199
China's Xi accused the US of trying to trick him into invading Taiwan, but said he won't take the bait (www.businessinsider.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
82 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 43 points 2 years ago (26 children)

Unrelated:

US Green Berets deploying to Taiwan’s front-line

The US is quietly arming Taiwan to the teeth

PRESIDENT TSAI ING-WEN RECEIVES NED DEMOCRACY SERVICE MEDAL

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 26 child comments
    •
  • [–] 17 points 2 years ago (19 children)

    Taiwan has a right to defend itself if it chooses to.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] -3 points 2 years ago (6 children)

    With US troops?

    Ukraine has a right to defend itself, but US troops are not deployed in Ukraine.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    The Green Berets are the army's spec ops that focus on training foreign fighters, specially chosen for things like foreign language proficiency. They're not Rangers or general light infantry. Ideally they're not really supposed to get into direct combat, as they're rather time consuming and difficult to replace.

    I would bet a whole bunch of money that we actually do have Green Berets present in Ukraine as well, though the only people that would know that for sure would be the US govt, the Ukrainians and probably Russian intelligence.

    If the 101st Airborne gets deployed to Taiwan, then I'd be worried.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 2 years ago* (3 children)

    Green Berets are just as worrying. It means US is training locals, preparing for yet another proxy war or brutal crackdown on any real or potential opposition against place being subjugated to US empire.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] -33 points 2 years ago (11 children)

    It doesn't. The vast majority of countries recognize the PRC having sovereignty over Taiwan, as does the UN. There is no right to separatism or anything like that. Rather the PRC has the right to enforce their sovereignty. The US btw has no right to send to troops into China, that's an act of war.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    Is the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party the same person as the President of Taiwan, then?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] -7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 16 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    If you are talking about the President of Taiwan, are you comparing a role that's existed since 1 January 1912 (25 October 1945 in its current form) to one that existed 18 February 1861 – 5 May 1865 and had exactly one officeholder?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    So you're not a fan of national self determination then?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [+] -9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The right to self-determination does not mean a right to an independent state or any right to secede.

    Also I'm not a fan of creating a new national identity just so the US can claim part of China for its puppet regime. That's using nationalism for a colonial divide-and-conquer strategy, that's pretty much the opposite of liberation and self-determination.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (5 children)

    First link: Members of A Company, so you're looking at 100 people maximum and likely less. Not exactly a large fighting force.

    Second link: There's nothing "quiet" about it. It's been blaring on Western News non-stop for about 6 years now. The US has been completely open about weapons sales and training schedules.

    Third link: We gave President Tsai Ing-Wen a medal. Okay, and?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 25 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The NED is notorious for basically being a CIA cut-out

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 22 points 2 years ago

    It’s amazing that this gets any downvotes at all.

    Washington Post 1991: Innocence Abroad: the New World of Spyless Coups

    "A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA," agrees [NED cofounder Allen] Weinstein.

    New York Times, 1997: Political Meddling by Outsiders: Not New for U.S.

    The National Endowment for Democracy, created 15 years ago to do in the open what the Central Intelligence Agency has done surreptitiously for decades, spends $30 million a year to support things like political parties, labor unions, dissident movements and the news media in dozens of countries, including China.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago*

    not a fighting force

    Genuine question, I know tone is hard to read online but I promise I'm not trying to be snarky: do you know the role that special forces in general and green berets in particular play in US proxy wars? They don't fight, they raise and train local militias how to do insurgency and kill political enemies. Anytime green berets are in a country next door to an enemy of the US empire, it's because they're training the next ARVN, Taliban or Azov Battalion.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent