• NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Umm…

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7

    Like… seriously? peaceful integration?

    If you’re going to parrot CCP propaganda you could try to make it a bit less obvious.

    • zephyreks@lemmy.mlOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      People always harp about Chinese airplanes flying in (as the US has established) international airspace. Prior to American FONOPs in the region, China stayed on their “side” of the strait and Taiwan stayed on their “side,” and they would request entry as expected of sovereign airspace. After American FONOPs (which make the strait international waters and thus the air above it international airspace), China no longer requests entry because there’s no requirement to announce entry of international airspace. Really makes you think, doesn’t it?

      The status quo circa 2016 was going to lead to a peaceful balance. Not necessarily reunification, but definitely economic and cultural co-dependence. Since then, relations have deteriorated significantly.

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is intentionally provocative and aggressive. All of these actions occurred in the span of 1 year, Mar 2022-Mar 2023. This is what military aggression looks like. To deny that is disingenuous.

        • zephyreks@lemmy.mlOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Three supposed incursions into territorial waters by unmanned aircraft (supposed, because judging by how they plotted it looks like they discretized movements and just linearly interpolated).

          Flying in international airspace is neither provocative nor aggressive. Flying in sovereign airspace is. That’s literally been the American position justifying their incursions into the SCS. Frankly, they’re not wrong. If the area is international, they are entirely within their rights to sail through it or fly through it. Whether that area is international is up to debate, but under the claim that it is (which Taiwan has not challenged), these operations are entirely legal and entirely justified, just like American FONOPs through the strait are entirely legal and entirely justified and neither provocative nor aggressive.

    • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh god… theyre getting ready for the PLA to swim to Taiwan… oh fuck

      ^^^ the seriousness which those links deserve

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ah yes, simply dismiss any sources that say things that you don’t like. Brilliant strategy, not transparent at all.

        And where are your sources which support your point of view?

        • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Your sources are great, if you wanted to support the claim that western media is saber rattling around China. They do a great job of framing stuff like “China flies jets in Chinese airspace” as aggressive moves on China’s part.

              • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                17
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Citing a four-volume series, which I don’t have on my shelf, doesn’t count as providing a source. This is not a current news article, it is a collection of essays.

                Furthermore because the author is Xi Jinping, this is a first-party source which makes it biased by default - it is inherently self-interested, it cannot be otherwise. This would only be a valid counter if I had posted a link to a publication produced by the government of Taiwan itself, written by its president.

                Reuters, AP News, the Guardian, and Al Jazeera (among the sources I linked) are all far more reliable and more importantly independent third-party sources.

                • OurToothbrush@lemmy.mlM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  19
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Oh, sorry, didn’t realize you wanted me to take you seriously and you also didn’t want to read what Chinese government officials think of the situation. You dont have to read the whole book, you can just read the relevant sections.