Clearly everyone should just let China do whatever they want to avoid war, if we appease them by expanding their territorial claims and avoiding conflict then surely everything will be fine. The politics of appeasement has historically been very successful.
Edit: Stop replying please, I don’t want to waste any more time arguing with y’all.
It is the USA that has been the target of appeasement. Every expansion, every death squad, every war crime, every black site, every assassination, every war of aggression, every single time the world appeases the USA.
If you think the USA is appeasing China, your head is screwed on backwards. I know it’s a common trope for abusers to feel offended and attacked when their victims standup for themselves, and I know you probably stand with the victims and see through the abusers’ bullshit. You need to do that with the USA.
Abu Ghraib - appeased.
Nord Stream 2 - appeased.
Solemaini - appeased.
Iraq - appeased.
Iraq 2 - appeased.
Vietnam - appeased.
Laos - appeased.
Cambodia - appeased.
Korea - appeased.
Hiroshima - appeased.
Nagasaki - appeased.
Guantanamo - appeased.
Libya - appeased.
Syria - appeased.
StuxNet - appeased.
Pulling out of nuclear treaties - appeased.
Refusing to be accountable to ICC - appeased.
Refusing to sign landmine treaty - appeased.
Agent Orange - appeased.
Napalm - appeased.
White phosphorus - appeased.
Depleted Uranium - appeased.
Yugoslavia - appeased.
Afghanistan - appeased.
School of the Americas - appeased.
Wiretapping the entire US civilian population - appeased.
Wiretapping every embassy through Siemens supply chain attack - appeased.
NATO expansion - appeased.
Economic shock therapy kills millions - appeased.
Training terrorists - appeased.
Airlifting terrorists into other countries - appeased.
Environmental devastation - appeased.
Sending expired vaccines - appeased.
Refusing to send vaccines - appeased.
Refusing to follow the predefined protocol for sharing vaccine research - appeased.
Iranian regime change - appeased.
Color revolutions - appeased.
Extracting trillions from Africa - appeased.
Child separation - appeased.
Toddlers in solitary confinement - appeased.
Forced hysterectomies - appeased.
Collective punishment of civilians - appeased.
Support for Israeli apartheid - appeased.
Iran-Contra - appeased.
Fast and Furious - appeased.
CIA drug trafficking - appeased.
Haitian assassination - appeased.
Bolivia - appeased.
Nicaragua - appeased.
Pinochet - appeased.I can keep going if you want.
Fuck the United States. They’re easily the worst, most imperialist nation on the planet. But we’re capable of more nuance than “any country in opposition to the US can do no wrong”
What the fuck is wrong with you? The idea that the USA could possibly engage in appeasement is completely undermined by the fact that THEY ARE THE AGGRESSOR WHO IS BEING APPEASED. When China pushes back against the USA they are not doing something wrong, they are doing something against the USA’s interests. When China doesn’t push back against the USA, they are appeasing.
The entire analysis of “oh everyone is bad and therefore the USA shouldn’t appease them” is completely structureless. It’s all moron vibes.
You see - fuck the US - but if the US is putting 12 000 km away from their mainland military equipment on what they recognize as China’s territory, it is actually “CCP imperialism” if they react ;)
Thanks for your reply, before I address it, I have to ask, would you support it if the CCP government launched a military invasion of Taiwan?
I would need to analyze the situation. The CPC has established it will not do this for any reason except to protect Chinese national security interests. If it turns out that the USA delivers advanced missile “defense” systems and other nuclear capabilities including submarines, air power, and other plaforms and assets, then it will be all but strategically certain that China will be forced to use military action to push the USA off the island and out of the surrounding waters.
Given the analysis of the Ukraine conflict, it’s possible that China may need to include other considerations that I am not fully up to speed on about American capabilities and American proxy war strategies.
In short, yes, I trust the CPC to only use military force when all other options for defense against the USA have been exhausted. This has been their policy and doctrine for a while and there are no indications of it changing anytime soon.
Honestly, I don’t think we really disagree all that much in broad terms. We both hate US imperialism. I just don’t see the CCP as an omni-benevolent state which can do no wrong. Until the world is ready to fully transition away from capitalism, greed and totalitarianism, it is best to limit the power and influence of nation states. And that includes states which claim to be transitioning towards communism. Checks and balances against supremacy prevents anti-revolutionary elements from seizing control of the state and turning its power against the people. Let’s just agree to disagree, move on with our lives, and spend our energy arguing with people who still support capitalism instead.
We do disagree, a lot. For example you think I believe that China is omnibenevolent. I don’t.
Another example, you think it’s possible to limit the power and influence of nationstates without simultaneously expanding the power and influence of nationstates. Exactly how do you think this is possible? Who, exactly, is going to limit the power and influence of China? After that power and influence is limited, what do you think will happen to the power and influence of others.
What you don’t seem to understand is that China is STILL going through the process of limiting the power and influence of the North Atlantic in China’s own physical location. The USA however, is busy limiting the power and influence of other nations in those nations’ physical locations. Pushing back against the North Atlantic is literally how you achieve the goal you say you want.
The idea of having checks and balances in an international world order that has spent the last 600 years dominating 80% of the world’s population with abject brutality and genocide required the expansion of power and influence of formerly oppressed states. Like it or not, you can’t just reduce the USA’s influence with vibes while the USA reduces China’s influence with nukes.
deleted by creator
Do you not believe in supporting the lesser evil? I thought libs loved that shit.
I’m not a lib. And no, I don’t believe in supporting the lesser evil. I don’t support any evil.
I’m not a lib.
Oh sorry, you’re an ultra, my mistake.
How is it idealistically opposing everyone everywhere and never accomplishing anything?
Why do you try to attack an identity you’re assuming that I hold, rather than addressing my actual arguments? Could it be because you’re incapable of actually successfully arguing against the points I’m making?
And no, I’m not an “ultra”, though it’s quite a vaguely defined term, I’m not opposed to all of the structures that ultra-leftists are traditionally opposed to. Keep guessing, though. You’ll probably get it eventually. The world is a nuanced place and you shouldn’t try to shove everything into a convenient box to make it easier to deal with. That’s lib behaviour. You should know better.
Your argument seems to be that we should oppose all sides equally, regardless of context.
Do you even support anything?
Whatabout, whatabout, whatabout.
You realize that if country A does something bad, “Country B did something bad too!” is not actually a defense of country A’s behaviour? Indeed, it just implies that you agree that that behaviour is bad.
Moron vibes.
China isn’t doing something bad. The USA is an aggressor in the region and has been for decades. The USA took over for the French in Vietnam, and that goes back a long time. The USA took over from Japan in Korea, and that goes back awhile too. The USA is the active aggressor here. The idea that China pushing back against USA aggression could ever be considered appeasement is completely illogical.
What China is doing is not capable of being appeased. It would be like saying that if Nazi Germany left Poland alone because Poland was fighting back then Germany would be guilty of appeasing Poland. It’s moronic beyond fucking belief.
No. It’s not whataboutism, it’s evidence that your argument is illogical. The USA cannot possibly appease China because the USA is the one being appeased the world over. The USA is the Fourth Reich. When China opposes it, China is doing its part to create a future where the USA no longer can hurt the supermajority of the world’s people.
Fuck your liberal brain rot.
If this is bad behavior than what do you call the countless military exercises the US does all over the world as a show of force against other sovereign nations?
The reality is that doing a military exercise in your own backyard is required for national security. Look at a map some day. Tell me what’s wrong with China doing exercises off their own coast.
No these were off Taiwan’s coast.
Which is a) literally off the coast of China and b) internationally recognized as China’s sovereign territory
Military exercises on their own territory as recognized by the United Nations and almost every single country on Earth? What is the issue here?
The Taiwan Province is an inalienable part of the People’s Republic of China:
And this is recognized by the United Nations ever since 1971 after UNGAR 2758.
Source, page 546: https://web.archive.org/web/20230503050030/https://legal.un.org/unjuridicalyearbook/pdfs/english/volumes/2010.pdf
Video of the votes happening: https://invidious.projectsegfau.lt/watch?v=sfOIEjuXFyU
why are you showing me excerpt’s from PRC’s constitution? Yeah, China claims Taiwan the same way Russia claims Ukraine, I dont care what the aggressor imperialist country thinks, I care what the people within the territory think. And what they wanted was to host a US official in their territory, and then China decided to threaten them. I get the impression folks in your circle have nothing but disdain for the people in Taiwan and dont care what they want.
That UN vote is not about Taiwan being a part of PRC, it’s about who represents ‘China’ in the UN.
That UN vote is not about Taiwan being a part of PRC, it’s about who represents ‘China’ in the UN.
Exactly, and the Taiwan Province is a part of CHINA, which is represented by the government in Beijing (PRC), before UNGAR 2758 it was represented by the government in Taipei (ROC).
“Taiwan” is not a country, regardless of one’s position on this they are either a province of the People’s Republic of China or of the Republic of China.
Oh geez. This thread is great. Thanks for the laugh! 😂
The only territorial claims China has tried to enforce recently are to literally uninhabited lands (Aksai Chin and the SCS islands) and Taiwan (which they are still at war with).
How much do you really care about a piece of rock with no people and no animals living on it?
So the CCP is full of idiots that are willing to weaken their international relations for a bunch of useless pieces of rock? Is that what you are saying?
Damn Taiwan is a piece of rock with no people on it?
Can you explain to the crowd how you felt comfortable enough to pretend that the country of Taiwan is a barren rock without any people living on it?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Removed by mod
Isn’t is great when someone speaks and tells you everything about who they are as a person.
Wanting US empire to collapse is certainly not everything I am as a person. I guess some are only capable to see others are cartoonish cardboard cutouts as opposed to actual people.
The person you replied to is from the UK, so what are you going on about right now?
Evidently you don’t understand what the word empire means. UK is a vassal state of the US and part of the empire.
You literally live in a fantasy world.
You literally have no clue about the world if you genuinely think that.
These are the territorial claims of the government on Taiwan, from a state the US and much of the Western world support or at least de facto like to defend in Asia. They never made any remarks regarding Taiwan’s claims with 18 other countries. If the US supports peace in the Asia Pacific (besides looking at a map and asking why the US has even a say about Asia in the first place), then surely Mainland China must be supported, as by protecting & legitimizing Taiwan’s constitution, you’re approving this shit in Asia.
But let me guess, neoliberal countries get a pass from the crackerverse?
Holy shit, you’re telling me that both sides in a civil war think they should have full control of the country they’re in a civil war over? Hang on I need to sit fucking down my head is spinning
Civil war is when two sides of a nonviolent conflict peacefully negotiate reintegration.
Better send weapons to Taiwan!
Here’s a question for you: would you support a Chinese military invasion of Taiwan?
No, but if it weren’t for Western provocations that would never have been on the table. What do you think giving weapons to Taiwan does? China will not tolerate an arms buildup in Taiwain, it will attack as a result. That’s not good and I don’t support it, but that’s the material reality that you refuse to accept.
If the Taiwanese state would never capitulate and reintegrate peacefully with the CCP state, which is their claim, then wouldn’t that make an invasion of Taiwan inevitable, regardless of weapons?
Never is a long time and, with the right incentives, that stance can be changed peacefully.
No, I think you need to read my comment and your’s again. You say appeasement politics will lead to no good, so… you protect the ROC’s claims instead, which is even appeasing more that just leaving China. I caught your illogical argument, and distilled it to the meaningless content that it was. Now you pretend stupid to run away from that illogical claim. But you can’t win against me, who studied at Oxford, Nato boy
you can’t win against me, who studied at Oxford, Nato boy
This is the most unbelievably embarrassing thing I have ever read on Lemmy. Honestly, if you regret writing this, please let me know. I will amend my comment to erase the fact you ever wrote it.
you protect the ROC’s claims
Please cite evidence of my support of Taiwan’s territorial claims. If you believe that opposing CCP imperialism means that one must also support Taiwanese territorial claims then you have made an incorrect assumption - and a converse error on your part does not constitute a failure on mine.
I’m very sorry that I refuse to defend the strawman you so thoughtfully prepared for me. By all means, whack away at him. I would suggest that you take your own advice, by the way, and read my actual comment and respond to the text of what I wrote, not some imagined subtext your Oxford-educated brain conjured to allay your cognitive dissonance. Oh, and one last thing - whatever your parents paid for that education, unfortunately it would appear to have turned out a poor investment.
Then get prepped, cause I did my postgraduate at MIT as well. There are no smarter guys than those graduating there. I knew you would now claim “where did I said we need support Taiwanese territorial claims mimimi”. Did you read the article and what it is about? What is the US and what is China’s point of conflict? Tell me, how can you say “we can’t appease China blabla…” to do what? Taiwan is the exact part of their sovereign terrorial claims. Opposing them on the fact that Taiwan becomes/remains independant is exactly enabling the territorial claims of the state on that island, ROC.
And now you backpedal, “I’m commenting on the article but in fact I do not support US point of view and argue without the context of any article we comment on!!!1! Its my isolated opinion from those events and blabla” or “Actually I meant we should oppose China but also make demands on Taiwan’s contitution and put conditions on their clams blabla…”. I know that if you would understand any of this conflict or history you wouldn’t actually call under the article of US warmongering, encirclement and violation of the One-China policy regarding China’s claim of Taiwan, an act of “CCP imperialism”. But know you backtrack and try to slip away like a oily snake. There is no escape from my superior arguing skills, and you’re critic of appeasing hypocritical is false even on the level of formal logics.
whatever your parents paid for that education, unfortunately it would appear to have turned out a poor investment.
This is the real strawman in this thread.
You sound like Donald Trump lmao. “Oh I went to Harvard got really good grades”.
I haven’t backpedaled on shit. I wrote a top level reply in an off-site comments section. I am not required to take an all-or-nothing position, either wholeheartedly agreeing or disagreeing with every claim in the article. The world has nuance.
“Oh I went to Harvard got really good grades”
Then next, guess where I did my PhD.
I haven’t backpedaled on shit. I wrote a top level reply in an off-site comments section. I am not required to take an all-or-nothing position, either wholeheartedly agreeing or disagreeing with every claim in the article. The world has nuance.
A lot of words for saying you have no consistent logic. If you understand the claims of Taiwan and that the US is supporting this state, you can’t impossible speak of “CCP imperialism”, in the context of ROC’s claims, and call their right for their territory as appeasement. But I know that people outside of Harvard have liquid arguments.
Btw lmao I neither studied at US nor UK, that only a joke. Yes I think he said something along that with Harvard lol
oh my god he’s got the 1’s mixed in with exclamation marks, god thats old school childish
deleted by creator
Holy fucking cringe, if I was the CCP propaganda office I would want my money back.
What actions have they taken in pursuit of these supposed claims?
Well, if they are so democratic, and support other nations sovereignty as they would like their own, why don’t they remove them from their constitution? I have a feeling you have no idea of the ideology of the state on that island.
So no actions needing attention like we’re giving to China for threatening the sovereignty of other independent nations.
Wdym? I said it does not make sense to say appeasement politics is bad but then by supporting the government on Taiwan, and appeasing their claims. If anything we need to define sovereignity first and then support a side on conditions. Which are obvioulsy not made regarding Taiwan’s claims because of Westerners lust for hegemony.
the only claim being appeased is to what they already control, Taiwan. That’s their country. I asked for specific actions being taken by Taiwan to take territory from sovereign nations. What other claims are we appeasing? Has there been military action against Mongolia, or Japan, that we are hypocritically ignoring? What threat to other nation’s sovereignty are we ignoring from Taiwan?
the only claim being appeased is to what they already control, Taiwan
That’s not true, or at least what I would argue. You can point me to any article where some Western politician is saying “as long as Taiwan want it’s island we support that, but not more than that”. In fact, I don’t know of any conditions the US or anybody who defends Taiwanese independence, is making regarding their claims. There is no “Taiwan only” constitution that the US supports. This is the needle in the ass of the PRC. I think it would be a different situation, if Taiwan (and the US) would say "we want Taiwan to be its own country, and we recognize the PRC as the successor of China.
But they don’t do that. They actually support the ROC and everything on their constitution. Including the 11-dash line in the South China Sea, that is larger than what China is drawing with their 9-dash line That they are for the “will of the Taiwanese to just be independant on their island” is for the public of the G7 countries. Nobody is willing to give up the territories of ROC afaik. Yes the ROC can’t do anything about it in terms of military power, but they equally don’t make any steps to remove them. (But I think if the US tells it’s guys at the DPP to create such a constitution that claims only the island of Taiwan, they will only do it to provocate an attack by China. But that’s beyond my point and the map above.)
China creates conflict with all its neighbours and tries to steal their territorial waters.
China threatens the existence of an independent Taiwan.
China commits literal genocide against Uyghurs
And it’s the US starting shit this time? Give me a fucking break imperialist sympathisers.
Explain why any of that is the US’s problem or necessitates a response from the US at all.
Morally, we made a commitment to preserve democracy and we keep our word.
Geopolitically, microchips.
we made a commitment to preserve democracy
Huh, when did you make such a commitment? Sometime in between of toppling democratic governments, installing dictators around the world and invading sovereign nations?
Well the moral argument is obviously false on its face.
But the microchips argument is also bizarre. Taiwan isn’t the only country that makes microchips. In fact the US has been spending large amounts of money to stand up domestic chip manufacturing. And China is also the leading global supplier of plenty of other commodities. Why is it that only matters for microchips?
Morally… 🤣
“The West” is essentially the group of nations attempting to abide by a moral code. It is not always, or maybe even often, successful, but there is a vast gulf between their morality-based approach and what China, Russia, DPRK, and other fascist/semi-fascist nations are doing.
Nah the west pulls plenty of shady, awful crap but that’s just a reason for the west (and everybody else) to try to be better - it shouldn’t be used as an excuse for other countries doing evil shit.
It’s amazing anyone can believe they are well informed and unironically say this bullshit
The well-being of the world should be everyone’s problem. It’s just that with the largest economy and comparative power in the world, the US has a greater responsibility than most. Queue the Spiderman quote.
This role of “world police” has not paid off for the US for the last 50+ years we’ve been doing it.
Idk their economy definitely has benefitted from stuff like international shipping (which their “world police” have been essential in protecting) it’s just that they allow their oligarchs to seize most of the profits. Their government definitely didn’t take up the role out of the good of their hearts!
I don’t think international shipping was under much threat from Iraq or Afghanistan.
So first, the US having military bases surrounding China is tied into why they disagree with their neighbors. They allowed the US on the boarder so it makes sense they aren’t stoked about it. The US has at least 750 military bases around the world in 80 countries. The next closest country has 145 bases and thats the UK. If we want to reference imperialism, then starting with the US is the most practical based on this alone.
In addition, only 12 countries consider Taiwan as an independent country. Regardless if this is correct, the actions the US has recently taken with Taiwan is without question increasing tension in an already tense situation.
Furthermore, following the numbers on the Uyghur women being forced to have contraception implants would mean each woman has 8 impants. This makes absolute zero sense. The fact the US media’s primary source on the Uyghur situation is an outright lunatic does help make it all add up though.
All in all, it takes two to tango for sure. Yet the US seeing it’s global power drastically decline makes their moves less obfuscated and vividly more desperate.
It’s not imperialism when the bases are invited and accepted. These bases open up because the host nations are worried about China and the US is the only country that has the scale to oppose a murderous regime from dominating the region.
It’s not that the US hasn’t also done bad things - it’s that they’re seen as a safer bet, despite those bad things, for those countries maintaining their independence.
Please give me an example of where the US was invited in by the people of a country. That certainly didn’t happen in Japan, Korea, or the Philippines unless you’re a fan of right wing dictators.
Tell me you’re a lib who doesn’t know what imperialism is without saying it directly holy fucking shit
Why are there so many brain dead takes in this thread? Who the fuck can possibly believe that imperialism can’t be imperialism if it’s “invited”?
Tell me you’re a tankie who doesn’t know what communism is without saying it directly holy fucking shit
Why are there so many brain dead takes in this thread? Who the fuck can possibly believe that communism can’t be communism if it’s “invited”?
Did you just have a stroke? Because your comment doesn’t make any sense at all…
Ah, there’s the lemmy.ml tankies trying to obfuscate China’s human rights abuses.
If you’re concerned about human rights, why gloss over the US being notorious for human rights abuse? They have the largest prison population ever, comprised primarily of minorities who were obscenely experimented on during MK Ultra. Plus the prior and current treatment of Native Americans or the 6,000,000+ innocent citizens killed in the war on terror. The US is no longer even classified as a first world country. But it doesn’t matter cause the news said the US is definitely the best choice for the world police.
Are you for bombing Mexico to stop the opioid crisis too? While the idea is gaining traction stateside, it takes minutes to understand of the 14,000+ pounds of fentanyl seized at the Mexican boarder in 2022, over 90% was from US citizens. But logic is totally overrated when it comes to international law I guess.
The Americans doing bad shit doesn’t make it alright for China and Russia to do the same bad shit. Is it alright to keep slaves just because the yanks used to do it too? Is torturing and executing prisoners acceptable behaviour to you?
What about, what about
Hey, I’m the one that started the whataboutism article even.
nah fuck China y’all simp for them
Taiwan is a sovereign nation
Hogwarts School of Witchcraft is a boarding school for wizards.
Same energy in this statement.
Your crowd loves strawmen so much.
I mean, you posted provably false bs. How can I not troll? Even the state on Taiwan claims Taiwan is only a region of a country, and not a nation lmao
25% of Taiwanese want independence.
6.8% of Taiwanese want to join China.
The others want things to stay the same, I.e functionally independent.
But hey let’s ignore the will of the people and impose imperialist rhetoric on why they don’t deserve self-determination.
What are you even talking about? The original commenter began trolling by on purpose stating some basic fact even these people whose will you support would say is not true. There is no constitution or state that calls itself Taiwan.
I’m talking about Taiwanese calling themselves an independent country. They are because the people living there consider themselves as such.
The government cannot come out and say it because they will be invaded if they break the status quo.
Hence we have to look at the will of the people to determine such things and that proves you wrong.
Yes I know what you mean, but see, there is ROC whose contitution currenlty says Taiwan is only a region, and the PRC, who says the same. This is what I adressed before. And besides, by the poll you mention, that even undermines it, as when the rest supports things stay the same, means the majority supports Taiwan is a part of ROC.
25% isn’t the will of the people lol
The 6.8% not wanting to be independent is the telling part.
Everyone else either wants to openly call themselves independent on carry on as they are in already being functionally independent.
tl;dr: No one wants to be part of China or not independent.
The vast majority of people want things to stay the same. Both independence and reintegration are very small minorities.
What that tells me is China has a lot of work to do to entice Taiwan. That’s it.
Well at least you admit to trolling.
I didn’t know Truthout was a CCP propaganda outlet. Glad to know.
containment, encirclement, etc
Exactly what Russia said pre February 2022
How weak do you have to be that sailing boats 100 mi from your shores is an act of war, and by the way, if it is an act of war there’s a concerning lack of response to it
No see it’s NOT a threat when the US surrounds China with literally dozens of military installations placed as close to their border as possible and actively practices military drills on their borders with their puppet states because the US is “good” and China is “bad” and our understanding of geopolitics shouldn’t go any further than that because China scary bad
Vietnam us puppet state confirmed
If China wants to set up navy bases in mexico or whatever they’re more than welcome, but they should recognize that their own harassment of shipping hundreds of miles from its shores is why those bases are there in the first place
You know full well that if China were to attempt to establish a military base in Tijuana then the US would invade Mexico within the month. Don’t be dense. The last time a geopolitical rival set up a base near the US we invaded, nearly started a nuclear war, and blockade them for 80 years.
The US is the walking embodiment of “rules for thee, but not for me” in international politics
Don’t be dense
I would suggest you start by admitting you know that the entirety of the South China Sea is not Chinese territory, as the Gulf of Mexico and bearing sea is not the US’
a geopolitical rival set up a base near the US
That’s a funny way of saying “covertly placed nuclear missiles in range to attempt a decapitating first strike” which is especially weird because you said we’re done being dense, I guess you’d be the expert in “rules for thee but not for me”
“covertly placed nuclear missiles in range to attempt a decapitating first strike”
Ah the nice retcon of history. Cuba missiles were only placed as only covert first strike weapons, while being invaded, having wide spread US state sponsored terrorism, and direct evidence that the US would further esclate soon. Not for a retaliatory strike against expected extreme American aggression- but for covert first strike.
I think youre better off referring to actual “covertly placed nuclear missiles in range to attempt a decapitating first strike” in deployed in Turkey.
We have nukes in Turkey, The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, and Italy. All of which are within easy first strike distance of Russia. Especially Turkey. And that’s just the ones we know of. I have no doubt there are others we haven’t told the public about.
Yet when Russia tried to get nukes in Cuba for the same reason, you’re claiming it was definitely for a first strike. The Russians said that the nukes in Cuba were not for a first strike, just like NATO does with the nukes in Turkey. Why do you believe NATO and not Russia? Only one side of the cold war had EVER used a nuclear first strike, and it wasn’t the Russians…
Wars are great for the economy. Color me completely unsurprised if politicians are starting to see it as strategy.
deleted by creator
