Taiwan Straights Tension

The Whispering Monk

Well-known member
Osaul

History Learner

Well-known member
Look at the peaceniks/sellouts/Chinese operatives.
Notably, the sellouts are in the KMT, which is the Party most likely to win the Taiwanese elections in 2024 and is Pro-status quo/reunification. The DPP, which is the Pro-Independence Party in Taiwan, has now counter-signaled independence in recent weeks. At a certain point, most of Taiwan's population becomes "Chinese operatives" in this frame, which begs the obvious question of why are we spending any money to defend them?
 

TheRomanSlayer

Unipolarity is for Subhuman Trogdolytes
Probably because we still might have a faint hope of a Chinese reunification under an anti-communist banner?

Though given the choice between independence and reunification, it might actually make more strategic sense (from both the Philippines and Japan's POV) to actually support Taiwanese independence, as a means of preventing the PLA from gaining an additional advantage. Because if Chinese reunification were to occur, then PLA military assets that may eventually be stationed in Taiwan will have a closer distance to potentially striking military targets in the two nations with the POVs that I've mentioned. Moreover, if China is itching for a possible invasion of the Philippines, they'd be able to launch a two pronged landing on Luzon, from both Taiwan and the Spratly Islands.
 

ParadiseLost

Well-known member
Notably, the sellouts are in the KMT, which is the Party most likely to win the Taiwanese elections in 2024 and is Pro-status quo/reunification. The DPP, which is the Pro-Independence Party in Taiwan, has now counter-signaled independence in recent weeks. At a certain point, most of Taiwan's population becomes "Chinese operatives" in this frame, which begs the obvious question of why are we spending any money to defend them?

Because 65% of the world's semiconductors are made on that fucking tiny inconvenient island.

If it weren't for that fact, China would have been allowed to retake Taiwan years ago.

But Taiwan is too important.

There's a reason why the current goal is for American native chip production to grow by something like 500-1000% over the next decade. The goal is for Taiwan to be replaced for most American purposes by the time China has enough power to force the issue.
 

History Learner

Well-known member
Because 65% of the world's semiconductors are made on that fucking tiny inconvenient island.

If it weren't for that fact, China would have been allowed to retake Taiwan years ago.

But Taiwan is too important.

There's a reason why the current goal is for American native chip production to grow by something like 500-1000% over the next decade. The goal is for Taiwan to be replaced for most American purposes by the time China has enough power to force the issue.

If we take the position of TWM, the CCP already controls Taiwan defacto because of the "sellouts", which was the point I was trying to make. Yours is, however, the correct take although I disagree with the "by the time China has enough power" bit, because that time was probably reached around 2017; if not then, certainly now. U.S. 7th Fleet commander says they have the naval capacity to blockade Taiwan now and the U.S. Air Force will no longer even attempt to contest air superiority, the balance has shifted that much in the past five years.
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
Guess a certain very special individual is getting bold with his precise language retardation, so a couple points:
DPP Chairman and former Vice President of the DPP publicly counter-signaled independence:



For those that don't know, he's the likely 2024 candidate for the DPP, which is the Pro-Independence party in Taiwan.

Paraphrasing the DPP Chairman, History Learner doesn't need to declare his illiteracy. The facts speak for themselves. His focus is on spreading defeatism and bullshit in favor of every anti-western power in existence.
If we take the position of TWM, the CCP already controls Taiwan defacto because of the "sellouts", which was the point I was trying to make. Yours is, however, the correct take although I disagree with the "by the time China has enough power" bit, because that time was probably reached around 2017; if not then, certainly now. U.S. 7th Fleet commander says they have the naval capacity to blockade Taiwan now and the U.S. Air Force will no longer even attempt to contest air superiority, the balance has shifted that much in the past five years.
Or in other words, the US Air Force guy said the obvious, China will make the air war harder than places like Iraq, which is an example of "decisive air superiority".
If you were not a manipulative fuck and/or a bloody idiot, you would not imply that "air denial" and title such as "illusion of decisive air superiority" is the same thing as "no longer even attempt to contest air superiority", which in turn would imply letting China have air superiority, which is patently not the case with a strategy of air denial.
Long story short, as usual History Learner is trying to disorient people through blatantly wrong use of military terms he either doesn't understand or pretends not to on account of being a CCP simp.
 

History Learner

Well-known member
Guess a certain very special individual is getting bold with his precise language retardation, so a couple points:

Paraphrasing the DPP Chairman, History Learner doesn't need to declare his illiteracy. The facts speak for themselves. His focus is on spreading defeatism and bullshit in favor of every anti-western power in existence.

Nowhere in here did you even make a counter argument to what I said, or even attempted to explain how I was wrong in your view, you just made some extremely poor attempts at insults and then pretended that's a case.

Or in other words, the US Air Force guy said the obvious, China will make the air war harder than places like Iraq, which is an example of "decisive air superiority".
If you were not a manipulative fuck and/or a bloody idiot, you would not imply that "air denial" and title such as "illusion of decisive air superiority" is the same thing as "no longer even attempt to contest air superiority", which in turn would imply letting China have air superiority, which is patently not the case with a strategy of air denial.

Which makes it a good thing I never said that so, again, would you care to make another attempt? I know you're not very bright, but we do have a quote function so would you like to quote me where I said anything alone the lines of "which in turn would imply letting China have air superiority". I literally just said the USAF wouldn't even attempt air superiority anymore, which is said, verbatim, in the sources I linked.

Long story short, as usual History Learner is trying to disorient people through blatantly wrong use of military terms he either doesn't understand or pretends not to on account of being a CCP simp.
My interactions with you continue to inform me why regular partitions of Poland between Germany and Russia are a good thing. Truly, the Monarchs of Europe were wise to eliminate Poland off the map in the 1790s and this should be done again.
 
Last edited:

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
Nowhere in here did you even make a counter argument to what I said, or even attempted to explain how I was wrong in your view, you just made some extremely poor attempts at insults and then pretended that's a case.
If you can't see it, i recommend an eye doctor.

Which makes it a good thing I never said that so, again, would you care to make another attempt? I know you're not very bright, but we do have a quote function so would you like to quote me where I said anything alone the lines of "which in turn would imply letting China have air superiority". I literally just said the USAF wouldn't even attempt air superiority anymore, which is said, verbatim, in the sources I linked.
You used a very specific term of "U.S. Air Force will no longer even attempt to contest air superiority" in your post you manipulative asshole. Which means a different thing than
"USAF wouldn't even attempt air superiority anymore". Get back to me when you understand the difference. Yes, not contesting air superiority is not the same thing as not attempting to establish air superiority. You are either using lawyer tricks to simp for CCP, or using military jargon you don't understand the meaning of, your choice.

My interactions with you continue to inform me why regular partitions of Poland between Germany and Russia are a good thing. Truly, the Monarchs of Europe were wise to eliminate Poland off the map in the 1790s and this should be done again.
My interactions with you continue to inform me that USA closing down mental asylums was a terrible mistake. Now the people who should be there are on the internet...
 

History Learner

Well-known member
If you can't see it, i recommend an eye doctor.
I cannot see that which does not exist. Are you going to stop being a bitch and explain how you view what I said as wrong or will you continue to prove the Soviet occupation stripped your people of any courage?
You used a very specific term of "U.S. Air Force will no longer even attempt to contest air superiority" in your post you manipulative asshole. Which means a different thing than
"USAF wouldn't even attempt air superiority anymore". Get back to me when you understand the difference. You are either using lawyer tricks to simp for CCP, or using military jargon you don't understand the meaning of, your choice.

Which is exactly what the articles I cited say and which means you lied. If you feel otherwise, again, stop being a bitch and quote me. We both know you won't because you're just engaging in projection, as usual.

My interactions with you continue to inform me that USA closing down mental asylums was a terrible mistake. Now the people who should be there are on the internet...
Meanwhile back in December I had you hysterically ranting about how you are not mentally unstable. Of the two of us, one is clearly unhinged and it is not me.
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
I cannot see that which does not exist. Are you going to stop being a bitch and explain how you view what I said as wrong or will you continue to prove the Soviet occupation stripped your people of any courage?
Oh, so you're too retarded to understand, got it.
I was as usual mocking your extremely suspicious ability to take a statement and through being incredibly bad at reading extract a message contrary to what the author meant from that statement.

Which is exactly what the articles I quote say and which means you lied. If you feel otherwise, again, stop being a bitch and quote me. We both know you won't because you're just engaging in projection, as usual.
Stop playing the fucking quote games to hide your retardation, i've quoted you once already, you bitch-ass defeatist commie simp.

This is not what the article in the link says, fight me.
Meanwhile back in December I had you hysterically ranting about how you are not mentally unstable. Of the two of us, one is clearly unhinged and it is not me.
Fuck off with the off-topic drama insults CCP yappy dog.
 
Last edited:

History Learner

Well-known member
Oh, so you're retarded to understand, got it.
If you're going to insult someone else's intelligence, please understand the difference in using "to" and "too" first; might also want to learn the placement of it too. Your capacity to self own continues to be impressive.
I was as usual mocking your extremely suspicious ability to take a statement and through being bad at reading extract a statement contrary to what the author meant from that statement.
Now how about you explain how my characterization of the statement was wrong? I said the DPP backed off independence, which is exactly what the tweet says. Why are you so afraid to expand your thoughts, is it reflective of the fact you are incapable of doing so?
Stop playing the fucking quote games to hide your retardation, i've quoted you once already, you bitch-ass defeatist commie simp.
No, I don't think I will because we both know you lied and that's why you refuse to do so. As I've asked three times now, please quote me where I said "which in turn would imply letting China have air superiority". If you feel you have done so, please cite your post where you did.
This is not what the article in the link says, fight me.

But it does, hence why you didn't actually quote from it yourself. By all means, quote from it; stop being a coward for once in your life.

Likewise, if we fought Marduk, judging by the fact Poland has been everybody's bitch since the 1600s, it wouldn't be much of a fight. Hungary had the balls to do 1956, Poland just bent over and took it for 45 years. No wonder Poland has one of the lowest TFRs in the World, Polish women are right to be disgusted of their men, whose only achievements of note in the past centuries has been to polish the cocks of German horses and to serve beet soup to Russian occupiers.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top