History Learner
Well-known member
So he is saying they already are.
Ballsy movw
Continuing to formally acknowledge China's claims to Taiwan, the status quo of the last 50 years, is ballsy?
So he is saying they already are.
Ballsy movw
In further evidence of the shifting balance of power in the Pacific, the Kinmen County Council has formally requested their territory be turned into a "permanent demilitarized zone". This is the territory of Taiwan closest to China, and thus likely to be one of the first battlefields in a Sino-American conflict.
Notably, the sellouts are in the KMT, which is the Party most likely to win the Taiwanese elections in 2024 and is Pro-status quo/reunification. The DPP, which is the Pro-Independence Party in Taiwan, has now counter-signaled independence in recent weeks. At a certain point, most of Taiwan's population becomes "Chinese operatives" in this frame, which begs the obvious question of why are we spending any money to defend them?Look at the peaceniks/sellouts/Chinese operatives.
Probably because we still might have a faint hope of a Chinese reunification under an anti-communist banner?
I think it's telling that even the Taiwanese gave up on that goal decades ago.
Not from what I know.Don't they still claim to be the legitimate Chinese government, in exile?
Don't they still claim to be the legitimate Chinese government, in exile?
Not from what I know.
They just want independence now more then anything
Notably, the sellouts are in the KMT, which is the Party most likely to win the Taiwanese elections in 2024 and is Pro-status quo/reunification. The DPP, which is the Pro-Independence Party in Taiwan, has now counter-signaled independence in recent weeks. At a certain point, most of Taiwan's population becomes "Chinese operatives" in this frame, which begs the obvious question of why are we spending any money to defend them?
Because 65% of the world's semiconductors are made on that fucking tiny inconvenient island.
If it weren't for that fact, China would have been allowed to retake Taiwan years ago.
But Taiwan is too important.
There's a reason why the current goal is for American native chip production to grow by something like 500-1000% over the next decade. The goal is for Taiwan to be replaced for most American purposes by the time China has enough power to force the issue.
DPP Chairman and former Vice President of the DPP publicly counter-signaled independence:
For those that don't know, he's the likely 2024 candidate for the DPP, which is the Pro-Independence party in Taiwan.
Or in other words, the US Air Force guy said the obvious, China will make the air war harder than places like Iraq, which is an example of "decisive air superiority".If we take the position of TWM, the CCP already controls Taiwan defacto because of the "sellouts", which was the point I was trying to make. Yours is, however, the correct take although I disagree with the "by the time China has enough power" bit, because that time was probably reached around 2017; if not then, certainly now. U.S. 7th Fleet commander says they have the naval capacity to blockade Taiwan now and the U.S. Air Force will no longer even attempt to contest air superiority, the balance has shifted that much in the past five years.
Guess a certain very special individual is getting bold with his precise language retardation, so a couple points:
Paraphrasing the DPP Chairman, History Learner doesn't need to declare his illiteracy. The facts speak for themselves. His focus is on spreading defeatism and bullshit in favor of every anti-western power in existence.
Or in other words, the US Air Force guy said the obvious, China will make the air war harder than places like Iraq, which is an example of "decisive air superiority".
If you were not a manipulative fuck and/or a bloody idiot, you would not imply that "air denial" and title such as "illusion of decisive air superiority" is the same thing as "no longer even attempt to contest air superiority", which in turn would imply letting China have air superiority, which is patently not the case with a strategy of air denial.
My interactions with you continue to inform me why regular partitions of Poland between Germany and Russia are a good thing. Truly, the Monarchs of Europe were wise to eliminate Poland off the map in the 1790s and this should be done again.Long story short, as usual History Learner is trying to disorient people through blatantly wrong use of military terms he either doesn't understand or pretends not to on account of being a CCP simp.
If you can't see it, i recommend an eye doctor.Nowhere in here did you even make a counter argument to what I said, or even attempted to explain how I was wrong in your view, you just made some extremely poor attempts at insults and then pretended that's a case.
You used a very specific term of "U.S. Air Force will no longer even attempt to contest air superiority" in your post you manipulative asshole. Which means a different thing thanWhich makes it a good thing I never said that so, again, would you care to make another attempt? I know you're not very bright, but we do have a quote function so would you like to quote me where I said anything alone the lines of "which in turn would imply letting China have air superiority". I literally just said the USAF wouldn't even attempt air superiority anymore, which is said, verbatim, in the sources I linked.
My interactions with you continue to inform me that USA closing down mental asylums was a terrible mistake. Now the people who should be there are on the internet...My interactions with you continue to inform me why regular partitions of Poland between Germany and Russia are a good thing. Truly, the Monarchs of Europe were wise to eliminate Poland off the map in the 1790s and this should be done again.
I cannot see that which does not exist. Are you going to stop being a bitch and explain how you view what I said as wrong or will you continue to prove the Soviet occupation stripped your people of any courage?If you can't see it, i recommend an eye doctor.
You used a very specific term of "U.S. Air Force will no longer even attempt to contest air superiority" in your post you manipulative asshole. Which means a different thing than
"USAF wouldn't even attempt air superiority anymore". Get back to me when you understand the difference. You are either using lawyer tricks to simp for CCP, or using military jargon you don't understand the meaning of, your choice.
Meanwhile back in December I had you hysterically ranting about how you are not mentally unstable. Of the two of us, one is clearly unhinged and it is not me.My interactions with you continue to inform me that USA closing down mental asylums was a terrible mistake. Now the people who should be there are on the internet...
Oh, so you're too retarded to understand, got it.I cannot see that which does not exist. Are you going to stop being a bitch and explain how you view what I said as wrong or will you continue to prove the Soviet occupation stripped your people of any courage?
Stop playing the fucking quote games to hide your retardation, i've quoted you once already, you bitch-ass defeatist commie simp.Which is exactly what the articles I quote say and which means you lied. If you feel otherwise, again, stop being a bitch and quote me. We both know you won't because you're just engaging in projection, as usual.
This is not what the article in the link says, fight me.
Fuck off with the off-topic drama insults CCP yappy dog.Meanwhile back in December I had you hysterically ranting about how you are not mentally unstable. Of the two of us, one is clearly unhinged and it is not me.
If you're going to insult someone else's intelligence, please understand the difference in using "to" and "too" first; might also want to learn the placement of it too. Your capacity to self own continues to be impressive.Oh, so you're retarded to understand, got it.
Now how about you explain how my characterization of the statement was wrong? I said the DPP backed off independence, which is exactly what the tweet says. Why are you so afraid to expand your thoughts, is it reflective of the fact you are incapable of doing so?I was as usual mocking your extremely suspicious ability to take a statement and through being bad at reading extract a statement contrary to what the author meant from that statement.
No, I don't think I will because we both know you lied and that's why you refuse to do so. As I've asked three times now, please quote me where I said "which in turn would imply letting China have air superiority". If you feel you have done so, please cite your post where you did.Stop playing the fucking quote games to hide your retardation, i've quoted you once already, you bitch-ass defeatist commie simp.
This is not what the article in the link says, fight me.