Taiwan Straights Tension

[strunkenwhite]

But it does, hence why you didn't actually quote from it yourself. By all means, quote from it

I admit I got curious as to the (however slim) possibility that HL had actually found a source that said what he said it did or, failing that, at least used "contest" in a way ambiguous enough to mislead him into thinking that "not attempt to establish air superiority" and "not attempt to contest air superiority" were equivalent statements.

The air war in Ukraine is a harbinger of air wars to come, when US adversaries will increasingly employ defense in vertical depth, layering the effects of cyber disruptions, electromagnetic jamming, air defenses, drones, and missiles in increasing degrees of strength, from higher to lower altitudes. Even if high-end fighters and bombers manage to gain air superiority in the "blue skies," the airspace below them remains contested.

...Maybe, if you squint really hard? And know nothing about air superiority and the contesting thereof from any source other than this news article?

 

[Husky_Khan]

Why is Chinese Taipei trending on Twitter? Are people trolling China? Is China trolling pro-Taiwanese supporters?

No.









Mainstream gonna lamestream.

Still that was an impressive pull ahead by TAIWAN in the 8th Inning as they defeated European Italia 11-7.



Also they have cheerleaders dancing on the top of the Dugout. 🧐

Very nice. Very nice.

 

[Husky_Khan]

United Kingdom approved the export of millions of dollars worth of Submarine components to Taiwan to help them with their ongoing domestic Submarine construction program.

Exclusive: UK approves increased submarine-related exports to Taiwan, risking angering China

Britain approved a sharp increase in exports of submarine parts and technology last year to Taiwan as it upgrades its naval forces, a move that could impact British ties with China.

www.reuters.com

 

[History Learner]

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.

So checking in, let's see how that prediction of yours went:

Taiwanese officials have advised McCarthy's staff, according to people familiar with the matter, that a trip this year would be exploited for political purposes by the opposition Nationalist Party, also known as the Kuomintang. The KMT favors closer ties with Beijing and, in the run-up to next year's presidential election, has sought to portray Tsai's Democratic Progressive Party's cross-strait policy as dangerous, unnecessarily provocative and raising the risk of war with China.​

​

Worth also noting that senior KMT officials met with Xi directly about a month ago and Taiwan has since re-established direct air travel with China. As for the general defeatism, you'll recall my other post in here, which you took issue with, concerned Vietnam, Thailand and Indonesia. How's that been?



Trade ministry supports businesses to boost exports to China

The Ministry of Industry and Trade (MoIT) has said that it will organise a wide range of trade promotion activities to support businesses in exporting their products to China.​

​

Vu Ba Phu, Director of the Ministry's Trade Promotion Authority, said that despite serious impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, economic and trade cooperation activities have developed continuously, stressing that China remains Vietnam's largest trade partner and import market.​

​

How about Indonesia?

 

[History Learner]

TL;DR - @History Learner is a moron, and continues to blur the lines between creative interpretation to suit his own needs, and being so blinkered by his beliefs that his brain can basically rewrite reality on the fly to support his conclusions. Is he lying? Is he lying to himself? Is he just that stupid? We'll never know!
Also @Marduk let it get under his skin, but has some wonderfully colourful insults when mad.

Pathological self-delusion is honestly kind of creepy to watch in action.

Most people with what I consider 'crazy' political beliefs have at least some form of internal self-consistency, even if a really shallow one. There will always be at least a few gaps, but most of their belief system has some internal coherence.

'History Learner' has gone out into the territory of 'I must be right in all ways at all times,' and combines it with a fundamental ignorance of how anything in the world actually functions, the two synergizing so that he can't admit he was wrong about anything in the past and actually learn.

Thus, he's constantly held captive to his prior incorrect assertions, with the need to prove them correct retroactively, which prevents him from ever learning from his mistakes, and instead perpetually doubling down and finding new justifications for all past foolishness.

It long since moved from 'obnoxious' to 'comical,' but at this point it's just becoming sad. The high probability that his probably narcissistic mentality is going to get someone seriously hurt at some point, and pretty much guarantees self-destructive behavior on his part, makes it tragic.

How do you reason with someone who takes as a first assumption 'I am always right'?

Because I am almost always right, as evidenced in this case by things that happened since my last post that validated exactly as I said. It's also why you both waited to post until I couldn't respond, because we both know I was right and why neither of you actually engaged the argument. I've often noted, and others have too here, that none of your clique desires to actually engage on the merits.

Also, I'm pretty sure Lordsfire has told me at least four or five times now I'm not worth his time, yet continues to seek my attention. While I'm certainly flattered by the obsession, that's extremely unhealthy. Perhaps instead, he should go read what Elbridge Colby, who wrote the 2018 National Defense strategy for the United States, has to say about the current state of the power balance in the Western Pacific:

 

[Marduk]

So checking in, let's see how that prediction of yours went:

Taiwanese officials have advised McCarthy's staff, according to people familiar with the matter, that a trip this year would be exploited for political purposes by the opposition Nationalist Party, also known as the Kuomintang. The KMT favors closer ties with Beijing and, in the run-up to next year's presidential election, has sought to portray Tsai's Democratic Progressive Party's cross-strait policy as dangerous, unnecessarily provocative and raising the risk of war with China.​

The prediction that you can't read? That was not a prediction, that was a statement of fact, one that seems as relevant today as it was before.
What does KMT position have to do with statements by DPP chairman? You do realize these are different parties with different people and different policies, right?

​

Worth also noting that senior KMT officials met with Xi directly about a month ago and Taiwan has since re-established direct air travel with China. As for the general defeatism, you'll recall my other post in here, which you took issue with, concerned Vietnam, Thailand and Indonesia. How's that been?



Trade ministry supports businesses to boost exports to China

The Ministry of Industry and Trade (MoIT) has said that it will organise a wide range of trade promotion activities to support businesses in exporting their products to China.


Vu Ba Phu, Director of the Ministry's Trade Promotion Authority, said that despite serious impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, economic and trade cooperation activities have developed continuously, stressing that China remains Vietnam's largest trade partner and import market.
​

How about Indonesia?

Oh no, countries still trade with China.
Don't care, try harder defeatist troll.
Did you know that USA, gasp, also still trades with China?

 

[History Learner]

I admit I got curious as to the (however slim) possibility that HL had actually found a source that said what he said it did or, failing that, at least used "contest" in a way ambiguous enough to mislead him into thinking that "not attempt to establish air superiority" and "not attempt to contest air superiority" were equivalent statements.

Good thing the article says exactly as I said it does, which you would've known had you actually bothered to read past the second paragraph.

...Maybe, if you squint really hard? And know nothing about air superiority and the contesting thereof from any source other than this news article?

It's rather remarkable you talk about "equivalent statements", and then just brush past the fact even the paragraph you're citing qualifies with "Even If". Beyond that, as I said above, it's clear you didn't actually read the article:

The United States and other Western air forces need to prepare for this future now. A strategy of air denial might be the smarter and more economical choice when trying to preserve the status quo on NATO's eastern flank or across the Taiwan Strait. By employing sufficiently large numbers of smaller, cheaper, unmanned systems in a distributed way, the United States and its allies and partners would increase both the costs and uncertainty of Chinese or Russian efforts to quickly seize territory and present their conquest as a fait accompli. Such a strategy requires moving away from the capable but costly and numerically limited high-end fighters and bombers in favor of more unmanned and autonomous systems. It also requires moving away from penetration and precision strike with manned aircraft to swarming tactics of denial with thousands of cheap small-sized drones. Fighter pilots still capture the Western imagination—this year's highest-grossing box office hit, Top Gun: Maverick, suggests that the mystique of the fighter pilot holds strong—but that kind of aerial combat is the exception to the rule. The future of air warfare is denial.​

​

Lest I be accused of just taking a single article as gospel, it's worth recalling the USAF began pulling out F-15s from Okinawa back in October, about a month after this article came out.

 

[History Learner]

The prediction that you can't read? That was not a prediction, that was a statement of fact, one that seems as relevant today as it was before.
What does KMT position have to do with statements by DPP chairman? You do realize these are different parties with different people and different policies, right?

Indeed they are different parties, which is why it's all the more notable the DPP feels it must constrain itself because of the KMT; their position with regards to China is viewed as that popular in Taiwan that the DPP is having to tread carefully because of 2024. Have you also bothered to look at the Polls lately?

Oh no, countries still trade with China.
Don't care, try harder defeatist troll.
Did you know that USA, gasp, also still trades with China?

The U.S. also has emplaced sanctions on China and is openly seeking to decouple its economy from theirs; Vietnam is seeking to forge a closer tie with China. It's just painfully obvious you can't actually argue the point, so you have to a shifting goalpost.

 

[Marduk]

Indeed they are different parties, which is why it's all the more notable the DPP feels it must constrain itself because of the KMT; their position with regards to China is viewed as that popular in Taiwan that the DPP is having to tread carefully because of 2024. Have you also bothered to look at the Polls lately?

It's called electioneering, you should have heard of it at your age.

Which is why there is such political maneuvering.

The U.S. also has emplaced sanctions on China and is openly seeking to decouple its economy from theirs; Vietnam is seeking to forge a closer tie with China. It's just painfully obvious you can't actually argue the point, so you have to a shifting goalpost.

Have you ever read this link? Statements about "seeking to decouple" are meaningless, when despite sanctions in some quite expensive things the trade value rises.

 

[History Learner]

It's called electioneering, you should have heard of it at your age.

Which is why there is such political maneuvering.

Which is precisely the point and directly stated in the article; the DDP sees provoking China as a negative to their election prospects in 2024. Which is, if you recall, exactly as I said.

Have you ever read this link? Statements about "seeking to decouple" are meaningless, when despite sanctions in some quite expensive things the trade value rises.

So what do you consider the objective standards of Pro/Anti China? Please elucidate them for the audience so there is no shifting goalposts going forward.

If your contention is that America is growing closer to China, then it seems my “defeatism” is well founded; Beijing has already won without a shot fired.

 

[strunkenwhite]

It's rather remarkable you talk about "equivalent statements", and then just brush past the fact even the paragraph you're citing qualifies with "Even If". Beyond that, as I said above, it's clear you didn't actually read the article:

I was talking about the definition of the verb "contest" in the context of air superiority. And you used it wrongly. I surmised that you were just ignorant as to what the word was supposed to mean, but I'm not in your head, so I can't say if you somehow had your facts wrong instead (or also).

 

[History Learner]

I was talking about the definition of the verb "contest" in the context of air superiority. And you used it wrongly. I surmised that you were just ignorant as to what the word was supposed to mean, but I'm not in your head, so I can't say if you somehow had your facts wrong instead (or also).

Except I didn’t, hence why you actually sidestepped the majority of my reply and are now trying to focus on word usage rather than the actual point. That’s a pretty clear indicator you know you’re wrong and don’t want to admit it.

 

[Marduk]

Which is precisely the point and directly stated in the article; the DDP sees provoking China as a negative to their election prospects in 2024. Which is, if you recall, exactly as I said.

Oh DPP does plenty of other things that provoke China. It is directly stated that KMT could see it as provoking China and DPP doesn't want to give them talking points needlessly.

Taiwanese officials have advised McCarthy's staff, according to people familiar with the matter, that a trip this year would be exploited for political purposes by the opposition Nationalist Party, also known as the Kuomintang.

Your usual, childishly malicious word twisting has been noted as usual.

So what do you consider the objective standards of Pro/Anti China? Please elucidate them for the audience so there is no shifting goalposts going forward.

Goalposts? What goalposts? This is not a wannabe lawyer forum. I will not give you statements to twist the meaning of, and i don't feel like hiring a lawyer to write my forum posts.
Skip the whole part where you twist someone else's words to say something idiotic again and just come back to explaining what "contesting air supremacy" means.

If your contention is that America is growing closer to China, then it seems my “defeatism” is well founded; Beijing has already won without a shot fired.

Money and conflicts can have very wild and turbulent relationships. History has plenty of examples. Let's not even go far into history. Remember how EU-Russia trade was supposed to make them "grow closer"? Where is that now?

Trade was recently rising, so clearly the EU is now being deferent to Russia in all matters Russia cares about, obviously...

 

[History Learner]

Oh DPP does plenty of other things that provoke China. It is directly stated that KMT could see it as provoking China and DPP doesn't want to give them talking points needlessly.

Except declare independence after seven years in power, refuse to meet McCarthy in Taiwan so as to explicitly avoid provoking China and refusing to not increase ties, such as by allowing direct flights between China and Taiwan.

Your usual, childishly malicious word twisting has been noted as usual.

Good thing I quoted that to begin with and we both agreed the DPP was trying to avoid empowering the KMT, who already lead in the polls. If you recall, my original contention was that Pro China sentiment was on the upswing in Taiwan.

Goalposts? What goalposts? This is not a wannabe lawyer forum. I will not give you statements to twist the meaning of, and i don't feel like hiring a lawyer to write my forum posts.
Skip the whole part where you twist someone else's words to say something idiotic again and just come back to explaining what "contesting air supremacy" means.

Money and conflicts can have very wild and turbulent relationships. History has plenty of examples. Let's not even go far into history. Remember how EU-Russia trade was supposed to make them "grow closer"? Where is that now?

Trade was recently rising, so clearly the EU is now being deferent to Russia in all matters Russia cares about, obviously...

That’s all well and good, so why don’t you now tell us by which standard you judge objectively if a country is Pro or Anti China? My own standard is having Pro China leadership and enacting policies that favor Chinese interests, which Vietnam is doing.

Please elucidate why you feel this isn’t the case, with clear reasons. It’s a simple question, so I’m not sure why you’re dodging it.

 

[Marduk]

Except declare independence after seven years in power, refuse to meet McCarthy in Taiwan so as to explicitly avoid provoking China and refusing to not increase ties, such as by allowing direct flights between China and Taiwan.

If you repeat the statement i've just called bullshit with proof that won't make it true. They are doing it to not give a talking point to the opposition, not to "not provoke China", are you trolling or what?
Again, who the fuck are you to tell DPP how exactly hostile should they be to China?
Your "if they don't escalate beyond any point in history that means they are capitulating" act is fucking ridiculous, i don't care about your wild pronouncements and designations and neither does anyone with two brain cells to rub together.

Good thing I quoted that to begin with and we both agreed the DPP was trying to avoid empowering the KMT, who already lead in the polls. If you recall, my original contention was that Pro China sentiment was on the upswing in Taiwan.

Of course the DPP is trying to avoid helping the KMT, they have an election to win and it comes before empty gestures, though it "Pro China sentiment was on the upswing in Taiwan" obviously that will not save them. We'll see who wins, and if it's DPP, if they keep doing such maneuvers *after* the election.

That’s all well and good, so why don’t you now tell us by which standard you judge objectively if a country is Pro or Anti China? My own standard is having Pro China leadership and enacting policies that favor Chinese interests, which Vietnam is doing.

Please elucidate why you feel this isn't the case, with clear reasons. It's a simple question, so I'm not sure why you're dodging it.

Vietnam is also entacting pro-US policies when it comes to trade and symbolic gestures by that logic, as shown by massive growth in US-Vietnam trade, so how can they be favoring both China and USA, if trade=favor?
Oh, wait, as i said, this is a silly loose standard for generating gotcha talking points while handwaving away everything that contradicts the narrative you are trying to clearly push, as usual.

Why Vietnam Has Become an Alternative for US Businesses in Asia

Vietnam Briefing examines the growing Vietnam-US relationship and why Vietnam has become a promising alternative for US businesses in Asia

www.vietnam-briefing.com

Vietnam’s Economy and U.S. Trade: Key Issues in 2021

www.everycrsreport.com

Vietnam-US trade hits record high in 2021 | Business | Vietnam+ (VietnamPlus)

Bilateral trade between Vietnam and the US set a new milestone, hitting 111.56 billion USD in 2021, up nearly 21 billion USD over the previous year, according to the General Department of Customs.

en.vietnamplus.vn

Vietnam leaders congratulate US elected president Joe Biden

hanoitimes.vn

 

[History Learner]

If you repeat the statement i've just called bullshit with proof that won't make it true. They are doing it to not give a talking point to the opposition, not to "not provoke China", are you trolling or what?

But you haven’t provided proof Marduk, you just re-cited the article I already provided. You then further made my case for me, as I will get to in a moment.

Again, who the fuck are you to tell DPP how exactly hostile should they be to China?
Your "if they don't escalate beyond any point in history that means they are capitulating" act is fucking ridiculous, i don't care about your wild pronouncements and designations and neither does anyone with two brain cells to rub together.

By the same right you choose to insert your own views as it regards my country, if you recall you opened this thread by calling me a “Defeatist”, which is odd since you’re not American and have equally as little say in our standards as you say I have for Taiwan’s.

Of course the DPP is trying to avoid helping the KMT, they have an election to win and it comes before empty gestures, though it "Pro China sentiment was on the upswing in Taiwan" obviously that will not save them. We'll see who wins, and if it's DPP, if they keep doing such maneuvers *after* the election.

Which is to continue to dance around admitting I was right. We agree there would be a political cost for the DPP to provoke China now domestically, so why would that be the case if there wasn’t Pro China sentiment, exactly as I said?

It cannot logically be both ways, Marduk, which is why we both know you’re dancing around the “cause” part while acknowledging the “effect”. If you feel otherwise, please directly state why.

Vietnam is also entacting pro-US policies when it comes to trade and symbolic gestures by that logic, as shown by massive growth in US-Vietnam trade, so how can they be favoring both China and USA, if trade=favor?
Oh, wait, as i said, this is a silly loose standard for generating gotcha talking points while handwaving away everything that contradicts the narrative you are trying to clearly push, as usual.

Why Vietnam Has Become an Alternative for US Businesses in Asia

Vietnam Briefing examines the growing Vietnam-US relationship and why Vietnam has become a promising alternative for US businesses in Asia

www.vietnam-briefing.com

Vietnam’s Economy and U.S. Trade: Key Issues in 2021

www.everycrsreport.com

Vietnam-US trade hits record high in 2021 | Business | Vietnam+ (VietnamPlus)

Bilateral trade between Vietnam and the US set a new milestone, hitting 111.56 billion USD in 2021, up nearly 21 billion USD over the previous year, according to the General Department of Customs.

en.vietnamplus.vn

Vietnam leaders congratulate US elected president Joe Biden

hanoitimes.vn

Okay, you feel trade is not a measure of influence; good thing I pointed out it went in tandem with a Pro China leader being elected by Vietnam too, which is what you keep avoiding.

Equally, so far the only thing I’ve got out of you is that trade ties aren’t a sign of influence. Okay, what in your mind constituents a nation’s geopolitical leaning? You continue to avoid this for reasons I can’t seem to grasp.

 

[Marduk]

But you haven’t provided proof Marduk, you just re-cited the article I already provided. You then further made my case for me, as I will get to in a moment.

I've re-cited the article you have provided, saying something openly contrary to what you then claimed the article said, as i re-cited it. I rest my case - the case that you can't fucking read with any reasonable level of comprehension of what you're reading.

You said DPP is doing it to not provoke China, yet the article gave a different reason...
So which one is it?

By the same right you choose to insert your own views as it regards my country, if you recall you opened this thread by calling me a “Defeatist”, which is odd since you’re not American and have equally as little say in our standards as you say I have for Taiwan’s.

You're not the legal or elected representative of the country of USA, poindexter.
Doubly so, Taiwan.
Neither am i.

But regardless of any of that, your trolling in that "if Taiwan doesn't do X extreme pro-independence move then it is capitulating to China" style is just your personal (shitty) measure of policy that no one else cares about, i for one say it's a completely bonkers way to measure Taiwan's political stance, we can make it a popularity contest if you want.

Which is to continue to dance around admitting I was right. We agree there would be a political cost for the DPP to provoke China now domestically, so why would that be the case if there wasn’t Pro China sentiment, exactly as I said?

It cannot logically be both ways, Marduk, which is why we both know you’re dancing around the “cause” part while acknowledging the “effect”. If you feel otherwise, please directly state why.

More troll logic. "If some pro-China voters exist in China and DPP doesn't want to help mobilize them, then DPP is avoiding provoking China". It's about the election, not relations with China, as your preferred source stated, so yeah, i'm right, you still didn't learn to read properly.

Okay, you feel trade is not a measure of influence; good thing I pointed out it went in tandem with a Pro China leader being elected by Vietnam too, which is what you keep avoiding.

Hey, he congratulated Biden, so by that logic he is a pro-US leader instead, haha, gotcha.

Equally, so far the only thing I’ve got out of you is that trade ties aren’t a sign of influence. Okay, what in your mind constituents a nation’s geopolitical leaning? You continue to avoid this for reasons I can’t seem to grasp.

Obviously there never was nor ever will be a single, decisive sign, it's a composite of policies and behaviors, while often countries intentionally follow a balancing policy, so it's not even a binary - after all, who said only one country can have influence somewhere and it has to be exclusive? So yeah, sod off with the gotchas, talk seriously or go troll somewhere else.

 

[History Learner]

I've re-cited the article you have provided, saying something openly contrary to what you then claimed the article said, as i re-cited it. I rest my case - the case that you can't fucking read with any reasonable level of comprehension of what you're reading.

You said DPP is doing it to not provoke China, yet the article gave a different reason...
So which one is it?

You cannot rest a case which has yet to be made, unfortunately. The problem here continues to be you are intentionally avoiding the Cause and Effect chain, as I already pointed out once before. My position is that there is surging Pro-China sentiment, and you agreed by noting the DPP has to avoid giving the KMT ammunition. How would the DPP give the KMT ammunition? By provoking China. So how does the DPP avoid giving the KMT ammunition?

By avoiding provoking China.

You're not the legal or elected representative of the country of USA, poindexter.
Doubly so, Taiwan.
Neither am i.

Which takes me back to my original point: if that's the case, then by what right do you as a Pole have to accuse me as an American of being defeatist? You noticeably continue to avoid the flaws in your own stated standards. If I cannot judge Taiwanese politics, you have no basis to judge me by American standards.

But regardless of any of that, your trolling in that "if Taiwan doesn't do X extreme pro-independence move then it is capitulating to China" style is just your personal (shitty) measure of policy that no one else cares about, i for one say it's a completely bonkers way to measure Taiwan's political stance, we can make it a popularity contest if you want.

If declaring Independence is an extreme position for a Pro-Independence Party, then what exactly is their end goal? How are we able to say the DPP is Pro Independence at all if it refuses to actually, you know, declare independence?

More troll logic. "If some pro-China voters exist in China and DPP doesn't want to help mobilize them, then DPP is avoiding provoking China". It's about the election, not relations with China, as your preferred source stated, so yeah, i'm right, you still didn't learn to read properly.

Except the source doesn't say what you claim, hence why you've now changed your goalposts. If what you claim is true, please explain why the DPP didn't want to have McCarthy come to Taiwan?

Hey, he congratulated Biden, so by that logic he is a pro-US leader instead, haha, gotcha.

The problem with that is I never said that anywhere as being the standard; rather, I said Thuong is Pro-China because of his stances and policies, not because Xi congratulated him. Biden certainly isn't Pro China, as evidenced by his policies and stances. It's very clear logical chain of reasoning here.

Obviously there never was nor ever will be a single, decisive sign, it's a composite of policies and behaviors, while often countries intentionally follow a balancing policy, so it's not even a binary - after all, who said only one country can have influence somewhere and it has to be exclusive? So yeah, sod off with the gotchas, talk seriously or go troll somewhere else.

The problem here is you were the one that started this conversation, not me, and you did so by attacking my point that Vietnam (and others!) are trending in a Pro-China direction. Clearly you disagree, yet you oddly still cannot define what that "composite of policies and behaviors" are from which to judge your contention vs mine. If it's unclear, then please explain by what metrics you think they aren't. If you can't define them, then you're admitting it's entirely subjective, so why did you even bother to start this conversation?

 

[Marduk]

You cannot rest a case which has yet to be made, unfortunately. The problem here continues to be you are intentionally avoiding the Cause and Effect chain, as I already pointed out once before. My position is that there is surging Pro-China sentiment, and you agreed by noting the DPP has to avoid giving the KMT ammunition. How would the DPP give the KMT ammunition? By provoking China. So how does the DPP avoid giving the KMT ammunition?

By avoiding provoking China.

Taiwan shoots down drone off Chinese coast for first time

Taiwan’s government has said it will not provoke or escalate tensions but has been angered by repeated cases of Chinese drones buzzing islands.

www.nbcnews.com

Where was the whole "not provoking China" policy when this happened?

Let's say there is an annoying guy called Joe Smith. I would love to punch him in the face.
However, we all know that would not look good for me in an assault case in the court, legal or of public opinion, so in the end i won't do it.
You: Aha, so you are afraid of provoking Joe Smith!

Also, spare me the dramatics with "surging pro-China sentiment".

Taiwan's Desire for Unification With China Near Record Low as Tensions Rise

Only 2.4 percent of Taiwan's residents identify as solely "Chinese," while roughly two-thirds say they are only "Taiwanese," according to new polling.

www.newsweek.com

So here we have an actually relevant poll and we don't have to meander around with extreme positions or lack of them and trying to make grand declarations out of loosely related political considerations:
A record 28.6 percent of those polled said they preferred to "maintain the status quo indefinitely," while 28.3 percent chose the status quo to "decide at a later date." Meanwhile, 25.2 percent of respondents opted for the status quo with a view to "move toward independence."
Long story short, status quo wins by a crushing margin, desire to unify with China is in fact falling, even if desire to declare independence is also falling, and the moderate pro-independence option got much more support than the pro-unification ones.

Which takes me back to my original point: if that's the case, then by what right do you as a Pole have to accuse me as an American of being defeatist? You noticeably continue to avoid the flaws in your own stated standards. If I cannot judge Taiwanese politics, you have no basis to judge me by American standards.

Because i can and you can't stop me, and by the same right i can judge your judgement as fucking ridiculous, which i just did.

If declaring Independence is an extreme position for a Pro-Independence Party, then what exactly is their end goal? How are we able to say the DPP is Pro Independence at all if it refuses to actually, you know, declare independence?

Dunno, perhaps because there are more nuanced options between being for unification and declaring independence? Like, say, the overwhelmingly popular status quo? Why would a political party support a position with about 80% popular support, i wonder...

Except the source doesn't say what you claim, hence why you've now changed your goalposts. If what you claim is true, please explain why the DPP didn't want to have McCarthy come to Taiwan?

The article you have linked explains how it relates to nearing election, cease these silly games.
How could have i moved any goalposts when you demanded that i... provide goalposts in the last post, and i have refused to do so?
Thanks for revealing your plans to yet again move the discussion off topic and into meta-debate larp with no moderator and utterly pointless discussion of muh goalposts and muh claims.

The problem with that is I never said that anywhere as being the standard; rather, I said Thuong is Pro-China because of his stances and policies, not because Xi congratulated him. Biden certainly isn't Pro China, as evidenced by his policies and stances. It's very clear logical chain of reasoning here.

What stances or policies make him pro-China? Supporting trade with China? Exchanging courtesies with China?
That's what you have linked, but as i've shown, he does the same with USA. So is he pro-US too?

The problem here is you were the one that started this conversation, not me, and you did so by attacking my point that Vietnam (and others!) are trending in a Pro-China direction.

You replied to my post from a month ago, clearly asking for comment, so you can't claim i started the conversation you bloody clown, your trolling is the only problem here.

Clearly you disagree, yet you oddly still cannot define what that "composite of policies and behaviors" are from which to judge your contention vs mine. If it's unclear, then please explain by what metrics you think they aren't. If you can't define them, then you're admitting it's entirely subjective, so why did you even bother to start this conversation?

Stick your silly pseudo-debate tactics you know where.

 

[strunkenwhite]

Except I didn’t, hence why you actually sidestepped the majority of my reply and are now trying to focus on word usage rather than the actual point. That’s a pretty clear indicator you know you’re wrong and don’t want to admit it.

Let me remind you what you said: "the U.S. Air Force will no longer even attempt to contest air superiority," and I say that "contest air superiority" means that one side is attempting to establish air superiority and the other side is attempting to stop that from happening, i.e. "contest" it, either to establish their own air superiority or to simply deny the other one air superiority. You may dispute this definition if you have evidence that a different definition should prevail. The evidence you presented in support of your claim in fact contradicts the claim as written, in that it affirms the US will not allow the Chinese to establish air superiority uncontested. If, for argument's sake, you've adequately supported the claim that the US will not attempt to establish air superiority but only shoot for air denial, then you misrepresented the claim you were intending to stake out because of misusing the word "contest".

Second, we may as well ask the question: have you adequately supported the lesser claim? As far as I can see, the linked article merely says, "A strategy of air denial might be the smarter and more economical choice when trying to preserve the status quo on NATO's eastern flank or across the Taiwan Strait." That's hardly an authoritative statement. "The future of air warfare is denial", they say, but that doesn't mean that there will never be traditional air superiority anywhere.