BF2S Forums Australian politics thread.

"Currently, with the pandemic still spreading across the world, the most pressing task is to put people's life and health first and work together to defeat the virus," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said.

"At such a critical juncture, it is highly irresponsible to resort to politically motivated suspicion and accusation.

"We advise the Australian side to put aside ideological bias and political games, focus on the welfare of the Australian people and global public health security, follow the international community's collective will for cooperation, and contribute to the global cooperation in fighting the virus, instead of doing things to the contrary."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-26/ … y/12185988
Is it just me or does that sound like a threat?

Dilbert_X wrote:

It took the dropping of a fusion bomb on Japan for them to accept that fusion with the world order was the better option over world domination.

you are so full of this ahistorical claptrap, i really wonder how you believe the rubbish you spout. you would really do well to take a summer course in a history (or a humanities!) degree to practice what you preach, scoff a little less, and learn how to construe an argument.

it (arguably, at least) took an atomic bomb to stop an imperial, militarised japan with a war government on a war footing, committed to an extreme ideology of racial purity and emperor-worship. of course, you with your racial-essentialist vision of the world see it in simpler terms: the jap menace had to be brought to heel! as if before being terra-formed into a radioactive car park they were some species of dog or were pig ignorant. you evidently have little to no understanding of why japan even adopted an aggressive phase of expansion aided by an extreme form of ethno-nationalism.

ironically japan's own imperial ambitions and efforts at becoming a major power were highly influenced by .... 'the world order' such as it existed in the 19th century. you make it sound as if they were an alien species who had to be talked around to the good old ways of western civilisation. very odd. 'fusion with the world order'. ah, yes, that highly cohesive world order that existed before 1938 or 1894. lol. europe's over-extended and in some cases decaying empires in the far-east were an easy land grab; america's actions in the 19th century could hardly be called non-acquisitive, and were a same response to the waning imperial power of spain (mexico, guam, cuba, puerto rico ... the philippines); japan were already playing the game of the 'world order'.

how is there a comparison with contemporary china in any way? why would china need to be so aggressive and acquisitive? your best explanation thus far seems to be 'they will do it to put down discontent at home', an extremely spurious line of thinking when you're talking about mobilising armies of millions of troops in massive ground wars. china is achieving global pre-eminence through 'soft power' and 'neo-colonial' means in africa and the developing world. they are already one of the heaviest investors in africa -- all that and they have about 2 military bases on the entire continent. japan's expansion and organisation at the turn of the 20th century must be understood in the paradigm of 'the age of empire', not to say in the history of nascent fascism and military-industrialism. china's growth and rise has been achieved almost entirely using the market and trade, not conquest, an option that wasn't available to japan in 1880.

the rules of the game have fundamentally changed since then, and your schoolboy reading on the 'evil axis' and vague gestures towards 'china in 1949', 'japan being nuked' are not going to cut it. like it or not, their syncretic, hybrid, un-pindownable combination of communism and capitalism has lifted the greatest number of people out of poverty in the history of the world, and they haven't had to make military attempts at 'world domination' to do it.

Last edited by uziq (2020-04-26 02:07:55)

jesus christ it's like you haven't read the last 3 pages. TAIWAN IS NOT AUSTRALIA.

best of luck.

ah yes, korea and japan, those powerhouses of manufacturing. samsung and sony with their completely in-house electronic supply lines.

dilbert has yellow peril syndrome, it's been obvious for years.

you have no real clue of modern china's history or politics, whereas larssen clearly has a working idea.

you prognosticate based on fears. may as well be reading palms. or, in your case, reading skin colour, as that seems to be the main thing that fuels your imaginary. did you perhaps watch '300' one too many times and took to heart the crude stylization of the dark marauding foreigner?

Dilbert_X wrote:

I'm seeing them taking over island chains and building amphibious assault ships.
https://navaltoday.com/2020/04/24/china … -launched/

For a country which plans to stay within its own borders it sure is expanding its navy and territory.

yeah but america made alliances in the region hundreds of years ago. that makes china stealing shoreline from vietnam okay.

Larssen wrote:

You all started with the notion that the west will be directly militarily threatened by China

I did not.

Dilbert_X wrote:

I'm seeing them taking over island chains and building amphibious assault ships.
https://navaltoday.com/2020/04/24/china … -launched/

For a country which plans to stay within its own borders it sure is expanding its navy and territory.

and we clearly stated that with america's 'pivot to asia' as their main strategy of foreign policy for the early-21st century, china escalating their naval presence is an entirely rational response.

in other news, russia didn't like NATO putting missile installations across its entire western border, either. actions, reactions.

you prefer to think of china like mordor, a place shrouded in shadow full of orc half-men gearing for war.

Last edited by uziq (2020-04-29 06:55:17)

SuperJail Warden wrote:

My problem with you and Uzique was that you were both defending China as "a nation of peace" when it clearly isn't.

When did I ever claim something like that? All I stated is that their focus is on internal political issues and not what Dilbert thinks. This is objectively true.

12 Years later Malka Leifer has been ruled fit to face eaxtraditions proceedings.

I predict the quid pro quo is Australia will approve Israel annexing the West Bank.