[trasz]

China is essentially pacifist. And it’s not just their politics; it’s how Chinese - the actual people - feel. Invading anyone just isn’t their thing.

So, they are quite unhappy with Russia’s invasion, but they can’t join US sanctions, because US. Instead they’ll probably sanction Russia silently, and then buy out Russian industry for peanuts.

[eloisius]

This is news for anyone living in Taiwan.

[trasz]

Only if you believe in propaganda instead of looking at the facts. Can you tell me what offensive actions against Taiwan China has actually made?

[adventured]

> Only if you believe in propaganda instead of looking at the facts. Can you tell me what offensive actions against Taiwan China has actually made?

You're clearly ignoring facts. They have increasingly frequently breached Taiwan's airspace with attack aircraft, which is a crystal clear threat that nobody can confuse (which is the point). And when they're not airspace breaches, they're as close as they can get to it in order to torment/bully Taiwan.

January 22: "Taiwan reports new large-scale incursion by Chinese warplanes. The 39 planes warned away from the island’s air defense zone were the most on a single day since October."

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/taiwan-reports-new-large-...

China has also directly threatened to force Taiwan into reunification as needed. The threat of force is an offensive action. If I threaten to invade my neighbor's house to take their property, that's an offensive action, it's not mere speech. If I threaten to kill my neighbor (which is what a forced reunification entails to one degree or another), that is an offensive action, it is not mere speech.

"China’s Xi threatens Taiwan with force but also seeks peaceful 'reunification'"

https://www.france24.com/en/20190102-china-xi-jinping-says-t...

[eloisius]

I consider the threat of violence to be violence, so I'm with you, China commits aggressive offenses against Taiwan by threatening anexation. But, a significant nit I have to pick is that China doesn't violate Taiwanese airspace. Doing that could be an act of war and may get a plane shot down. They enter Taiwan's ADIZ, which span Taiwanese airspace, over international waters and even covers about 2/3 of China's Fujian province. ADIZ isn't airspace. It's just the zone that Taiwan monitors.

[trasz]

“Chinese people don’t attack other Chinese people. We are willing to use the greatest sincerity and expend the greatest hard work to strive for the prospect of peaceful reunification”

Warmongering indeed. /s

[eloisius]

Followed by “We do not promise to renounce the use of force and reserve the option to use all necessary measures”

[trasz]

“… against external military intervention”. That’s a pretty crucial detail you’ve left out.

[eloisius]

Are we limited to actions they have successfully carried out, or just those they threaten to? Are you implying that it’s Western/Taiwanese propaganda that China is willing to forcibly unify Taiwan and that in fact China would never consider it?

[trasz]

Precisely - China has been repeatedly saying they wouldn’t invade Taiwan. What you are describing is our western rhetoric built around it, which essentially assumes everything they say is a lie.

We are perversely enthusiastic towards wars. Chinese - the people, not just their government - hate war. Even if sometimes it’s not a good thing, like when declining to join economic war against Russia.

[reducesuffering]

> China has been repeatedly saying they wouldn’t invade Taiwan.

This is the argument you're still positing after the last month? Is the irony lost on you? I guess if it's not crystal clear: https://www.npr.org/2022/01/10/1071766987/u-s-russia-dicuss-...

[acdha]

> China has been repeatedly saying they wouldn’t invade Taiwan

China also promised that Hong Kong would operate as it had until 2047 so clearly the Taiwanese have reason to question the sincerity of these claims.

[dirtyid]

PRC had the legal right to enforce NSL in HK if city failed to do so herself, especially if lack of NSL threatened PRC security. Similarly PRC has legal right (anti secession law) to restart civil war with TW if she moves towards secession, which would threaten PRC security. Clearly PRC have reason to question current TW developments with Tsai not reaffirming 92 consensus.

[eloisius]

Xi has said over and over that if his ends can’t be achieved peacefully he will use force to unify Taiwan with China. He’s said that Taiwan independence is a red line for invasion. I’m having a hard time believing that you’re arguing in good faith while denying these facts, which can be found in Western, Taiwanese and Chinese media.

[trasz]

No - he said he would use force against a military intervention by another state. Followed by repeating that this won’t be used against Taiwan citizens.

So, who left that detail out - you, or the medium you trusted?

[acdha]

Is it propaganda that China blocks international recognition of Taiwan? That's not the same as troops on the ground but it's a pretty basic rejection of their sovereignty and it shows up all over the place accompanied by threats.

[trasz]

According to various polls about half of Taiwanese support maintaining current status quo; those who prefer independence are still a (growing) minority.

This alone, when compared with your assumptions, shows the rift between reality and western media rhetorics.

[acdha]

If you're familiar with the polls, you should also know that this issue is more complicated than how you're portraying it. The status quo isn't miserable so it's unsurprising that many people want to avoid forcing changes which have potentially disastrous downsides. That makes it important to specify exactly which polls you're referring to and what the options are.

Here's a good chart to consider for the history percentages of people who identify as Taiwanese rather than Chinese or both. Clearly that has been moving solidly in the direction of an independent identity:

https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/upload/44/doc/6961/People202112.jpg

(Source: https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/PageDoc/Detail?fid=7800&id=6961)

Now, here's the chart from polls looking at what people want:

https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/upload/44/doc/6963/Tondu202112.jpg

(Source: https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/PageDoc/Detail?fid=7801&id=6963)

That shows a more complicated position: support for either immediate unification or independence has been a minority position for a long time but “maintain status quo, move towards independence” has grown from ~8% to 25% with a notable spike starting in 2019 and a decline in both “maintain status quo, decide at later date” and “maintain status quo, move toward unification”.

[nowherebeen]

Err.. daily trespassing airspace to measure their response time.

[eloisius]

To be fair, they don't violate Taiwanese airspace. They enter Taiwan's Air Defense Identification Zone, and Taiwan scrambles jets in preperation to intercept if they violate airspace. But they have periodically threatened to do a flyover to assert their claims.

[mekster]

You already forgot what happened in Hong Kong?

[freeflight]

You apparently forgot what happened in Nanking in 1842 [0], you know, how Hong Kong ended up as "British" in the first place?

That didn't happen trough "democracy and freedom", that happened trough literal British colonial conquest and subjugation.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Nanking#Cession_of_H...

[adventured]

Why would an offense from 150 years ago justify the enslavement and torture (revocation of all human rights by a dictatorship) of a free people today? It obviously doesn't.

[freeflight]

The only reason HK wasn't Chinese for 150 years, was that the British very much did use offensive military action to take it from China.

That would be the actual example of using offensive military action to take over other countries territories, but it was Colonial Britain doing it, taking away territories from China.

To get that territory back China did not invade HK with an military offensive, so you using HK as an example for such a thing happening is just weird and completely opposite to what actually happened with HK.

Adding some pointless fluff about "enslavement, torture, human rights" and all the usual memes does not detract from that point, it's just moving the goalpost, it's trying to evoke emotions over a situation that international law wise is quite unspectacular.

It's also historically revisionist, as it implies British HK didn't start out as a colony very much based on enslavement and exploitation, not out of some grander ambition to "bring human rights and democracy!" to the people of HK.

[nowherebeen]

Very well put. History is always used as justification, because then its no longer a proaction, but a reaction - Its victimhood.

[trasz]

Revocation of all human rights? You aren’t mistaking China and North Korea, are you?

Also, we don’t need to look 150 years back. It’s enough to look at current statistics from American penitentiary system to notice continued race-based mass oppression, and to some extent (fortunately slowly winding down) literal slavery in private prisons.