Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)N
Posts
202
Comments
448
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • IIRC it's considered middle of the road due to political leanings rather than the actual credibility of the reporting.

    Which, tbh, is sort of concerning when evaluating credibility because political leanings do not change whether a report is factual or not.

  • WSWS tends to do accurate reporting in my experience.

  • This is the same agreement that the US was holding up for days to "negotiate"... And the best they can do is abstain for an agreement that they led negotiations for?

  • I mean, I agree, but that doesn't mean China could "win" in an offensive military action against Taiwan. Taiwan is literally a fortress and Taiwan/China cultural overlap is too significant to drive strong warmongering sentiment.

    An invasion is such a silly suggestion that it doesn't even need consideration. At best, it would be a pyrrhic victory with millions dead on both sides and the island in ruins.

    The far more likely scenario is a blockade, sorry, "economic embargo" of Taiwan... Of course, Cuba is a clear example of how a blockade economic embargo doesn't really work, so...

  • Has anyone read the founding documents of the PRC from 1949 1949? China's policy has always been "we will unify with Taiwan, by military means if necessary." It's like saying "God Save The Queen" or "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all." There's a fundamental gap between what's written officially as a matter of "this is what I believe" and what's implemented in policy.

    If it didn't warrant a hostile reaction a decade ago, it doesn't warrant one today. China isn't any closer to military action against Taiwan today than they were a decade ago. The First, Second, and Third Taiwan Strait Crises showed that the status quo would be basically impossible to flip militarily without millions of lives lost. It's much easier to just expand trade, expand travel, expand cultural interchange, and expand immigration.

  • Anyone with half a brain knew this way before the IDF had boots on the ground in al-Shifa.

  • This is the Suez Crisis of the 21st century. Chinese companies like OOCL are unaffected by conditions in the Red Sea and are still able to freely transit, so why should China care?

    Edit: looks like in light of the US announcing Operation "Three Aircraft Carriers in the Red Sea", Hong Kong's OOCL and Taiwan's Evergreen have also now suspended shipments through the Red Sea. A few days ago, they had just suspended shipments to Israel and operated as per usual.

    Truly, contributing to the security of the region by making sure that the few companies who could transit the Red Sea without being at risk are now at risk of getting caught in the crossfire.

  • In October 2023, the increase in China's year-by-year exports to Russia was explained primarily by an increase in product exports in Computers ($226M or 108%), Telephones ($220M or 50.3%), and Cars ($134M or 142%). In October 2023, the increase in China's year-by-year imports  from Russia was explained primarily by an increase in product imports  in Crude Petroleum ($1.74B or 69.8%), Coal Briquettes ($444M or 193%), and Refined Copper ($279M or 191%).

    In October 2023, the increase in China's year-by-year exports to Ukraine was explained primarily by an increase in product exports in Computers ($29M or 198%), Pesticides ($25M or 59.2%), and Electric Generating Sets ($21.6M or 2.86k%). In October 2023, the decrease in China's year-by-year imports from Ukraine was explained primarily by an decrease in product imports in Barley ($-52.5M or -73.7%), Iron Ore ($-23.6M or -7.64%), and Other Vegetable Residues ($-15.7M or -15.5%).

    China's making a killing selling computers to both sides. Unfortunately, China's primary export to Ukraine (telecommunications equipment) is no longer viable if Ukraine wants to receive Western funding and China's primary imports from Ukraine (agricultural products, iron ore) aren't exactly easy to export during wartime.

  • The KMT supports the status quo, the DPP wants to flip it on its head.

    Are you even Taiwanese?

    Edit: classic Westerners trying to put words in the mouths of the people who actually have to deal with the actions driven by their words

  • The status quo is Taiwan having de facto independence without seeking de jure independence.

    It's not that complicated.

  • Taiwan technically doesn't unequivocally support China's claim to the whole of the South China Sea... But that's only because Taiwan claims more of the South China Sea than China.

  • China wants to maintain the status quo and believes (perhaps wrongly) that Taiwan will eventually normalize relations with China due to economic opportunities.

    The US wants Taiwan to declare independence to contain the China threat, which is why the US funnels so many resources from government-funded entities like the National Endowment for Democracy to Taiwan's DPP.

    The fact that the US is taking more overt action in Taiwan today is a sign that there's a perception in Washington that China's status quo strategy is working.

  • Any hostage deal with Israel will lead to Israel having more hostages sorry detainees than they started with.

  • You might even call this a camp where Israel can concentrate their efforts...

  • Disturbing to see Canada participate in this. Traditional Canadian foreign policy would have opted for a diplomatic intervention here, not immediately going for the colonial warmongering route.