were never under any dispute? IMHO, Hong Kong had more right to independence, but that right was achieved through colonialism, not their own resistance. I’d love to see the PRC evaporate today, but that’s not the reality of the situation. And again, IMHO, the best way for Taiwan to achieve its independence is to become ungovernable and too politically and finically costly for China. That’s a tall order, but also something to think about when sending money to the PRC for every item that says Made in China on it. Also edited to add: at what point would you consider political borders immutable? It’s far less common since 1945, but prior to that borders were pretty malleable. Should the US give Alaska back to Russia? Should Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico, Texas, etc. be their own independent systems again? Israel be dismantled and then mantled again as we go back through history restoring old borders until we are all nomadic, independent family tribes fighting for natural resources? Wasn’t the UN already set up to be the arbiter of these changes?

AbrahamParangi 3y ago
Turns out I didn't even need to wait for China to start a war.
- jonhohle 3y ago
  tl;dr - if the shoe fits… As an American, I’m saying there would be as much of a war between Taiwan and China as there was between Hong Kong and China if there was not external intervention. China would just roll in and declare they’re in charge. There would be a few weeks or maybe even months of possibly violent protests, but nothing that would be considered a war. It would suck for the people of Taiwan in the same way things suck for anyone taking advantage of unenforced authority. Should we side with Taiwan because China is bad and anything that hurts them is good? That’s a very simplistic and immature position. Why not just go into China and “liberate” all the people. Why does Taiwan get special treatment? I’m no fan of the PRC, but there are a million other strategies to taking them on that avoid massive death tolls over land that is internationally recognized as belonging to them. US nation building doesn’t work when the adversary is significantly less capable than the US. I have no faith that it would work better against China. By doesn’t work, I mean the “protected” people take more losses than had the US not “helped” and in the worst cases it fosters direct blow back by newly formed adversaries.