The covert training sessions focused on the use of drones. Read more at straitstimes.com. Read more at straitstimes.com.
  • freagle@lemmy.mlEnglish
    01·
    1 month ago

    At this point it’s obvious you’re not here to discuss facts and reason about them. You’re here to filter facts and misinterpret them deliberately to fit your preferred conclusion.

    1. Your link says literally nothing about secession, despite my claim being about secession
    2. You assign individual motives to a state, despite repeated attempts by me to establish that psychologizing a state it not how we understand behaviors of states
    3. You don’t believe China has a right to self-defense
    4. You don’t actually understand any aspect of my position despite repeated explanations about my position, as indicated by you asking whether they consider Taiwan part of China
    5. You think I don’t have a problem with Han colonialism despite my saying I do
    6. You avoid any and all reasoning that would establish the Han settlers on Taiwan as part of the same process you think is terrible and undermines claims of sovereignty
    7. You repeat imperialist propaganda without any evidence, stating without evidence that Tibet has had its culture destroyed (it hasn’t, it’s thriving) and claiming that the crisis in Xinjiang was about cultural misalignment instead of the thousands of bombings, mass stabbings, and riots over multiple decades.
    8. You hold the position that is aligned with Western imperialist goals (“Since when can you choose your neighbours?”) but also believe that everyone who disagrees with you actually has a simple Manichean worldview that cannot account for nuance when I have clearly and firmly established the multiple problems of layered contradictions in the Chinese context and established my position for the conditions required for resolution.

    And then you pivot to Korea in a way that is so disingenuous and so obviously ignoring literally everything I’ve said about the nature of sovereignty, Western imperialism, mutual security, nationhood and statehood, that it’s clear you’re having a discussion with yourself and not with me.

    • Quittenbrot@feddit.orgEnglish
      0·
      1 month ago

      Your link says literally nothing about secession, despite my claim being about secession

      Someone that doesn’t consider themselves Chinese is seceding from China.

      You don’t believe China has a right to self-defense

      They do. Invading an island is as little self-defence as bombing Iran.

      You hold the position that is aligned with Western imperialist goals (“Since when can you choose your neighbours?”)

      ‘Since when can you choose your neighbours’ has nothing to do with ‘Western imperialist goals’ but is a fact that affects all countries globally.

      And then you pivot to Korea in a way that is so disingenuous

      Except it isn’t. The PRC/ROC split is the result of the Chinese Civil War, just as the NK/SK split is the result of the Korean Civil War. Both wars ended in a status quo where neither side controls the entirety, de facto resulting in two separate countries since decades.

      So, if you negate the possibility of such an outcome in the Chinese question, you should negate this possibility in the Korean question and hence argue for South Korea, as the stronger part, to be entitled to force ‘reunification’ with the crippling North, which is rightfully theirs.

      • freagle@lemmy.mlEnglish
        01·
        1 month ago

        Someone that doesn’t consider themselves Chinese is seceding from China.

        This is why you’re not worth talking to.

        They do. Invading an island is as little self-defence as bombing Iran.

        You’re a completely disingenuous person.

        ‘Since when can you choose your neighbours’ has nothing to do with ‘Western imperialist goals’ but is a fact that affects all countries globally.

        You don’t argue in good faith.

        The PRC/ROC split is the result of the Chinese Civil War, just as the NK/SK split is the result of the Korean Civil War

        You have a delusional grasp of history that serves only your pre-selected conclusions.

        Both wars ended in a status quo where neither side controls the entirety, de facto resulting in two separate countries since decades.

        And your pre-selected conclusions are exactly matched to Western imperialist goals.

        So, if you negate the possibility of such an outcome in the Chinese question, you should negate this possibility in the Korean question and hence argue for South Korea, as the stronger part, to be entitled to force ‘reunification’ with the crippling North, which is rightfully theirs.

        And you argue like a right-wing youtuber with zero self-awareness for how transparent you are.