Why US will lose a war with China over Taiwan island - Page 11 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15171938
Fasces wrote:
This to me is the single biggest overriding concern - I don't want China to have undue influence within the West. But I fear that the West, fearful of losing its hegemony, will push for an aggressively antagonistic relationship and kickstart a new cold war. End of the day, in the next 50 years, I don't think China has any aspirations of hegemony beyond the first island chain, and I'm OK with that if it avoids conflict.


I'd be ok with that too.

Tainari88 wrote:Rancid, you don't understand imperialism yet well with this statement.


I don't understand this conclusion you've come to.
#15171941
Rancid wrote:I'd be ok with that too.



I don't understand this conclusion you've come to.


You don't get why i hate imperialism with everything I got? It is because it is about dominating and controlling places so you can live off of them and make them powerless in the process. It is a form of enslaving people and denying them their freedom. If human societies can't stop with that behavior? We are really in bad shape Rancid.

Got to get over the need to control nation-states in order to enslave them. That mentality? Has caused such untold grief to the human condition that it is going to live in infamy in human history for all time.

Everything bad and satan like in behavior comes from that mentality. All of it.

If you can't get over imperialism? Humans are gonna perish. Guaranteed.
#15171942
Tainari88 wrote:
You don't get why i hate imperialism with everything I got? It is because it is about dominating and controlling places so you can live off of them and make them powerless in the process. It is a form of enslaving people and denying them their freedom. If human societies can't stop with that behavior? We are really in bad shape Rancid.

Got to get over the need to control nation-states in order to enslave them. That mentality? Has caused such untold grief to the human condition that it is going to live in infamy in human history for all time.

Everything bad and satan like in behavior comes from that mentality. All of it.

If you can't get over imperialism? Humans are gonna perish. Guaranteed.


Yea, I understand that.
#15171945
What could happen @Rancid is this:

Chinese single dudes who can't find wives in the PRC and they go to Cuba to sell a bunch of bicycles to the Cubans and wind up doing this with Cuban women. But, if you can't dance Merengue and he can? How dominicano are you? Lol. I love teasing you Rancid. Buenas noches.

#15171948
Tainari88 wrote:You don't get why i hate imperialism with everything I got? It is because it is about dominating and controlling places so you can live off of them and make them powerless in the process. It is a form of enslaving people and denying them their freedom. If human societies can't stop with that behavior? We are really in bad shape Rancid.

Got to get over the need to control nation-states in order to enslave them. That mentality? Has caused such untold grief to the human condition that it is going to live in infamy in human history for all time.

Everything bad and satan like in behavior comes from that mentality. All of it.

If you can't get over imperialism? Humans are gonna perish. Guaranteed.

The only way to get rid of imperialism is to get rid of the competition between countries and the existential threats countries pose to each other.

If the US didn't partake in imperialism and the USSR did, the USSR may have won the Cold War. If hundreds of years ago France and Spain set up overseas colonies and Britain chose not to then it's possible France or Spain could have gained enough extra wealth and power to defeat Britain militarily. This was a time when countries went to war constantly, and men like Napoleon ruled.

A wolf doesn't kill and eat a rabbit because a wolf is mean or cruel, it does it to survive.

The US and China pose real threats to each other, and they're competing over the same resources for power and control to make their countries more secure and prosperous. The US doesn't blow up Arabs in the middle-east because they hate Muslims, they do it to control access to oil resources, because their entire economy and military runs on oil, and if they left the middle-east alone the Russians and Chinese would fill the vacuum and threaten to control much of the world's oil resources, and could weaponize it against the US via oil embargos just as OPEC did in the 1973 oil crisis. Running an economy and a military on $20 a barrel can ravage a country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis
#15171959
Unthinking Majority wrote:The only way to get rid of imperialism is to get rid of the competition between countries and the existential threats countries pose to each other.

If the US didn't partake in imperialism and the USSR did, the USSR may have won the Cold War. If hundreds of years ago France and Spain set up overseas colonies and Britain chose not to then it's possible France or Spain could have gained enough extra wealth and power to defeat Britain militarily. This was a time when countries went to war constantly, and men like Napoleon ruled.

A wolf doesn't kill and eat a rabbit because a wolf is mean or cruel, it does it to survive.

The US and China pose real threats to each other, and they're competing over the same resources for power and control to make their countries more secure and prosperous. The US doesn't blow up Arabs in the middle-east because they hate Muslims, they do it to control access to oil resources, because their entire economy and military runs on oil, and if they left the middle-east alone the Russians and Chinese would fill the vacuum and threaten to control much of the world's oil resources, and could weaponize it against the US via oil embargos just as OPEC did in the 1973 oil crisis. Running an economy and a military on $20 a barrel can ravage a country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis


Unthinking, we are beyond the past types of imperialism. We are into the nuclear age. If you think survival is about that kind of aggression then we as a human species are doomed.

It is as this quote says. Einstein the socialist said:

"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war. The very prevention of war requires more faith, courage and resolution than are needed to prepare for war."

— In a letter to Congressman Robert Hale, 1946; later published in Einstein on Peace, 1988

"I look upon myself as a man. Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind."

— To The Saturday Evening Post, October 1929

"What is the meaning of human life, or of organic life altogether? To answer this question at all implies a religion. Is there any sense then, you ask, in putting it? I answer, the man who regards his own life and that of his fellow creatures as meaningless is not merely unfortunate but almost disqualified for life."

— From The World As I See It, 1949

What does this mean here? What I highlighted in yellow Unthinking.

It is not about survival. They have enough to eat, educations, water, transportation, medicine, etc. relative to other nations who lack basics. Mexico has workers getting paid very low salaries. It is extremely hard.

It is not about surviving. It is the elites wanting MORE. MORE and MORE. And not being satisfied. Why must they continue to want more than what is enough for the most humble of people? A life were the basics are covered and you have freedom to become your best potential is ENOUGH. No need to enslave others with bad class systems and wanting to be better and be dominant or you can't exist. Learn to co-exist and don't compete. Cooperate and SHARE. Learn what five year olds have to learn to do in kindergarten. Share the damn toys and respect the rights of the others. Because dominating it all is not fun for anyone.

Simple. ;)
#15171961
Unthinking Majority wrote:The US and China pose real threats to each other, and they're competing over the same resources for power and control to make their countries more secure and prosperous. The US doesn't blow up Arabs in the middle-east because they hate Muslims, they do it to control access to oil resources, because their entire economy and military runs on oil, and if they left the middle-east alone the Russians and Chinese would fill the vacuum and threaten to control much of the world's oil resources, and could weaponize it against the US via oil embargos just as OPEC did in the 1973 oil crisis. Running an economy and a military on $20 a barrel can ravage a country. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis


It's amazing how easily you justify American atrocities as 'realpolitik' while condemning Chinese ones as 'assaults on morality and human rights' and 'the evil intent of China'. :roll:
#15171965
Tainari88 wrote:What does this mean here? What I highlighted in yellow Unthinking.

It is not about survival. They have enough to eat, educations, water, transportation, medicine, etc. relative to other nations who lack basics. Mexico has workers getting paid very low salaries. It is extremely hard.

It is not about surviving. It is the elites wanting MORE. MORE and MORE. And not being satisfied. Why must they continue to want more than what is enough for the most humble of people? A life were the basics are covered and you have freedom to become your best potential is ENOUGH. No need to enslave others with bad class systems and wanting to be better and be dominant or you can't exist. Learn to co-exist and don't compete. Cooperate and SHARE. Learn what five year olds have to learn to do in kindergarten. Share the damn toys and respect the rights of the others. Because dominating it all is not fun for anyone.

Simple. ;)

Well you're telling me how you wish it to be, how it would be best, but i'm telling you how it is. You're an idealist and i'm a realist, and we're both right. Like how you would say that all married couples should remain faithful, and I'd say yes but some people will always cheat.

Unfortunately we haven't learned how to fully cooperate yet. Competition has been the case of all human history, and it's the case between all living things since the beginning of time. It takes a great amount of thought and ingenuity to break the laws of nature. Humans lived on the ground forever until they invented the airplane and learned to fly, and then went to the moon. We obviously haven't been smart enough to solve these social problems yet. Like asking an ancient Egyptian to build an airplane, this is an extremely complex problem.
#15172004
Unthinking Majority wrote:Well you're telling me how you wish it to be, how it would be best, but i'm telling you how it is. You're an idealist and i'm a realist, and we're both right. Like how you would say that all married couples should remain faithful, and I'd say yes but some people will always cheat.

Unfortunately we haven't learned how to fully cooperate yet. Competition has been the case of all human history, and it's the case between all living things since the beginning of time. It takes a great amount of thought and ingenuity to break the laws of nature. Humans lived on the ground forever until they invented the airplane and learned to fly, and then went to the moon. We obviously haven't been smart enough to solve these social problems yet. Like asking an ancient Egyptian to build an airplane, this is an extremely complex problem.


You should read the bestseller that Rutger Bregman wrote recently. He basically says the competition model is not natural at all or inevitable. It is learned. Cooperation is learned behavior too. It is really about what has to happen for the human race to not become extinct. I can tell you right now? Competing and more empire is not the answer.

It is extinction. Guaranteed. The Chinese start consuming and trashing the planet at the same rate as the USA has done? It is game over for all of us. India in 27 years will have a market as big as the USA's in terms of purchasing power. If India also wants American standard of middle class styles as the model to follow. Guess what? Environmental disaster. Competition imitating a model that is unsustainable for the entire world is not smart and anti-productive.

My role on this message board is not to back the USA government. I won't ever do that in a million years. If someone thinks I am going to back the USA government on this message board? Then they will be waiting till hell freezes over.

I won't back a government that is abusive, contaminating, unjust, and full of lies and waste. If you want me to do that? It ain't gonna happen.

I live in the Americas. The day the USA government sells my country to the PRC to have the PRC forgive some debts of theirs? And the PRC invades and tells us to speak Mandarin and shoots our people in the head for wanting to fly our flag or be an independent nation? Then I will deal with the PRC. So far? It is not the PRC doing the bullshit abuse. It is the USA.

So for all of you who want me to be letting the USA get away with abusive shit in Latin American and the Caribbean? On this message board? I will not do it.

I never will!
#15172065
Tainari88 wrote:You should read the bestseller that Rutger Bregman wrote recently. He basically says the competition model is not natural at all or inevitable. It is learned. Cooperation is learned behavior too. It is really about what has to happen for the human race to not become extinct. I can tell you right now? Competing and more empire is not the answer.

I'm saying competition in general is natural. We compete for grades, compete for jobs, compete for mates. We spend most of our lives competing every day. All plants and animals compete against each other for food, shelter, mates, etc. Competition is natural and in a way healthy because it gives strong incentive for people to improve themselves to the utmost and to achieve great things in life.

The problem is that there's healthy competition and unhealthy competition. The US and Britain have all their businesses compete against each other, and this is a friendly competition. However, if through competing companies exploit and destroy poor foreign countries then that is unhealthy and undesirable, and so the system needs to be changed to protect the exploited.

I agree that imperialism is bad and wrong. But it isn't often the countries who are at fault in the grand scheme, it's the international system that creates the need for the competition that is the main fault which needs to change. I recommend all countries follow the UN Charter and there be a real enforcement mechanism to ensure compliance.

I admire and agree with your fighting for the rights of exploited Latin countries. We all need to fight for the right of self-determination for everyone in the world. I would never tell you to stop. My point is that we need to understand why the exploitation is happening in the first place in order to change it. There will always be bad and greedy people, you can't stop human nature but you can create a system that stops these people from doing bad things and go unpunished for it.

The UN is a good start, but it's a flawed institution.
#15172080
China can pound the crap out of Taiwan with land based long range missiles. However, in an all out war, China cannot move ships across the Taiwan Strait without being seriously damaged or sunk by anti shipping missiles, including US Harpoon and Taiwan's own anti-ship missiles. So like, its hard to conquer a country without landing troops. What's China's plan B? Paratroops? :lol:
#15172082
Scamp wrote:China can pound the crap out of Taiwan with land based long range missiles. However, in an all out war, China cannot move ships across the Taiwan Strait without being seriously damaged or sunk by anti shipping missiles, including US Harpoon and Taiwan's own anti-ship missiles. So like, its hard to conquer a country without landing troops. What's China's plan B? Paratroops? :lol:


Plan A: Peaceful reunification with the island at some point in the future, under a 'one country two systems' strategy.

Plan B: The indefinite continuation of the status quo.

Plan C: A short blockade of the island to force the island into reunification negotiations under a 'one country, two systems' strategy. Plan not viable until China develops local naval supremacy (estimated around 2030-2040).

Plan D: A multifaceted invasion involving special operations (using embedded operatives to secure airports and other critical infrastructure, and take out key individuals), cyber attacks (to damage critical infrastructure), and missile attacks to disable anti-air and anti-ship systems, followed by regular cargo flights of personnel and equipment into Taiwan and a naval blockade to force the island into reunification negotiations, under a 'one country two systems' strategy.

....

Plan Not Found: Copy of the 1944 Normandy D-Day Landings and using 70 year old military doctrines. :roll:
#15172086
Fasces wrote:Plan D: A multifaceted invasion involving special operations (using embedded operatives to secure airports and other critical infrastructure, and take out key individuals), cyber attacks (to damage critical infrastructure), and missile attacks to disable anti-air and anti-ship systems, followed by regular cargo flights of personnel and equipment into Taiwan and a naval blockade to force the island into reunification negotiations, under a 'one country two systems' strategy.

This^ Excellent post.
Already having spies and Spec Ops troops in place, and then landing several civilian commercial airliners full of hundreds of hard core front line China fighters could wreak havoc on Taiwan. If they are taken by surprise by this.
And it would not surprise me if China had the ability to cyber attack and disable computerized weapons systems.
#15172087
Fasces wrote:Plan A: Peaceful reunification with the island at some point in the future, under a 'one country two systems' strategy.

Like Hong Kong? LOL.

China and the US need to leave Taiwan alone. They are an independent and sovereign country, and should be recognized by all countries as such. If they want to join China there should be a democratic referendum by the citizens of Taiwan free from foreign interference.

The UN should be dealing with an protecting Taiwan, not the US or China. Unfortunately the UN is dysfunctional and poorly designed..
#15172088
Unthinking Majority wrote:Like Hong Kong? LOL.

China and the US need to leave Taiwan alone. They are an independent and sovereign country, and should be recognized by all countries as such. If they want to join China there should be a democratic referendum by the citizens of Taiwan free from foreign interference.

The UN should be dealing with an protecting Taiwan, not the US or China. Unfortunately the UN is dysfunctional and poorly designed..


You're very descriptivist when describing US foreign policy failures, such as American interference in Cuba - you say things like "I'm not excusing or justifying, just describing how superpowers behave," to handwave criticisms.

You don't do the same with China. You moralize, and preach about what "should" be done.

Why do you hide behind descriptivism when defending US policy - to avoid having to actually defend it, despite broadly agreeing with it? Why can't we have a similar conversation about Chinese foreign policy, without going off the rails with "should"?
#15172093
Fasces wrote:You're very descriptivist when describing US foreign policy failures, such as American interference in Cuba - you say things like "I'm not excusing or justifying, just describing how superpowers behave," to handwave criticisms.

You don't do the same with China. You moralize, and preach about what "should" be done.

Why do you hide behind descriptivism when defending US policy - to avoid having to actually defend it, despite broadly agreeing with it? Why can't we have a similar conversation about Chinese foreign policy, without going off the rails with "should"?

All countries should abide by the UN charter, especially those who have signed it. Respecting international law regarding the right to sovereignty and self-determination of all countries is the key to world peace. I have said NO LESS about the US. I don't defend their imperial actions, nor have I ever. I protested the Iraq War more than just about anyone.

I'm also not saying CHINA EVIL TOWARDS TAIWAN! I understand 100% why China wants Taiwan and Hong Kong under their rule. I'm saying how about everyone follow international law, including the US, Russia, and China. If we had that there would be no wars in the middle east either. If Hong Kong and Taiwan want to join China, let them decide that themselves.

If I'm harsher on China sometimes it's because 1. they harm my country constantly, undermine its sovereignty, and are a great threat to my security etc unlike the US, so it's my interests to criticize them, I'm certainly not unbiased and I'll freely admit it, and 2. I have a great dislike for fascist governments with tremendous power, based on history.
#15172095
Unthinking Majority wrote:If I'm harsher on China sometimes it's because 1. they harm my country constantly, undermine its sovereignty, and are a great threat to my security etc unlike the US, so it's my interests to criticize them, I'm certainly not unbiased and I'll freely admit it, and 2. I have a great dislike for fascist governments with tremendous power, based on history.


No one is asking you to be unbiased - just that you avoid defending US imperialism while easily criticizing Chinese for similar actions. I'd be more interested in reading your defense of US policy, not bland descriptions of "well, that's hegemons for ya!".
  • 1
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13

What do yall think of 'former male' trannys beati[…]

CRT

That is not relevant to the claim. Why not? Y[…]

Florida Bans CRT in Schools

Yet, they are not banned or otherwise restricted […]

Now reading

Hey I would add him being socialist as well when […]