this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2024
361 points (97.4% liked)

News

23600 readers
3282 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

All of this is a lot of flexing, there’s no reason for China to cause massive conflict with the US because both parties would lose in some major ways. Essentially it would just waste resources between the two nations and permanently kneecap both of their economies.

Not to mention that I don’t think any nation is in a position to challenge the US anywhere in the near future. A minor conflict could break out, sure, but an actual war where the US takes the gloves off is not a good idea for anybody.

[–] aodhsishaj@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Exactly this. Somehow this position is one of my most controversial comments, and started some really good conversation.

https://lemmy.world/comment/11874656

[–] CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It’s interesting because you seem to have focused a lot more on the actual Taiwan they’d be invading and less about the worldwide implications of doing so. For me, it’s a much different argument than most people think it is.

People state that the US is overdependent on China but forget that China is also dependent on Taiwan and China is also dependent on the US. For all of the saber rattling that both China and the US do at each other, they’re humongous trade partners and losing that partnership is the #1 reason that neither of them have any interest in actually starting a war. Similar to what Russia does, they will both do as much with words as they can to show power but never go further.

Then when you get to actually talking about Taiwan, it’s kind of irrelevant in regards to geography and taking it over. China has the resources to do that and Taiwan vs China is a losing (but costly) battle if the US isn’t involved. But when the US is involved, they lose. China has a large military and tons of traditional firepower but they don’t have battle tested hardware even. Meanwhile the US eats breathes and sleeps war and is extremely well funded.

So I like your breakdown and I think you’re entirely right but the issue is just so much simpler than people make it in my opinion. Now if another conflict prompted it, China might try to take Taiwan as a distraction, but that’d be the only scenario and we’d already be at war.

[–] aodhsishaj@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I agree with you on all points. My original post was directed at the RAINING DOWN HELLFIRE FROM DRONES rhetoric in the article and tailored my response to that AO.

I'll paste it into here when I find it but I have a better breakdown of what's probably happening instead.

Edit: I found the comment, however in the thread for the original coment I linked, a lot of people came in to provide really apt and considered context. I really love this aspect of Lemmy when people get together to discuss and share their knowledge on different topics. Many good points were raised.

Agreed and I touched a little bit on that in the last edit of my original comment.

I really think this is Xi pushing a lame duck president in an election year to get a little more coastal boarders. Also showing internally that the recent purges have been effective and that he can now posture with a show of strength.

This could be setting the groundwork for their 2030 plans but I don't think this is an immediate threat on the level of the general media coverage. I mean look at all the engagement it's generated here.

https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/JIPA/Display/Article/3371474/the-ambitious-dragon-beijings-calculus-for-invading-taiwan-by-2030/