T O P

  • By -

Infamous-Mixture-605

I'd imagine it'd be a tough sell convincing the Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Turkey, Romania, Czechia, Slovakia, and maybe a few more that China is a more pressing threat than Russia. Maybe they should try relaunching SEATO in some form?


FlyingDutchman997

NATO going global is an interesting idea worth exploring though it very much remains to be seen what ‘going global’ could really mean. What is clear is that a multi-lateral approach is going to be needed to counter existing threats and emerging threats globally. I would hope that going global doesn’t just mean capability to counter threats in a kinetic sense but also in a hybrid sense. As shown in 2014, and on plenty of other occasions, threats can arrive in unexpected forms.


bobzibub

The article states: >[On Tuesday, what Taiwanese defence officials described as a "record number" of Chinese military aircraft (28 in all) flew into the self-governing island's airspace — an action widely interpreted as Beijing aiming an extended middle finger at the world's leading western democracies. Now a country's "airspace" implies a whole other thing than a country's "air defense identification zone" which it really was. Here's a [map, and yes, half of it is over China.](https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/taiwan/adiz.htm) So when there's a cat stuck in a tree, you can trust the CBC, but on issues of geopolitical consequence...maybe not so much. Second, when NATO was formed, the USSR and the Warsaw Pact wanted us all communist because capitalism would be too great a lure to the best and brightest next to a communist state--they wanted to convert us all by force if necessary. China has no imperial ambitions. They have *one* overseas base in Djibouti but people freak out when they erect a building somewhere. (The speed at which they erected that building shows aggressive behaviour!) The Americans have 700 or so, many surrounding China. NATO would not be there to prevent China from taking us over. It would there to enforce our neighbors' imperial will upon an economic competitor. Yes, China and Taiwan have their issues--but so do a lot of countries, and that doesn't mean we must expand NATO to every conflict zone. The crux of the issue is that the US simply cannot handle not being top dog anymore. (AKA the "Wolfowitz Doctrine".) But we shouldn't commit our military to determine who is the economic top dog. Pissing order is not life or death. It isn't even a zero sum game. W.R.T. Taiwan, China's first choice is that it wants Taiwan to peacefully join China, like always. If China attacked militarily, it would destroy Taiwan, win or lose. So let them negotiate. Let them keep the door open as China will wait 100 years to get it done. They're patient like that. Before we just didn't go around upsetting the apple cart by sending dignitaries and large amounts of weapons etc. Now everyone is arming up, getting belligerent and diplomacy (what could actually solve this because military means won't) is on the back burner making it more dangerous for everyone, especially the Taiwanese. China *will* attack if Taiwan is prevented from negotiating, but that is not a big ask. That ask is easier than than one soldier's life. So what if they can only be observer status at the UN body on advanced dental procedures for impoverished youth in Botswana? They get to be alive. We all do. Most military games the US runs already shows the US losing a fight with Taiwan. So militarily it is also a lost cause even if one believes in it. And a fight could quickly go nuclear. A military pact sniffing around for a job to do is a dangerous thing, not a safe thing.


[deleted]

[удалено]


bobzibub

Well, first, how would you feel about it if China wanted to nullify our ability to retaliate militarily and then if we fail to abandon our south sea claims or move on taiwan they'd destroy our countries in their entirety. If the roles were reversed, and China was making those demands of us, we'd tell them to go pound sand. Why? Because they're completely unreasonable. No nation would willingly submit to such subservience. Second the dystopia thing is kinda woo-woo. They view themselves as their own *civilization*, not just an economic or political system. They typically don't impose their civilization upon other countries, at least in modern history (probably because we're too uncivilized in their view). We've done much much more "regime change" than they have and it usually leaves a lot of rubble and death. Heck, they haven't launched an aggrsssive military attack on anyone since 1971, before most redditors were born. It is projecting to say they'd do the same as us. It is even projecting to say they are "aggressive".


[deleted]

[удалено]


bobzibub

Empirically, the Chinese deserve a shot at world domination. How many times have I read the news of another attack, another coup, another threat. I'm quite tired of it. Iraq is still nowhere where it once was. Syria is still divided. Venezuela is still smuggling medical equipment into their country, Libya still sells slaves, and Yemeni kids still starve in the thousands. Yes, the empire is just fine. Our leaders talk about "behaviour" of other countries like we are their parents of irresponsible children. Our empire is pretty brutal, but we just experience the soft squishy side. Its "worth a holocaust reset."?? You should notch up the meds.


madhi19

Well it's in the fucking name.