Of course I understand the difference. You are the one saying that ethnicity is evidence of nationality. I was just pointing out how ridiculous that is.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
China Expanding Government iPhone Ban
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, read my comment again - I am saying that it doesn't make sense to use it for America because it's a mixture of different people. Is that true for Taiwan? No, it's not!!!
Does Hong Kong belong to China or does it belong to the UK? And if you think it belongs to China, then why? And then ask yourself how Taiwan differs.
The point is that nuclear arms are obviously working as a deterrence as you admitted yourself that putting US boots on the ground is a bad idea.
The only time it seems that it is not working as a deterrence when a subversive "message" is being sent on purpose that you can cross any red line without any repercussions. But if you continue to act on it you will never know the moment when you are going to get really "surprised".
Hong Kong was leased to the Great Britain by the Chinese. When the lease ended, it went back to the Chinese. Sucks for the people of Hong Kong, but it was legally above board.
The CCP has never ruled Taiwan. Formally all of China and Taiwan were ruled by the government of what became Taiwan. There was a civil war. When hostilities ended, the CCP had taken control of the mainland and the ROC retained control of Taiwan. Two governments, two counties, no lease saying China is getting Taiwan.
Completely different situations. Lots of ways they differ 😛
Last edited:
Again, I don't believe ethnicity has anything to do with nationality.
Your arguing with someone besides me. I was just mocking the claim that food, language and ethnicity are evidence of nationality. I don't have an opinion on Taiwan's governance.
Objectively, it makes no sense for the US to have boots on the ground in Ukraine. Currently the world's 2nd largest army, which is run by a country hostile to the free world, is being destroyed with no loss of US lives and no loss of equipment that the US cares about (as in, outside of Patriot, everything that is getting donated is outdated equipment that the US no longer uses). That leaves the US free to fully focus on the bigger fish (China).
If the US got more directly involved, it would risk at minimum increase the risk of nuclear war, but also would, perhaps paradoxically, result in the loss of less Russian equipment. Currently they are continuously bleeding through everything they got. If the US stepped in and rapidly ended the conflict, Russia would have greater short term equipment losses but much less, net.
The united forces of Russia and China would be a pretty large military force. By the end of the Ukrainian conflict, if not already, that's not really something that needs to be worried about anymore. Russia's military will be gutted for at least the next decade, and China won't be nearly the signifcantl player it is today by the time Russia has recovered (assuming Russia's military recovers-- Russia is also facing a demographic collapse and much of their military was based on old Soviet hardware that is getting taken out-- yet to be seen if they can actually replace it).
I forget who it was that was concerned about US debt, but the Hong Kong handover has an interesting side effect.
When the CCP called in the lease of Hong Kong to Great Britain, legally they agreed to take on the debts (and assets-- e.g. Hong Kong) of the Chinese government that leased it to them in the first place.
That Chinese government owed the USA trillions of dollars
China is in default on a trillion dollars in debt to US bondholders. Will the US force repayment?
Now that the relationship with China has soured and the People’s Republic of China has become the greatest adversarial threat to the U.S. and Western security, policymakers should revisit thi…
thehill.com
... so if the US really needs to zero out some debt without printing money, they could just swap US debt to China for Chinese debt to the USA and call it good.
There is precedent for this. The Chinese had the exact same sort of debt to Britain, and part of getting Hong Kong back was the requirement that the CCP repay it, which they did-- so even the CCP recognizes it as valid.
Hong Kong was stolen by the British. It was always a part of China. Just like Taiwan was and will always be a part of China.
Stop trying to differentiate between CCP and China - that's the only way you can legitimize your argument, by dividing China. You don't get to do that. Only the Chinese can decide. The Taiwanese are stuck being a part of China. It has always been Chinese territory.
Last edited:
I understand. Every guy at least once in his life said to another: I am much tougher than you but I am not going to fight you this time because I am also much smarter and have a better plan.
When the emperor agreed to cede Hong Kong to GB as part of a treaty, how is that considered stealing? I'm genuinely interested in a Chinese point of view on this topic!
Taiwan was leased to GB. Not sure how that’s theft.
China is the country. The CCP is a political party, that, since the people have no say (… until they do), is also the government of China— but it’s not a country.
Taiwan has never been under CCP rule. What the CCP did with Hong Kong pretty well assured they’ll never want to be.
Last edited:
Again. Your BS way to divide China by using "CCP."
There is no independent Taiwan - YOU do not get to decide. The Chinese get to decide!!!
The British didn't buy anything. They intimidated and forced their way into different lands to steal resources from locals and create markets for British goods.
How about the Taiwanese people get to decide, since, you know, it’s them in question?
Just shouting into the void, “Taiwan belongs to us because we say so” doesn’t make it true.
The last time China and Taiwan were controlled by the same government, it was by the government of what is today Taiwan. If your argument is that what was must be again, then the government of Taiwan should rule China. The CCP/current day China has never ruled Taiwan.
But, really, borders were drawn at the end of Chinese civil war. Since that time, China and Taiwan have been functioning as two different countries. The people of Taiwan have made it clear they don’t want to be part of China. Their entire military is solely designed to fight China, to prevent that fate.
Last edited:
I didn’t say they did. I said they were ceded the land as part of a treaty.
Okay? That’s how many borders have been established. Are you saying that no Chinese lands were claimed through violence?!?
Another very important thing to understand with regards to nuclear deterrence and subversive "messaging": When Xi says something like: "Nuclear arms should never ever be used." and then he goes and pushes totally anti-Russian Chinese "peace proposal" he is essentially trying to take the power of nuclear deterrence away from Russia and take advantage of the situation in his favor.
And Chinese now complain about the British taking advantage of them by taking Hong Kong? From what I understand Africa is also not very happy with the way China deals with Africa(essentially very similar to the way the West deals with Africa).
Like I said China don't have experience to play on a superpower level(and perhaps never will) and therefore can be a very dangerous cowboy. They've already made a lot of mistakes by thinking that it is all about money, stocks and taking advantage of others.
And Chinese now complain about the British taking advantage of them by taking Hong Kong? From what I understand Africa is also not very happy with the way China deals with Africa(essentially very similar to the way the West deals with Africa).
Like I said China don't have experience to play on a superpower level(and perhaps never will) and therefore can be a very dangerous cowboy. They've already made a lot of mistakes by thinking that it is all about money, stocks and taking advantage of others.
US academia is full of foreign students and foreign born academics. Many US R&D teams are also full of foreign talent.
Funny how that's not poaching, but when the Chinese hire foreign talent it's poaching and stealing.
You should look up Operation Paperclip - America is the master of poaching.
Weird how all those foreign students willingly and wanted to come to the US to study, instead of in their own country. Huh.
I’ll absolutely give you OP Paperclip, even though we weren’t the only ones to take nazi scientists.
This right comment right here shows just how brainwashed a person can be by modern day Chinese culture lead by the CCP.
Race, ethnicity, food, or language does NOT make somewhere a part of another country. Politics, boundaries, and the citizens choices do, we aren't in the Stone Age anymore. Taiwan is separate from the Chinese mainland and formed their own government in opposition to the mainland, they have every right to independence and they've gotten it, they dont answer to the CCP, they are already recognized as a sovereign state by many countries and its only a matter of time until most of the world does to, the CCP's threats have been the only reason that hasn't happened yet. Oh and Taiwan by definition is their own colony, they are their own settlement in a different territory than Mainland China with their own government.
Last edited:
The “One China Policy” and the “One China Principle” are not the same.
Journalists and analysts often conflate the two versions, and explicitly say that the U.S. abides by the PRC’s version of One China. However, this is both incorrect and a false interpretation of U.S. policy.
The United States’ “One China Policy” does not recognize Taiwan as part of the PRC.
The U.S. has never recognized Taiwan as a part of the PRC. The U.S. merely acknowledges that the PRC holds the position that Taiwan is part of the PRC.
U.S. Policy – The One China Policy
The official U.S. policy is that Taiwan’s status is undetermined. The One China Policy is intentionally ambiguous, and the U.S. does not take a position on the resolution of the Cross-Strait situation – leaving any final resolution of their differences up to the two parties. However, the U.S. opposes either side unilaterally changing the status quo, and has stated its interest in the peaceful resolution of Cross-Strait differences. Washington has also said that any such resolution should take place with the consent of the Taiwan people.
While interpreted slightly differently by different U.S. administrations, the U.S. One China Policy has long served as a way to maintain a strong relationship with Taiwan while also maintaining official diplomatic relations with the PRC.
PRC Policy – The One China Principle
The PRC follows the One China Principle, a core belief stating that Taiwan is an inalienable part of China, with the PRC serving as the sole legitimate government of that China. The U.S. acknowledges this position, but does not take a stance on its validity.
Resources
The Taiwan Relations Act, the three Joint Communiqués with the PRC, and the Six Assurances to Taiwan provide the foundation for U.S. policy on Taiwan and China.
Please see One China Policy Primer – The Brookings Institution for how the U.S.’ One-China policy interacts with these documents.
See also One China, Multiple Interpretations by the Center for Advanced China Research.
Regarding economy, I'll set a reminder for 6 months from now and we'll see how your take ages
6 months later (reminder just went off)...
I don't think anyone, even CCP government mouthpieces, thinks/claims the Chinese economy is doing well at this point.
… but U.S. government mouthpieces think and claim that the U.S. economy is doing well at this point.
lol. Multiple orders of magnitude difference in what’s going on in the Chinese economy (likely peaked 4 years ago and is headed into a decades long recession) and the US economy (basically, inflation as it friendshores) 🤣