Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If they are different in most circumstances, then why not compare it with an example that is more similar, which is the situation before the Ukraine war.
Before the Ukraine war, we also talked about a potential invasion. France and Germany thought they could avoid war, while the USA and UK was warning about a potential invasion. When the invasion finally happened, then France and Germany decided to back Ukraine and condemn Russia. I don't expect the outcome to be any different if China invades Taiwan.
Fair enough, though I can't agree on the outcome being any different. The European economy will be in shambles if it tries to orchestrate the same level of sanctions on China while also keeping sanctions on Russia. Not to mention the already reduced weapons stockpile. Probably get a lot of "we support you in spirit."
Fair enough, though I can't agree on the outcome being any different. The European economy will be in shambles if it tries to orchestrate the same level of sanctions on China while also keeping sanctions on Russia. Not to mention the already reduced weapons stockpile. Probably get a lot of "we support you in spirit."
I agree that it is impossible to orchestrate the same level of sanctions on China. That is why I have kept arguing that the USA won't respond in the same way as in Ukraine.
If China tries to invade, I expect the USA will prevent Taiwan from being blockaded by sinking Chinese ships that go to the deep waters east of Taiwan. The USA will also blockade China at chokepoints. Not to stop all trade, but to stop trade that is not permitted by the USA. This will obviously make nations like Iran angry, so Iran might see it as an opportunity to invade Iraq.
Europe won't do much in this scenario, especially if the war in Ukraine is not finished. But, I don't expect China to invade next year, so the war in Ukraine is probably finished by then.
You were just talking about a tiny deconfliction zone?
"The US presence in the base was agreed upon with Russia, and is part of a 55km (34 miles) “deconfliction zone”, which US and allied forces patrol. Russia has since called on the US to withdraw from al-Tanf."
.
Did you forget to mention the other area in the link?
Some US forces are still located in the SDF-controlled areas of northeastern Syria, such as Hassakeh and Raqqa provinces.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon
I will, because being annexed by a hostile nation is much worse than being destroyed. Especially in this case, where Libya wasn't destroyed directly by the USA but by the civil war that followed the war. A country that is destroyed can rebuild, a country that is forcibly annexed by a hostile nation cannot.
.
Hawaii was hostilely annexed, so was Texas. Would have been better to destroy them or annex them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon
That is true, and China has gotten pretty powerful. So the excuse that it was forced to invade Taiwan because it got provocated won't fly.
...and they haven't invaded. US interference and provocations have failed to this point.
Did you forget to mention the other area in the link?
Some US forces are still located in the SDF-controlled areas of northeastern Syria, such as Hassakeh and Raqqa provinces.
They say SDF controlled, not US controlled. Also, there are more Russian troops in Syria than American.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ticking
Hawaii was hostilely annexed, so was Texas. Would have been better to destroy them or annex them?
Texas wanted to be annexed by the USA and Hawaii was taken in a coup, similar to Crimea.
I am also only talking about modern wars. If you go far enough back, then the connection between citizens and the state was weak, so it didn't matter that much who they were ruled by. In modern states, it is much worse as the hostile country try to force its own ways on the country destroying the country in the process.
A country that is destroyed can recover. There is a lot of examples of that, for instance Germany after WW2. However, if they get forcefully occupied by a hostile nation like Poland did, then they are denied the opportunity to recover or govern themselves. which is a worse fate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ticking
...and they haven't invaded.
I said that the quote "we were forced to invade because they provoked us" is Hitleresque. If China doesn't invade, then I don't care what China thinks about Taiwan.
i think all of you are fooled.
here is what US wants:
sell weapons for $
it's really tricky though
1. war breaks out, tw will have no $ no matter what
2. peaceful reunite, obviously no $ since china do not buy weapons from the US
3. peaceful status quo/92 consensus, not enough demand
so the only way is:
create a scenario where it's a hostile status quo yet never reach the point of hot war. That way, there is maximum profit for selling old stockpile/design weapons
you got to admit that's hard work, got it hand it to the capitalism at its finest.
They say SDF controlled, not US controlled. Also, there are more Russian troops in Syria than American.
Russian troops are invited. US Troops are not invited/wanted. Big difference.
Truth is, special forces and contractors aren't in the US official count, and there are no telling how many of those are lurking about, in a country we have been told to leave.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon
T
Texas wanted to be annexed by the USA and Hawaii was taken in a coup, similar to Crimea.
I am also only talking about modern wars. If you go far enough back, then the connection between citizens and the state was weak, so it didn't matter that much who they were ruled by. In modern states, it is much worse as the hostile country try to force its own ways on the country destroying the country in the process.
.
So now has to be in what you consider the modern era, and coups don't count either. You are putting a lot of restrictions on what can be included. Reminds me of gerrymandered districts here in the US.
I'm still going with destruction of a nation with deaths of it's citizens is not less bad that an invading nation taking it over. Iraq, 100's of thousands dead, some say a million with all factors considered. All excused with a wrist slap beause it isn't "As bad as" annexing.
China has a lot of catching up to do!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon
I said that the quote "we were forced to invade because they provoked us" is Hitleresque. If China doesn't invade, then I don't care what China thinks about Taiwan.
I don't think anything is Hitleresque.
US intentionally trying to put China in that a position whereby they are pressured to do something. So far that continues to fail.
Taiwan is part of One China and most all the world agrees with that.
Russian troops are invited. US Troops are not invited/wanted.
The USAs troops are invited by the SDF.
Quote:
So now has to be in what you consider the modern era, and coups don't count either. You are putting a lot of restrictions on what can be included.
Yes, and I do that because I am talking about a specific type of scenario, which is a hostile country invading and annexing another country. Examples of this is USSR annexing Eastern Europe, Japan annexing Korea and Indonesia annexing East Timor.
That is the scenario that I say is worse than being destroyed, I am not talking about coups and I am not talking about wars 200 years ago. The reason it is worse is because the country get destroyed by the forced occupation, but unlike countries like Germany and Japan it has no opportunity to recover.
Quote:
I don't think anything is Hitleresque. US intentionally trying to put China in that a position whereby they are pressured to do something.
I completely disagree. We should learn from history and call out fascists that think invasion is legitimate if their country got provoked.
Laughable but yet it is the flimsy excuse we apparently will utilize to stay in a country where we have been told to leave. Maybe China should form a small group called the TDF and use that as a legit reason to set up shop in Taiwan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon
Yes, and I do that because I am talking about a specific type of scenario, which is a hostile country invading and annexing another country. Examples of this is USSR annexing Eastern Europe, Japan annexing Korea and Indonesia annexing East Timor.
That is the scenario that I say is worse than being destroyed, I am not talking about coups and I am not talking about wars 200 years ago. The reason it is worse is because the country get destroyed by the forced occupation, but unlike countries like Germany and Japan it has no opportunity to recover.
Why exaggerate so much and say 200 years ago when Hawaii was much less, and only about 17 years difference between those events and Japan/Korea?
It is ONE China (According to most of the world), so other country doesn't really apply.
I'd still say 100's of thousands to a million dead in Iraq is enough to prove this point isn't valid.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon
I completely disagree. We should learn from history and call out fascists that think invasion is legitimate if their country got provoked.
Only ok if it is across the board, which it hasn't' been.
Laughable but yet it is the flimsy excuse we apparently will utilize to stay in a country where we have been told to leave. Maybe China should form a small group called the TDF and use that as a legit reason to set up shop in Taiwan.
Now you are moving the goalposts. You claimed the USA weren't invited when they clearly were invited by SDF. And you are even further away from your original argument that a military base in Syria is some horrible offense done by the USA that can be compared with an invasion of Taiwan.
Just like Russia in Eastern Europe, China would definitely support a civil war in Taiwan, but they are not going to just setup a base, they will use the opportunity to annex Taiwan. The reason they don't do it, is not because they don't want to do it, but because it is impossible to organize anything more than a few militias that would immediately get arrested.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ticking
Why exaggerate so much and say 200 years ago when Hawaii was much less, and only about 17 years difference between those events and Japan/Korea?
Read the first part of my sentence
"I am not talking about coups and I am not talking about wars 200 years ago."
I only said it was worse than being destroyed if there was a hostile invasion to annex another country. So why are you bringing up coups and Texas that wanted to join the USA?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ticking
Only ok if it is across the board, which it hasn't' been.
We should learn from history even if it is not across the board. Going around claiming that an invasion is justified because you got provoked is Hitleresque. It's the kind of excuse expansionist dictators make to invade other countries.
Now you are moving the goalposts. You claimed the USA weren't invited when they clearly were invited by SDF. And you are even further away from your original argument that this is some horrible offense done by the USA that can be compared with an invasion of Taiwan.
.
Ridiculous and grasping at straws.
The US backs a group (Not elected) and then says that group invites them in. How about China organize a little group in Taiwan, and then claim that they invited them in? The US set the precedent, so I guess that is ok everywhere, or is that just ok for the US to do?
Correcting your mistakes isn't a deviation from the original discussion which can be conducted simultaneously.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon;65155881
Read the first part of my sentence
"[B
I am not talking about coups[/b] and I am not talking about wars 200 years ago."
I'm going to grant that the annexations aren't analogous to your point, although the Hawaiin coup is a shameful and often dismissed chapter in US history.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camlon
We should learn from history even if it is not across the board. Going around claiming that an invasion is justified because you got provoked is Hitleresque. It's the kind of excuse expansionist dictators make to invade other countries.
No, if it isn't across the board than it isn't going to fly. If the US creates license to do demolish countries, and end 100's of thousands of lives for some perceived advantage, then other countries may eventually use similar tactics when they get the ability to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
