What matters is CCP wants it. The disputed land status will be used as a pretense. The US won't dare to start a war and will write off the loss. Other countries won't even dare to comment on the situation.
The US starts wars all the time. The CCP would have made a grave error in judgement if it thought this would be any different. If the US walked away from Taiwan that puts South Korea, Japan and other allies in SE Asia at risk. Not going to happen.
They said the same thing about HK: "If the US walked away from HK that puts Taiwan, South Korea, Japan and other allies in SE Asia at risk. Not going to happen"
Exactly this. To effect policy you have to get elected, and Obama knew quite well that supporting gay marriage in 2008 was a big losing proposition. Regardless of your opinions of Obama's politics, he is not a stupid man. All this nonsense about his position "evolving" is just that, nonsense. Obama was never really against gay marriage, he just needed to have viable positions to get elected.
This. I don’t know why people found Obama’s position on gay marriage so difficult to understand. It was simple. In 2008, he had to win a Democratic primary. This meant echoing the stances that would be popular with Democratic primary voters. In Obama’s case, he needed all of the black vote as well. Only 60% of Democrats in 2008 supported marriage equality, compared to 80% in 2020 ( https://news.gallup.com/poll/350486…
Would you say the same things about John McCain during his election campaign?
> Eventually, Xi will die, and it's more likely than not that his successors will liberalize It is more likely there will be a contest for power. It could become violent, though that is unlikely. In that event, I see no reason to ensure like-minded Chinese are sufficiently armed, or at the very least informed. China's path changed when Xi installed himself as dictator for life. It's foolish to ignore that seismic shi…
> China's path changed when Xi installed himself as dictator for life. It's foolish to ignore that seismic shift. It didn't change. It's foolish to not to acknowledge that communists been in power in China all along. Hu, and Wen were just very convenient fronts the party let the West, and its populace see, while it was pulling strings from behind, and bidding time for the comeback in force. The West, its politicians,…
When was Obama's contain China strategy declared? The only thing the West didn't predict to happen is that with the development of living standard, Chinese people become more supportive of their government. It has shown again only sanction works: make people suffer, then they will overthrown your enemy.
I lived in HK 2018-2020, leaving around the passage of the “national security law”. I think HK is a perfect case study of a line of fallacious thinking popular among westerners: the idea that peaceful protesting or rule-abiding political opposition is generally effective. This is wrong for at least two reasons. The first mistake is failing to recognize that many governments (case in point) are not nearly as vulnerabl…
> ... peaceful protesting... Is setting fires on public transport, damaging roads and buildings, beating up (in some cases almost killing) innocent bystanders "peaceful protesting"? What westerners do not understand is that the 2019 riots in HK are motivated by hatred toward Chinese mainlanders who have risen in wealth in recent decades and to whom HK residents have historically felt superior. A parallel in the West…
I love HK, and I have friends in HK. What I've heard is very different - most protesting has been peaceful, sometimes turning violent after actions by the police or a few anarchist types on the fringes (and let's be honest, there's a good chance these are often working under instruction of the secure apparatuses). They also vehemently deny any kind of racism against mainlanders - people are against the new security laws and restrictions on personal freedoms, nothing else.
Maybe a better way would be to stop selling them food. We still want to buy Apple products, but they need to buy food.
I disagree, in that the problem is the Chinese Communist Party, not the Chinese people. It's also contradictory to counter a bully by being a bully. Having said that: iron ore, not food. As a thought experiment: it would be most effective to target China's main imports: integrated circuits, oil, iron ore, ... [1] ICs are mainly used in exports so limited domestic impact, oil can be had from any number of despotic par…
> ICs are mainly used in exports so limited domestic impact,
Then China would impose tit-for-tat tarrifs - imagine they slapped a 100% tariff on ICs.
I lived in HK 2018-2020, leaving around the passage of the “national security law”. I think HK is a perfect case study of a line of fallacious thinking popular among westerners: the idea that peaceful protesting or rule-abiding political opposition is generally effective. This is wrong for at least two reasons. The first mistake is failing to recognize that many governments (case in point) are not nearly as vulnerabl…
> ... peaceful protesting... Is setting fires on public transport, damaging roads and buildings, beating up (in some cases almost killing) innocent bystanders "peaceful protesting"? What westerners do not understand is that the 2019 riots in HK are motivated by hatred toward Chinese mainlanders who have risen in wealth in recent decades and to whom HK residents have historically felt superior. A parallel in the West…
> What westerners do not understand is that the 2019 riots in HK are motivated by hatred toward Chinese mainlanders who have risen in wealth in recent decades and to whom HK residents have historically felt superior.
The US starts wars all the time. The CCP would have made a grave error in judgement if it thought this would be any different. If the US walked away from Taiwan that puts South Korea, Japan and other allies in SE Asia at risk. Not going to happen.
They said the same thing about HK: "If the US walked away from HK that puts Taiwan, South Korea, Japan and other allies in SE Asia at risk. Not going to happen" Look at where we are now :|
That's a bit different. While China did for all intents and purposes violate the agreement it had signed in the 90s nobody would question the legitimacy of the handover itself. Hong Kong of course doesn't have the American military machine deployed within its borders either. Having driven by some of those bases I'm kind of in awe - and that's just the stuff on public roads.
What matters is CCP wants it. The disputed land status will be used as a pretense. The US won't dare to start a war and will write off the loss. Other countries won't even dare to comment on the situation.
The US starts wars all the time. The CCP would have made a grave error in judgement if it thought this would be any different. If the US walked away from Taiwan that puts South Korea, Japan and other allies in SE Asia at risk. Not going to happen.
You are so naive. China is not Afghanistan. Look at where Taiwan is and how big it is. It is 100 miles from the mainland. China can take over it in a matter of days if it wants. China has 4 aircraft carriers now. China has become more and more powerful. And most importantly, China doesn't have oppositions inside and has no cap on casualties. And if it finally decides to invade, it will be all-or-nothing. If the US gets involved, it needs to pass Congress and maintain that win over strong opposition in its own backyard. And with large casualties, it would be another Korean War at the very least. This could well be the beginning of the World War III with nuclear weapons flying across the earth and killing millions. The US is still a stronger force, but it is getting weaker and China is getting stronger. The probability of this invasion happening is increasing with each day. And by that time, the US might not be able to stop it or get itself into a full-blown war.
They have. At least for the HK residents which predate the '97 handover and therefore have British Overseas National status. This is about 1/3 of the HK population which is now allowed to settle and work in the UK on a track towards permanent residency. If they can get the permission to leave, that is.
It is notable that very few seem to have taken this path. Yet many seem to be protesting, despite it really looking like they have hardly any chance of their protests getting anything they want. There must be more to the story that I'm not seeing...
I wouldn't say it's "very few", all flights from HKG to LHR are fully booked despite the ongoing pandemic.
This. I don’t know why people found Obama’s position on gay marriage so difficult to understand. It was simple. In 2008, he had to win a Democratic primary. This meant echoing the stances that would be popular with Democratic primary voters. In Obama’s case, he needed all of the black vote as well. Only 60% of Democrats in 2008 supported marriage equality, compared to 80% in 2020 ( https://news.gallup.com/poll/350486…
Would you say the same things about John McCain during his election campaign?
Certainly. McCain had to say what would win him the primary. That’s just how a representative democracy works. You’re a follower first, a leader later. I can’t say how President McCain might have led his supporters.