this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2024
2 points (51.5% liked)

Socialism

5329 readers
12 users here now

Rules TBD.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

the map is far more accurate than it is not though

Come on, Yog, we can hold ourselves to a higher standard than this. It'd be so easy to just color in Vietnam and then you'd be set, but by posting it in its current form you are actively lying.

[โ€“] yogthos@lemmy.ml -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I think there's a difference between invasion/occupation and a minor border skirmish. Like yeah it could've been more accurate, but it does get the point across. ๐Ÿคท

[โ€“] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If I was just complaining about border skirmishes, then I'd mention India or something. The attack on Vietnam was more than just a "minor border skirmish".

[โ€“] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Well, feel free to explain how the attack on Vietnam constitutes an occupation. Are you suggesting China's military action was carried out with the intent of annexing a part of Vietnam?

[โ€“] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Come on, you're more well-read than this. You know that military occupation and annexation are not the same thing.

[โ€“] yogthos@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You still haven't answered what you think the intent of the military action was. Do you claim any military confrontation is occupation?

[โ€“] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I'd more say that the military occupation was done for the sake of confrontation (this is similar to the official Chinese line). It was a really senseless invasion, as far as I can tell (and I disagree with the Vietnamese line that the war was expansionist).

[โ€“] yogthos@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 months ago

I think we can agree on that