comment: >
  
  Not so sure...  The US released classified internal memos dated prior to china's escalation saying that Chinese attack on Taiwan would be met with full on war.
  Now that itself may be a game, but it sent a pretty strong message.  The US isn't fucking around with Taiwan.  
  That said, are we RRALLY gonna get into a full on satellite-destroying war with China over Taiwan? I'd guess not, but my confidence isn't high.
context: It's provocative. It gets the people('s party) going! >
  
  We’re skating to one song, and one song only >
  
  I ball so hard, motherfuckers wanna fine me >
  
  But first _____ gotta find me >
  
  Its probably just a PR diversion from Covid disaster inside the country. >
  
  They've been doing shit like this for years.  It isn't because of covid.. >
  
  Yeah.. they learned a lot from the United States during those last 30 years.. >
  
  What's your point? >
  
  I wouldn't say the US is as bad as Russia but you are right, we definitely have our flaws. >
  
  Especially looking at russias past .. lol.. >
  
  A dog that keeps barking does not have the balls to bite. >
  
  Basically what you're saying is that you want China to be like the US and invade others? >
  
  Well China continues to build a force of assault carriers and continues to improve their amphibious capability, so what else could they possibly be building up their forces for if not an invasion of Taiwan?
  If their military was purely interested self-defense, it would look more like Europe or Japan. Instead, they are increasingly invested in power projection and war fighting, similar to the force structure of the U.S. >
  
  China is surrounded by vassal states of the US like Japan and South Korea, one of them is an archipielago and the other is a peninsula, both full of US military bases. Could this possibly explain why they invest heavily in their amphibious capability? >
  
  Could it? It could. 
  But hostile US sentiment to China was not pre-determined at the times those bases were constructed and mutual-defense treaties were signed. It was hoped that through open markets and free trade that China would liberalize and become more democratic, more inclusive, more Western. China was on this track, or at least on less aggressive path, until Xi. 
  Up until Xi, US-China relations were not nearly as cold as they are now.
  And what is the logic implying that they are building up their military in response to US bases and “vassal” states? Japan and Korea are not US vassals, despite what idiotic nationalists may say. Are they going to defend themselves by invading and destroying these bases? If that was the case, why the focus on amphibious assault?
  They are clearly modeling themselves to be similar to the US military. Capable of projecting force overseas and defending overseas interests. The carriers and assault carriers aren’t for show, they’re in order to project force. >
  
  If they want to be similar to the US  they need to invade someone to prove their complete disregard for the sovereignity of weaker, non-submissive countries. Until that happens, such comparisons are idiotic and entirely speculative. Facts show China aims to be a very different sort of global superpower than the US. >
  
  Well you’re stupid because they already did. 1979 Sino-Vietnamese War. 
  
  
  speculative
  
  
  China has imperialist history. They are a civilization that goes back centuries. They predate Rome. At one point, nearly all of Asia paid them tribute. 
  Facts show China will be like any other global superpower. Assuming they’ll be different because you assign morality to their actions as a power is wrong and the same sort of logic people use to discredit the US and their actions. >
  
  bro the US is directly involved in the majority of coups and attempted coups going on in the world for the past 100 years, they're actively involved in the coup that happened this month in Peru and the subsequent cover up by their propaganda machinery. the only two countries that comes close to their disregard for human life and pathological self-righteousness are the UK and Israel. the US foreign policy can only be described as psychopathic and is only justifiable with a blatant disregard for any semblance of morality, like you do. China might end up doing the same but so far they're on a different path. >
  
  Applying morality to the actions of states is a mistake. Countries don’t do things for good or bad reasons. They have an interest. 
  
  
  bro
  
  
  Bro, you’re stupid if you think US involvement in regime change isn’t the most alarmed and called out thing ever. You think you’re special? 
  What school of geopolitics do you follow? The Black and White School of Morality? The Reddit School of Binary Good and Bad?
  Also, the US post-WWII order has been the least malicious of any previous empire. 
  Your Ameri-centric understanding of history is gross. Close minded. >
  
  you think cynicism is a virtue, it's not. the rest of the world would absolutely not do what the US does if they were in their position. you're clearly a lost cause since you have no qualms about using euphemisms like "regime change" which belong right next to "final solution" and "enhanced interrogation".
  all your bootlicking won't change the imminent and accelerating crumbling of the US, already coming apart at the seams. all they can do to delay the inevitable is start shit elsewhere to rile up nationalism, like the proxy war they started in Ukraine and what they're trying to start with China, but these are only delays. when the US crumbles the world will finally have peace and prosperity. >
  
  China doesn't want none. They're just attempting to flex. >
  
  These incursions are designed to normalize this behavior and over the next couple of years will slowly grow in size of number of planes.  This way, when China does decide to attack, Tiawan will not have enough time to launch all their planes in the air. >
  
  US will know weeks before they know China will attempt an actual invasion so it wont be an actual secret and plenty of time for US to put their own presence in the area known. China wont be able to invade with just an air force. Taiwans beaches will be mined to shit in time for China to make a landing. >
  
  Yea a seaborne invasion set to rival the D-Day landings isn’t going to sneak up on us. We’ll all know well in advance. >
  
  But what if they stage a false invasion to a different shore with inflatable vehicles and cardboard cutouts? >
  
  If we fell for that with all the tech we have in this day and age we’d deserve to lose, honestly. That would be the greatest tactical blunder in many years >
  
  Especially when we (I think) invented it >
  
  Except it's the US that's giving their final warning here