5 ms·

Which empty, Taiwan-sized island did you have in mind?

yieldcrv 2y ago
Wyoming
baxtr 2y ago
I know, I know… But let me dream on: Tasmania could work. It has 500k people and 25k sqm. Taiwan has 25 million people on 36k sqm.
- sealeck 2y ago
  There's just the small problem that Tasmania is part of Australia?
- euroderf 2y ago
  Could we move Israel there too ? It would solve myriad problems.
- boffinAudio 2y ago
  Tasmania was already the site of the modern Western worlds first genocide - an event which went on to inspire many more attempted genocides by Western powers, including some of the worst we have seen so far. You want to bring more suffering and misery to that part of the world? This is imperialist thinking. Please try to understand the harm you are doing to the world by proferring this view, even in jest. The idea that you can just 'take' an island to solve some imperial problem is heinous. If you can just 'take' Tasmania for the hell of it, why not just 'give' Taiwan to China, and end the issue entirely? (/s) By 'taking' Tasmania, you are behaving no better than the perceived view of China in 'taking' Taiwan.
  - libertine 2y ago
    Unlike the current Autocratic regimes, like Putin's Russia, or Xi's China, the "Western Worlds" - whatever that means - don't hide or rewrite their History. You haven't seen any "Western" leader try to justify Hitler's invasion of Poland, and the start of WW2, by blaming Poland and apologizing for Hitler, like Putin did... conveniently so, perhaps because of the role the USSR played in it? Which Russia likes to omit, you know, their alliance with Nazi Germany.. WW2 started in 1939, not in 1941 as Russia claims. Or maybe because Russia is now using the same false casus beli the Nazis used to invade Poland, so Putin needs to legitimize Hitler's claims and grievances? Or perhaps China attempts to hide its own atrocities? So that whole "imperialist thinking" propaganda logic seems very flawed, and more like an excuse the new autocratic regimes are using to expand their borders by force, and be themselves imperialistic. The good whole "so only you could be imperialistic, and now we can't?! Hypocrisy!!!", disregarding that in their History, they were also imperialistic at some point too. The world moved on in the meantime, you know, since the founding of the UN and such. It's much easier to blame the autocracy's shortcomings on the success of others, by framing everything as "Western Imperialism", and the forced expansionism of autocracies as a "multipolar world".
    - linearrust 2y ago
      > Unlike the current Autocratic regimes, like Putin's Russia, or Xi's China, the "Western Worlds" - whatever that means - don't hide or rewrite their History. Sure we do. All the time. > WW2 started in 1939, not in 1941 as Russia claims. Or it started in 1931 according to the chinese. > So that whole "imperialist thinking" propaganda logic seems very flawed, and more like an excuse the new autocratic regimes are using to expand their borders by force, and be themselves imperialistic. Because the west hasn't expanded by force? > The world moved on in the meantime, you know, since the founding of the UN and such. And that's why the western world hasn't invaded dozens of countries since. Right? > and the forced expansionism of autocracies as a "multipolar world". So you are defending the unipolar world? The same unipolar world maintained by force? It's hard to take you seriously when your points defending 'the west' actuals exposes all the evil the west has done.
      - libertine 2y ago
        > Sure we do. All the time. I gave you a few examples, please do share instances of rewriting the History of the "Western Worlds" - again, whatever that means. But I have a feeling you're soon going to find yourself in a pickle. > Or it started in 1931 according to the chinese. Rightfully so, the difference was that the Chinese weren't allies of Japan invading other countries... Like the USSR allied with Nazi Germany, and be an active part on the hostilities and genocide, right? It's like the same thing Germany denied WW2 ever happened. > Because the west hasn't expanded by force? When? Where? Who? Tell me a "Western Country" that expanded by Force since the founding of the UN - because, you know, that was kind of the point of it. > And that's why the western world hasn't invaded dozens of countries since. Right? Of course it has, or do you think just because of the founding of the UN countries got a green card to commit genocide and invade neighbors? Like Serbia, or Saddam's Iraq? > So you are defending the unipolar world? The same unipolar world maintained by force? Where did I say I defend a unipolar world? I'm saying the world is already multipolar - it's like all of a sudden the last 30+ years of global trade, alliances and investments never happened. It's especially funny coming from China, or from Russia who thrived with this multipolar world.
        2y ago
  - Rinzler89 2y ago
    >Tasmania was already the site of the modern Western worlds first genocide Why not specify it was the British Empire and instead move the guilt to some vague collective "west", which is a relatively modern concept from the cold war, which didn't exist back then?
    - helpfulContrib 2y ago
      [dead]

Wyoming

I know, I know… But let me dream on: Tasmania could work. It has 500k people and 25k sqm. Taiwan has 25 million people on 36k sqm.

sealeck 2y ago
There's just the small problem that Tasmania is part of Australia?
euroderf 2y ago
Could we move Israel there too ? It would solve myriad problems.
boffinAudio 2y ago
Tasmania was already the site of the modern Western worlds first genocide - an event which went on to inspire many more attempted genocides by Western powers, including some of the worst we have seen so far. You want to bring more suffering and misery to that part of the world? This is imperialist thinking. Please try to understand the harm you are doing to the world by proferring this view, even in jest. The idea that you can just 'take' an island to solve some imperial problem is heinous. If you can just 'take' Tasmania for the hell of it, why not just 'give' Taiwan to China, and end the issue entirely? (/s) By 'taking' Tasmania, you are behaving no better than the perceived view of China in 'taking' Taiwan.
- libertine 2y ago
  Unlike the current Autocratic regimes, like Putin's Russia, or Xi's China, the "Western Worlds" - whatever that means - don't hide or rewrite their History. You haven't seen any "Western" leader try to justify Hitler's invasion of Poland, and the start of WW2, by blaming Poland and apologizing for Hitler, like Putin did... conveniently so, perhaps because of the role the USSR played in it? Which Russia likes to omit, you know, their alliance with Nazi Germany.. WW2 started in 1939, not in 1941 as Russia claims. Or maybe because Russia is now using the same false casus beli the Nazis used to invade Poland, so Putin needs to legitimize Hitler's claims and grievances? Or perhaps China attempts to hide its own atrocities? So that whole "imperialist thinking" propaganda logic seems very flawed, and more like an excuse the new autocratic regimes are using to expand their borders by force, and be themselves imperialistic. The good whole "so only you could be imperialistic, and now we can't?! Hypocrisy!!!", disregarding that in their History, they were also imperialistic at some point too. The world moved on in the meantime, you know, since the founding of the UN and such. It's much easier to blame the autocracy's shortcomings on the success of others, by framing everything as "Western Imperialism", and the forced expansionism of autocracies as a "multipolar world".
  - linearrust 2y ago
    > Unlike the current Autocratic regimes, like Putin's Russia, or Xi's China, the "Western Worlds" - whatever that means - don't hide or rewrite their History. Sure we do. All the time. > WW2 started in 1939, not in 1941 as Russia claims. Or it started in 1931 according to the chinese. > So that whole "imperialist thinking" propaganda logic seems very flawed, and more like an excuse the new autocratic regimes are using to expand their borders by force, and be themselves imperialistic. Because the west hasn't expanded by force? > The world moved on in the meantime, you know, since the founding of the UN and such. And that's why the western world hasn't invaded dozens of countries since. Right? > and the forced expansionism of autocracies as a "multipolar world". So you are defending the unipolar world? The same unipolar world maintained by force? It's hard to take you seriously when your points defending 'the west' actuals exposes all the evil the west has done.
    - libertine 2y ago
      > Sure we do. All the time. I gave you a few examples, please do share instances of rewriting the History of the "Western Worlds" - again, whatever that means. But I have a feeling you're soon going to find yourself in a pickle. > Or it started in 1931 according to the chinese. Rightfully so, the difference was that the Chinese weren't allies of Japan invading other countries... Like the USSR allied with Nazi Germany, and be an active part on the hostilities and genocide, right? It's like the same thing Germany denied WW2 ever happened. > Because the west hasn't expanded by force? When? Where? Who? Tell me a "Western Country" that expanded by Force since the founding of the UN - because, you know, that was kind of the point of it. > And that's why the western world hasn't invaded dozens of countries since. Right? Of course it has, or do you think just because of the founding of the UN countries got a green card to commit genocide and invade neighbors? Like Serbia, or Saddam's Iraq? > So you are defending the unipolar world? The same unipolar world maintained by force? Where did I say I defend a unipolar world? I'm saying the world is already multipolar - it's like all of a sudden the last 30+ years of global trade, alliances and investments never happened. It's especially funny coming from China, or from Russia who thrived with this multipolar world.
      - 2y ago
- Rinzler89 2y ago
  >Tasmania was already the site of the modern Western worlds first genocide Why not specify it was the British Empire and instead move the guilt to some vague collective "west", which is a relatively modern concept from the cold war, which didn't exist back then?
  - helpfulContrib 2y ago
    [dead]