Miscellaneous News

escobar said:

CN do nothing every time US send arms to taiwan but we are supposed to believe they will really escalate because of Pelosi ? Biden should just stop Pelosi from going to taiwan but should announce a big military shipments to Taiwan just after talking with Xi: Get something real for giving up something symbolic. Unless CN can deter US from selling arms to Taiwan, all this fuss about Pelosi visit is rather amusing

Click to expand...

I couldn't say it better than @Bellum_Romanum Arms sales are of different nature than this visit. They are not an erosion of one china policy. They also don't signal support for formal Taiwanese independence.

One China policy is more than a bunch of sentences written on a paper. It is a political compromise both the USA and China agreed to. By accepting One China policy, China indefinitely deferred its reunification with Taiwan. In turn the US ended its formal relations with Taiwan and recognized the PRC. So it is not appeasement of China as some harebrained Twitter accounts are saying. One China policy involves China tolerating foreigners interacting with Taiwan as long as they don't formally recognize Taiwan. It was a massive compromise by China. Taiwanese independentism is something that emerged later. In turn, a similar compromise was reached with Taiwan too. China was okay as long as there was no attempt at formal independence. I don't think China is going to allow Taiwan, the US or its usual allies to reframe it at their will. If the other side is not willing to compromise then neither will China.

China apparently views this as a very significant erosion of One China by both Taiwan and the USA. It will calibrate its answer according to this.

KYli said:

The land of fear.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Might as well call GTA 5, America Simulator at this point..

Radar operator: SR THE ENEMY HAS LAUNCHED A MISSILE ATTACK OVER OUR BASE, IT WILL HIT US SOON
Commander: Quickly, we need to cast a vote on whatever we should defend ourselves
Commander: Also I receive a note minutes ago from our diversity officials saying that this base is too white, too male and too straight to represent our democracy, so we need to replace half of our radars operators with marginalized they/them people, today.
multi-color haired soldier: Sr the word "people" is discriminatory, it hurts the feeling of those who gender identity is a REAL WOLF or a REAL FIGHTER JET. our democracy needs more proper representation.
Commander: I didn't knew that, WAIT, ARE WE GONNA GET CANCELLED AGAIN? because I still have PSTD from the last cancelling.


Meanwhile:

ACuriousPLAFan said:

This would be a very stupid move that would only do Beijing's cause more harm than good.

Despite of what the English vegetable is, in the eyes of Beijing, she's actually much more preferable to the "Vice President" of Taiwan, who is even more vocal and pro-independence that the English Vegetable ever is.

Assassinating Tsai would only serve to rile up and galvanize Taiwanese support even further for declaring formal independence from China when Lai takes over the "presidency" of Taiwan. This ultimately breaks the status quo of which China is working so hard to preserve.

Moreover, if China really did such stupid thing, rest assured that the US-led West would jack up their propaganda machines to the eleventh, aiming the bullseye towards China and loudly broadcasting "Look at China, China assassinated Taiwan's president! China is the threat to world peace and stability! Beware if you do anything that goes against Beijing's wishes, China will come for you too!" to the world. It also becomes much easier for the US-led West to find justification in supporting Taiwan's independence (and war with China under the guise of "defending democracy and freedom").

What else can China do to defend her action in this case? There is none. And the rest of the globe would scoff at China resorting to such dirty and immoral tactics, which leads to severely damaging China's image on the world stage.

None of these would even remotely work in favor of China, and nobody in Beijing is even remotely stupid to believe that would work.

Furthermore, neither Russia wanting the Ukrainian President killed, nor Israel wanting the Supreme Leader of Iran killed. Because having them dead is only going to make present situations so much worse.

So why bother with Taiwan's "president" at all?

Click to expand...

With my tinfoil hat on... don't discount a false flag by the CIA to assassinate her and then install the current VP and egg him on to declare independence.

escobar said:

Even if PLA fear the type of kinetic weapons the US is willing to sell, they can't deter US

Click to expand...

Selling hand me down weapons is not enough to trigger an armed response. The US hasn't sunk Chinese freight shipping despite China allegedly importing fentanyl ingredients to the US for a decade.

The idea itself of giving great flexibility and equality within each unit is not a bad one in itself.

For example the Soviets experimented with abolishing military ranks, and China arguably perfected it in the Korean war. Since then, the ability for indivudal initiative is something that has benefitted the PLA in all its conflicts, and something that was further taught to Vietnam with great effect during their own struggle for national freedom.

The question is, if America has been able to achieve that type of professionalism.

There's a huge difference between delegating tasks to competent smaller units and allowing troops to rampage freely.

Within a true decentralised framework, soldiers must be patriotic and motivated, because they must be fearless against any odds.

Calling in an AC130 on a wedding party or deciding on the spot to spray a block of civilian houses with your mounted machine gun because your squad thought they saw something weird isn't "Mission command", it's just rampaging due to fear and believing yourself to be smarter than you are due to main character syndrome.

An example of creative response that actually makes an army able to beat the odds would be: the enemy controls the local air, theyre shelling you with more shells than you can throw back, they have more soldiers than you. Their missiles are raining down on your airfields and sniping your command posts. Still, your command needs you to advance and destroy the enemy. It's unfair, it's impossible, your unit won't come out of it unscathed if you'll survive at all.

Can American rank and file soldiers do this type of fighting?

Any force can be creative when they're fighting only easy battles against opponents unable to resist. What determines true toughness is if they can be practical when they're on the back foot. An army that can't deal with setbacks is just a horde.

Bellum_Romanum said:

[snip]

The Chinese government may have been less bellicose when then U.S. administration launched it's preemptive trade war, tech war etc. against China it could respond back with less emotion involved since the physical sovereignty of the country wasn't being infringed, or it's territorial integrity being breached. But the issue of Taiwan as you and I know was, is, and will be a different case. The question of response or inadequate response from the previous Chinese government or even the current one must be examined in it's proper context. Selling limited arms to Taiwan is not equal and will never be equal to a political opportunists desire to poke and test the mettle of China's core principles.

Click to expand...

That's the crux when it comes to China's geopolitical competition with the rest of the world and particularly the West.

Personally I tend to refer to Kishore Mahbubani's assessments where he judges China to be one of the coolest and most rational actors in the world stage when it comes to geopolitical contests, whether it be on trade, tech, human rights etc.

Per the professor the one thing China would act emotionally and absolutely would not hesitate to trigger a war is over Taiwan. This is something the ruling establishment at D.C. may understand, but not necessarily appreciate. The danger ofc is the US expecting Taiwan to be just like any geopolitical card game the Americans are so fond of that they can deal China akin to the trade war or the Quad/AUKUS that they can provoke a response from the Chinese just to see what that response looks like, like it doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Except with Taiwan there's only ever gonna be one response from China, and the US is still messing with that fire like it won't engulf them and the whole world with them.

Sardaukar20 said:

They never learn:
Fox News anchor and Republican nuts today: "China is bluffing".

In January 2022, CNN and Democrat nuts: "Putin is bluffing".

The US thinks that geopolitics and war is a game of poker. But China and Russia don't bluff. They do make mistakes, but they don't gamble with state security and territorial integrity, no matter how weak their position is. These are non-negotiables.

If the US still don't believe, they can recall what China did in the Korean War. Or what Russia is doing now in Ukraine.

Click to expand...

Regarding Kasparov...

4channer said:

Regarding Kasparov...

Click to expand...

Isn't Bobby Fischer the cunt who congratulated "Mr. Bin Laden for attacking the Jewnited States of America" despite being Jewish himself? What an all around stable genius.

siegecrossbow said:

Isn't Bobby Fischer the cunt who congratulated "Mr. Bin Laden for attacking the Jewnited States of America" despite being Jewish himself? What an all around stable genius.

Click to expand...

Based man