• Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    There is a spectrum of options between “do nothing” and “go to war”. I would not support a US military intervention in a war between Taiwan and the CCP.

    Clearly, the CCP is nowhere near on the scale of Nazi Germany, though when we talk of appeasement, it wasn’t quite at the levels of conquering all of Eastern Europe at the time, but I’m not going to split hairs over that - your point that I shouldn’t compare them is completely valid and fair.

    I think continuing to keep things at a stalemate where neither country gets invaded is the best state of affairs for the time being, until something changes geopolitically. For that reason, I am not going to decry the supply of weapons to Taiwan, because that provides disincentive for an invasion of Taiwan, and makes military conflict less likely.

    • AkariMizunashi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re correct that if Taiwanese independence is taken as a goal there is a spectrum between doing nothing and immediately declaring war, and thank you for clarifying. I think peaceful engagement is absolutely preferable in this situation but I’m deeply suspicious of the consequences of alignment toward the US and I don’t believe the country has a goal of minimizing tensions in the region. I’ll leave it at that.

      • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I agree with your comment completely, stability and peace in the region is definitely not what the United States wants, long term. But that doesn’t mean that every single thing they do is wrong, and it doesn’t mean that every thing the US’s opponents do is right. We should take the actions and outcomes of these actors at face value, continue to advocate for peace and reconciliation and encourage more nuanced, balanced takes rather than hugely polarising positions. Thank you for engaging and considering what I wrote, we can build a better world if we keep building consensus, treating those with whom we disagree respectfully (assuming that they’re not being intolerant assholes!) and talking things through! <3

    • Doubledee [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I appreciate your openness here. I think the PRC would also prefer peaceful engagement with the longer term goal of peaceful reincorporation, the trade ties they’ve cultivated in spite of US hostility I think lend credence to their sincerity there. In the big picture I just don’t think the region can sustain two governments that each claim sovereignty over the same areas, and given their historical cultural and economic ties I think reunification would be the outcome of a process of dialogue between them.

      • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I agree, it seems that the political instability can’t last for too much longer, and I’m hoping for a peaceful resolution in whatever way that is. I have to admit that I would prefer a peaceful bipartisan result where each state relinquishes their claims on the other, but I have to admit that seems very unlikely and that your conclusion that they would most likely reunify is the most likely result.