News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
It’s interesting because you seem to have focused a lot more on the actual Taiwan they’d be invading and less about the worldwide implications of doing so. For me, it’s a much different argument than most people think it is.
People state that the US is overdependent on China but forget that China is also dependent on Taiwan and China is also dependent on the US. For all of the saber rattling that both China and the US do at each other, they’re humongous trade partners and losing that partnership is the #1 reason that neither of them have any interest in actually starting a war. Similar to what Russia does, they will both do as much with words as they can to show power but never go further.
Then when you get to actually talking about Taiwan, it’s kind of irrelevant in regards to geography and taking it over. China has the resources to do that and Taiwan vs China is a losing (but costly) battle if the US isn’t involved. But when the US is involved, they lose. China has a large military and tons of traditional firepower but they don’t have battle tested hardware even. Meanwhile the US eats breathes and sleeps war and is extremely well funded.
So I like your breakdown and I think you’re entirely right but the issue is just so much simpler than people make it in my opinion. Now if another conflict prompted it, China might try to take Taiwan as a distraction, but that’d be the only scenario and we’d already be at war.
I agree with you on all points. My original post was directed at the RAINING DOWN HELLFIRE FROM DRONES rhetoric in the article and tailored my response to that AO.
I'll paste it into here when I find it but I have a better breakdown of what's probably happening instead.
Edit: I found the comment, however in the thread for the original coment I linked, a lot of people came in to provide really apt and considered context. I really love this aspect of Lemmy when people get together to discuss and share their knowledge on different topics. Many good points were raised.
https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/JIPA/Display/Article/3371474/the-ambitious-dragon-beijings-calculus-for-invading-taiwan-by-2030/