War risk

[Liberty]

Didn't Germany and Japan come out of a world war more democratic?

 

Or, so you are for a boots-on-the-ground invasion of China with a regime change? That'll be easy in a post-nuclear world  ::)

[Guest]

Didn't Germany and Japan come out of a world war more democratic?

 

Or, so you are for a boots-on-the-ground invasion of China with a regime change? That'll be easy in a post-nuclear world  ::)

 

No, I don't think we should invade anyone. I do think we should have very harsh economic penalties for their lack of compliance.

[Guest]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/15/tech/tsmc-arizona-chip-factory-intl-hnk/index.html

 

Trump isn't all bad. Even if this required some a lot of handouts, probably a better use of taxpayer's money than other things (unless it turns out like Foxconn in WI which is certainly a possibility).

 

What exactly did Trump's administration do here? The article you posted does not mention anything.

 

Any time now he'll take credit for it.

 

Do you guys really think a deal like this would have been made without Trump's administration playing a big role?

[Liberty]

Didn't Germany and Japan come out of a world war more democratic?

 

Or, so you are for a boots-on-the-ground invasion of China with a regime change? That'll be easy in a post-nuclear world  ::)

 

No, I don't think we should invade anyone. I do think we should have very harsh economic penalties for their lack of compliance.

 

Weren't you talking about Germany and Japan after the war a second ago? You're giving me whiplash.

[Liberty]

Do you guys really think a deal like this would have been made without Trump's administration playing a big role?

 

Some approvals and such, for such. That's not the same as deserving credit for the deal. Otherwise, everything that requires federal approval in a country is because of the fed? I didn't know you had the federal government in such high regard.

 

TSMC has known for a long time that the world wants to diversify supply chains outside of Asia, and they'd rather still be the beneficiaries of that rather than let Intel or someone else get that market share.

[Spekulatius]

The US and Taiwan would be allies against China in all likelihood.

 

And everyone would lose.

 

No, Liberty (the concept) would win. ;)

 

How naive you are. You think China would come out of a world war more democratic? You think liberty in the US would increase in the face of nuclear war? You think Taiwan wouldn't be potentially destroyed? You think dead people are free?

 

Didn't Germany and Japan come out of a world war more democratic?

 

Yes, but it took two trials though. The first one made it worse. I don’t think we want to go there.

[Guest]

Do you guys really think a deal like this would have been made without Trump's administration playing a big role?

 

Some approvals and such, for such. That's not the same as deserving credit for the deal. Otherwise, everything that requires federal approval in a country is because of the fed? I didn't know you had the federal government in such high regard.

 

TSMC has known for a long time that the world wants to diversify supply chains outside of Asia, and they'd rather still be the beneficiaries of that rather than let Intel or someone else get that market share.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/14/technology/trump-tsmc-us-chip-facility.html

[Guest]

Didn't Germany and Japan come out of a world war more democratic?

 

Or, so you are for a boots-on-the-ground invasion of China with a regime change? That'll be easy in a post-nuclear world  ::)

 

No, I don't think we should invade anyone. I do think we should have very harsh economic penalties for their lack of compliance.

 

Weren't you talking about Germany and Japan after the war a second ago? You're giving me whiplash.

 

Perhaps I misunderstood your original point. You said "You think China would come out of world war more democratic?" I then gave two examples of countries that went through a world war and came out more democratic.

 

You then mentioned "boots-on-the-ground" which I made no mention of. I never said I was "for war" or "for boots on the ground." Countries need to step of to China's aggression and to stop worrying about their "supply chains."

[Liberty]

Perhaps I misunderstood your original point. You said "You think China would come out of world war more democratic?" I then gave two examples of countries that went through a world war and came out more democratic.

 

You then mentioned "boots-on-the-ground" which I made no mention of. I never said I was "for war" or "for boots on the ground." Countries need to step of to China's aggression and to stop worrying about their "supply chains."

 

Oh boy, I sometimes forget how much hand-holding is required to carry you through a full thought.

 

So Germany and Japan came out more democratic because they were fully invaded and their governments were replaced and redesigned from the ground up. That was possible in a pre nuclear war, but China is a large nuclear power, and can't be invaded.

 

When I mentioned war with China, I wasn't thinking about invasion. But you mentioned Germany and Japan becoming more democratic. I don't think China would become more democratic if they were at war with external aggressors. They'd just clamp down on liberties and the import of foreign ideas and influence, as countries do in time of war. They'd become more totalitarian. So there goes your theory.

[Guest]

Perhaps I misunderstood your original point. You said "You think China would come out of world war more democratic?" I then gave two examples of countries that went through a world war and came out more democratic.

 

You then mentioned "boots-on-the-ground" which I made no mention of. I never said I was "for war" or "for boots on the ground." Countries need to step of to China's aggression and to stop worrying about their "supply chains."

 

Oh boy, I sometimes forget how much hand-holding is required to carry you through a full thought.

 

So Germany and Japan came out more democratic because they were fully invaded and their governments were replaced and redesigned from the ground up. That was possible in a pre nuclear war, but China is a large nuclear power, and can't be invaded.

 

When I mentioned war with China, I wasn't thinking about invasion. But you mentioned Germany and Japan becoming more democratic. I don't think China would become more democratic if they were at war with external aggressors. They'd just clamp down on liberties and the import of foreign ideas and influence, as countries do in time of war. They'd become more totalitarian. So there goes your theory.

 

I always like how you insult me, even though I try to be gracious to you. Classy.

 

I'll also say I find it quite odd that you don't think Taiwan shouldn't have liberty (because China will get mad)...even though your name is Liberty. Perhaps liberty is okay for you but not for them?

 

After China lost (and they in all likelihood would lose) they would be more open to democracy. I think the Chinese people would want democracy (as most people do). In fact, I think you could get them to be open to democracy with harsh economic penalties and not have to resort to war.

[DooDiligence]

 

I'll also say I find it quite odd that you don't think Taiwan shouldn't have liberty (because China will get mad)...even though your name is Liberty. Perhaps liberty is okay for you but not for them?

 

 

To say that Liberty doen't think Taiwan should have liberty is an insult to intelligence.

 

Typical neo-con retort.

[Guest]

 

I'll also say I find it quite odd that you don't think Taiwan shouldn't have liberty (because China will get mad)...even though your name is Liberty. Perhaps liberty is okay for you but not for them?

 

 

To say that Liberty doen't think Taiwan should have liberty is an insult to intelligence.

 

Typical neo-con retort.

 

Didn't he call me naive when I said liberty would win?

[Liberty]

I always like how you insult me, even though I try to be gracious to you. Classy.

 

I'll also say I find it quite odd that you don't think Taiwan shouldn't have liberty (because China will get mad)...even though your name is Liberty. Perhaps liberty is okay for you but not for them?

 

After China lost (and they in all likelihood would lose) they would be more open to democracy. I think the Chinese people would want democracy (as most people do). In fact, I think you could get them to be open to democracy with harsh economic penalties and not have to resort to war.

 

It's not an insult, it's just a fact. Very obvious things need extra explanations with you that they don't require with most other people.

 

As for the rest of what you said, now *that* is insulting. I won't take that transparent bait.

[Liberty]

Didn't he call me naive when I said liberty would win?

 

No, I said you were naive to think that world war three was a good idea.

[DooDiligence]

 

I'll also say I find it quite odd that you don't think Taiwan shouldn't have liberty (because China will get mad)...even though your name is Liberty. Perhaps liberty is okay for you but not for them?

 

 

To say that Liberty doen't think Taiwan should have liberty is an insult to intelligence.

 

Typical neo-con retort.

 

Didn't he call me naive when I said liberty would win?

 

You faux conservatives just love twisting peoples words.

 

You must be exhausted.

[Guest]

Didn't he call me naive when I said liberty would win?

 

No, I said you were naive to think that world war three was a good idea.

 

When did I ever say that WWIII would be a good idea?  :o

[Guest]

 

I'll also say I find it quite odd that you don't think Taiwan shouldn't have liberty (because China will get mad)...even though your name is Liberty. Perhaps liberty is okay for you but not for them?

 

 

To say that Liberty doen't think Taiwan should have liberty is an insult to intelligence.

 

Typical neo-con retort.

 

Didn't he call me naive when I said liberty would win?

 

You faux conservatives just love twisting peoples words.

 

You must be exhausted.

 

Twisting people's words? How? I simply said that if war to occur then Taiwan would be allies. Liberty said no one would win. I said liberty would win.

 

What do you guys think the best course of action is?

[DooDiligence]

 

I'll also say I find it quite odd that you don't think Taiwan shouldn't have liberty (because China will get mad)...even though your name is Liberty. Perhaps liberty is okay for you but not for them?

 

 

To say that Liberty doen't think Taiwan should have liberty is an insult to intelligence.

 

Typical neo-con retort.

 

Didn't he call me naive when I said liberty would win?

 

You faux conservatives just love twisting peoples words.

 

You must be exhausted.

 

Twisting people's words? How? I simply said that if war to occur then Taiwan would be allies. Liberty said no one would win. I said liberty would win.

 

What do you guys think the best course of action is?

 

I’ll probably never learn to not feed trolls but this is my last morsel for you.

[Guest]

 

I'll also say I find it quite odd that you don't think Taiwan shouldn't have liberty (because China will get mad)...even though your name is Liberty. Perhaps liberty is okay for you but not for them?

 

 

To say that Liberty doen't think Taiwan should have liberty is an insult to intelligence.

 

Typical neo-con retort.

 

Didn't he call me naive when I said liberty would win?

 

You faux conservatives just love twisting peoples words.

 

You must be exhausted.

 

Twisting people's words? How? I simply said that if war to occur then Taiwan would be allies. Liberty said no one would win. I said liberty would win.

 

What do you guys think the best course of action is?

 

I’ll probably never learn to not feed trolls but this is my last morsel for you.

 

Are you drinking?

[Liberty]

Didn't he call me naive when I said liberty would win?

 

No, I said you were naive to think that world war three was a good idea.

 

When did I ever say that WWIII would be a good idea?  :o

 

Not in those exact words: https://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/general-discussion/war-risk/msg414754/#msg414754

[Liberty]

Twisting people's words? How? I simply said that if war to occur then Taiwan would be allies. Liberty said no one would win. I said liberty would win.

 

What do you guys think the best course of action is?

 

You think in slogans.

 

"Liberty would win" is meaningless in the context of a nuclear war. Everybody would lose. Your comparison to Germany and Japan isn't applicable on many dimensions.

[Guest]

Twisting people's words? How? I simply said that if war to occur then Taiwan would be allies. Liberty said no one would win. I said liberty would win.

 

What do you guys think the best course of action is?

 

You think in slogans.

 

"Liberty would win" is meaningless in the context of a nuclear war. Everybody would lose. Your comparison to Germany and Japan isn't applicable on many dimensions.

 

 

You're the one who brought up nuclear war (and WWIII!). Who, exactly, would be on China's side? North Korea? Russia?

 

It isn't clear at all that we would have nuclear war. Is it possible? yes. A far more likely outcome (I suspect) would be more like the cold war. I highly doubt China would risk nuclear war just to keep their stranglehold on Taiwan.

 

What do you think the best course of action is? To keep letting them do what they're currently doing?

[rb]

The the thing with major economic, military and nuclear powers. You don't "let" them do anything. They do whatever the like. Nobody "lets" the US to do anything. They just do it

 

All this was stuff is bullshit anyway. The US will not go to war with China. The US could not solve Afghanistan. Which were a bunch of barefoot, impoverished, malnourished motherfuckers living in caves. But yes they'll have great success against China in a conflict.

 

By the way, how's that liberty thing going in Afghanistan? Last I checked the US was negotiating with the Taliban. You know, that beacon of liberty.

[Liberty]

Twisting people's words? How? I simply said that if war to occur then Taiwan would be allies. Liberty said no one would win. I said liberty would win.

 

What do you guys think the best course of action is?

 

You think in slogans.

 

"Liberty would win" is meaningless in the context of a nuclear war. Everybody would lose. Your comparison to Germany and Japan isn't applicable on many dimensions.

 

 

You're the one who brought up nuclear war (and WWIII!). Who, exactly, would be on China's side? North Korea? Russia?

 

It isn't clear at all that we would have nuclear war. Is it possible? yes. A far more likely outcome (I suspect) would be more like the cold war. I highly doubt China would risk nuclear war just to keep their stranglehold on Taiwan.

 

What do you think the best course of action is? To keep letting them do what they're currently doing?

 

It's not my responsibility to teach you geopolitics. If the topic interests you, go learn about it.

[muscleman]

Nuke China!

 

 

(This message is approved by Generalissimo Trumpy 2024 campaign)

 

Back in 1970s when Russia was about to nuke the entire China, US came out and stopped it. If this time US wanted to nuke the entire China, I think Russia will come out to stop it.