this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
78 points (91.5% liked)

World News

32306 readers
445 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zephyreks@programming.dev 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Are you surprised? People in Washington are openly talking about how they should be focusing on China under the assumption that China will somehow make the decision to seize Taiwan tomorrow... As if they haven't been posturing about that literally since the end of the civil war and done nothing except increase trade, open up immigration, and increase cultural coupling with Taiwan.

The US needs an enemy to justify their extreme military budget and China is the bogeyman of the decade.

[–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The weird thing is that the US is pretty much just sending old military equipment to Ukraine that the US has no use for. The aid provided is barely noticeable in the US military budget. If the US actually focused on this the war would be over in a month.

[–] zephyreks@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

So far, the US has approved $113 billion in aid to Ukraine ($62 billion through the Pentagon and another $40 something billion through the State Department that definitely totally wasn't spent on war guys). It's something like a tenth of the US military budget and on par with the entire Russian military budget of around $100 billion.

[–] freagle@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I am a little surprised because it's not like they didn't know about China as their target back in '08. I'm wondering about why it's shifting now

[–] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hong Kong.

They promised to leave it alone for 50 years, and they did not.

[–] freagle@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, they did mostly leave it alone. The only real changes I'm aware of is they extended their national security apparatus to Hong Kong as part of one country two systems. Is that what you're referring to or am I missing something?

[–] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

They took unilateral control of choosing which political candidates can run.

That's literally taking over the government.

That's like calling something a democracy when you can decide you're the only person who can run for your office.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-57236775

[–] freagle@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Honestly? I wouldn't trust a thing written by the BBC on this topic. Britain occupied Hong Kong for how long? Thatcher wanted to keep it going. They made tons of changes to create unrest and separatist movements.

The bill was signed into law by the majority of the Hong Kong government. China didn't impose it in Hong Kong, Hong Kong adopted it.

The "widespread" condemnation came from the colonizers and dominators of China. Hardly a bunch for whom I give a shit about their opinions.

[–] InvertedParallax@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] Kuori@hexbear.net 13 points 1 year ago

you'd no doubt prefer stormfront. why not fuck off back to it?

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 12 points 1 year ago

...is rapidly becoming a byword for correct, yes

[–] zephyreks@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

They pulled out of the Middle East and now need a new enemy to justify the defence budget.

Following the Second World War, they had the Soviet Union to blame and the War on Communism. Then it was the War on Terror. Now? Well... Now it's the War on China.