you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -8 points 1 year ago (3 children)

@cfgaussian say I grant the violent incursion on tibetan land as "liberation" (which I do not), that would still leave the Sino-Indian and Sino-Vietnamese wars. Or do we redefine those away on a technicality as well? Were they maybe not long enough? I dont ask you to defend western imperialism. Its inexcusable. I do ask you to see the PRC for what it is, which includes its flaws and mistakes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago*

    say I grant the violent incursion on tibetan land as “liberation” (which I do not)

    So you love slavery. Good start.

    that would still leave the Sino-Indian

    India dicked around, China put them to their place and the war ended in extremely amicable terms.

    Sino-Vietnamese wars

    There was one (1), so no "wars"(plural), a war(singular). It was a limited border conflict because Vietnam and the PRC ended on different sides of the the Sino-Soviet split.

    Were they maybe not long enough?

    They happened before the timframe covered by the picture. Tibet happend under Mao, as did the Sino-Indian one. The war against Vietnam happened under Deng. The timeframe covered by the pic is post-Deng. Since then the PRC did, factually, not wage any war.

  • source
  • parent