4 ms·

> China is now participating in hybrid warfare against Europe Geez, I'm glad you're not war minister. It's a Chinese registered ship with a Russian captain. I

> China is now participating in hybrid warfare against Europe Geez, I'm glad you're not war minister. It's a Chinese registered ship with a Russian captain. If a terrorist crashes a truck with Portuguese plates into the US embassy in Berlin, would that mean Portugal's declared war against the USA?

drewcoo 2y ago
> war minister Due to an earlier generation's newspeak, that's "defense," not "war."
- Arnt 2y ago
  Are you sure about that? I happened to notice that at least in some cases, the change of terminology happened roughly when it became clear that offensive war was a losing proposition in terms of money and resources. I suspect that as invading the neighbours became financially irrational, the cool heads that tend to survive in management shifted their stand from mixed offense/defense to just defense.
  - mitjam 2y ago
    Yes Mr Pistorius is „Verteidigungsminister“ as in defence, and it‘s called that way since 1955. Not that hard to find out.
    - Arnt 2y ago
      Germany's a good example. In 1914 the ministry was called Kriegsministerium, and an invasion wasn't seen as a necessarily bad idea. I think it already was, but at the time, you could argue in Berlin that a country that started a war could benefit from that war, if executed well. That kind of argument wouldn't make people doubt your judgment yet. A few years later it was clear that offense was necessarily a resource loss. Someone who wanted to build a career as a civil servant might then see a defense ministry as a viable option, but not any sort of offensive war. Offense was clearly not viable, and therefore not a good basis for budget allocations, and therefore the good career move for the civil servants was to focus the ministries entirely on defense.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
Larrikin 2y ago
[flagged]
- Octoth0rpe 2y ago
  They're not asking for Russia to get the benefit of the doubt, they're asking (reasonably IMO) for China.
- jajko 2y ago
  A well-earned result of decades of their hard work, although this is about china-registered vessel
Arnt 2y ago
[flagged]
- netsharc 2y ago
  Yes, this is what I'm saying, but with less words. But look around (even in these comments) and look at how many people are thinking "Chinese act of war!!!11!!"
  - Arnt 2y ago
    Yes… A lot of them really need have it spelt out, twice, in large clear type.
  - jstummbillig 2y ago
    > Yes, this is what I'm saying, but with less words. That's really not all you are saying, and the difference is important. Maybe not to you, though.
    - netsharc 2y ago
      Then, elaborate please, Jochen, what's the important difference?
    - PhasmaFelis 2y ago
      As far as I can tell, you're both saying the same thing: that registering a ship in China does not mean China is responsible for that ship's actions. If you've got a different point to make, please make it clear.
- xbar 2y ago
  Well said.
- aldous 2y ago
  Yes, good points. It's not a wild stretch of the imagination that Mr P and gang are actively trying to drag China into the Ukraine conflict and I'd imagine Beijing is pretty pissed off today about being (ostensibly) implicated in this sabotage. So the usual underhand scheming from the Kremlin imho, don't fall for it. China and Russia's relationship is very complicated of course and there's many a convincingly analysis out there that predicts conflict between them in the near future (an example flashpoint being Siberia).
mschuster91 2y ago
> If a terrorist crashes a truck with Portuguese plates into the US embassy in Berlin, would that mean Portugal's declared war against the USA? At the very least, the cooperation of Portugal's authorities would be expected to determine how the truck ended up being used for the attack, and if anyone knew about how the vehicle was to be used. I expect the same amount of cooperation from China as the flag state.
- thewileyone 2y ago
  By this logic, United and American Airlines were complicit in 9/11 as well.
bungle 2y ago
It was the second Chinese registered ship with Russian crew within a short period of time. A year ago this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newnew_Polar_Bear https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newnew_Polar_Bear cut the gas pipe and another communications line. I am sure if the cowardly Russians ever did this to USA, it would cause a much bigger drama and retaliation wave, and China would take the hit as well.
mitjam 2y ago
True but China can support or not support investigations and prosecution. After all they are the ones who can exercise their sovereign rights on ships sailing under their flag. I‘m really curious and open minded how this plays out but sadly would be surprised if China would support the EU in this case.

drewcoo 2y ago

> war minister Due to an earlier generation's newspeak, that's "defense," not "war."

Arnt 2y ago
Are you sure about that? I happened to notice that at least in some cases, the change of terminology happened roughly when it became clear that offensive war was a losing proposition in terms of money and resources. I suspect that as invading the neighbours became financially irrational, the cool heads that tend to survive in management shifted their stand from mixed offense/defense to just defense.
- mitjam 2y ago
  Yes Mr Pistorius is „Verteidigungsminister“ as in defence, and it‘s called that way since 1955. Not that hard to find out.
  - Arnt 2y ago
    Germany's a good example. In 1914 the ministry was called Kriegsministerium, and an invasion wasn't seen as a necessarily bad idea. I think it already was, but at the time, you could argue in Berlin that a country that started a war could benefit from that war, if executed well. That kind of argument wouldn't make people doubt your judgment yet. A few years later it was clear that offense was necessarily a resource loss. Someone who wanted to build a career as a civil servant might then see a defense ministry as a viable option, but not any sort of offensive war. Offense was clearly not viable, and therefore not a good basis for budget allocations, and therefore the good career move for the civil servants was to focus the ministries entirely on defense.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

Larrikin 2y ago

[flagged]

Octoth0rpe 2y ago
They're not asking for Russia to get the benefit of the doubt, they're asking (reasonably IMO) for China.
jajko 2y ago
A well-earned result of decades of their hard work, although this is about china-registered vessel

Arnt 2y ago

[flagged]

netsharc 2y ago
Yes, this is what I'm saying, but with less words. But look around (even in these comments) and look at how many people are thinking "Chinese act of war!!!11!!"
- Arnt 2y ago
  Yes… A lot of them really need have it spelt out, twice, in large clear type.
- jstummbillig 2y ago
  > Yes, this is what I'm saying, but with less words. That's really not all you are saying, and the difference is important. Maybe not to you, though.
  - netsharc 2y ago
    Then, elaborate please, Jochen, what's the important difference?
  - PhasmaFelis 2y ago
    As far as I can tell, you're both saying the same thing: that registering a ship in China does not mean China is responsible for that ship's actions. If you've got a different point to make, please make it clear.
xbar 2y ago
Well said.
aldous 2y ago
Yes, good points. It's not a wild stretch of the imagination that Mr P and gang are actively trying to drag China into the Ukraine conflict and I'd imagine Beijing is pretty pissed off today about being (ostensibly) implicated in this sabotage. So the usual underhand scheming from the Kremlin imho, don't fall for it. China and Russia's relationship is very complicated of course and there's many a convincingly analysis out there that predicts conflict between them in the near future (an example flashpoint being Siberia).

mschuster91 2y ago

> If a terrorist crashes a truck with Portuguese plates into the US embassy in Berlin, would that mean Portugal's declared war against the USA? At the very least, the cooperation of Portugal's authorities would be expected to determine how the truck ended up being used for the attack, and if anyone knew about how the vehicle was to be used. I expect the same amount of cooperation from China as the flag state.

thewileyone 2y ago
By this logic, United and American Airlines were complicit in 9/11 as well.

bungle 2y ago

It was the second Chinese registered ship with Russian crew within a short period of time. A year ago this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newnew_Polar_Bear https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newnew_Polar_Bear cut the gas pipe and another communications line. I am sure if the cowardly Russians ever did this to USA, it would cause a much bigger drama and retaliation wave, and China would take the hit as well.

mitjam 2y ago

True but China can support or not support investigations and prosecution. After all they are the ones who can exercise their sovereign rights on ships sailing under their flag. I‘m really curious and open minded how this plays out but sadly would be surprised if China would support the EU in this case.