carpoftruth [any, any]

  • 16 Posts
  • 1.14K Comments
Joined 8 months ago
cake
Cake day: October 23rd, 2023

help-circle



  • This is a good overview of Taiwan’s recent history as RoC vs PRC, as well as the American influence there. Start brushing up on history now to prep for war with China sadness

    https://warwickpowell.substack.com/p/dire-straits

    spoiler

    This essay aims to unpack this pivot and how it relates to US ‘grand strategy’ ambitions, historically and in the present. To summarise the key points and arguments:

    Taiwan island in and of itself has no sovereignty status as a nation state. The island is part of a single Chinese sovereign territory. This is the position embedded in the Constitution of the Republic of China (ROC), the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), resolutions of the United Nations, and positions of the United States Government as articulated in various communiques and official documents. It’s also a position accepted by the overwhelming majority of countries around the world.

    This status matters, because attempts to alter this status is one of the root causes of current frictions. Taiwan island remains subject to administrative dispute between two competing Chinese administrations. This stems from a not fully resolved civil war, dating back to the 1930s and 1940s. The status of the island can only be understood in the context of this unfinished civil war.

    The US has long harboured ambitions to occupy and control the island for its own strategic purposes. This has seen the island positioned as a potential launchpad to prosecute either a geopolitical or at times a “spiritual war” against mainland (Communist) China; and at other times, the island has been a bulwark protecting America’s Lake - namely the greater Pacific Ocean.

    Today, the US is fanning regional instability in Asia through the application of strategies employed in recent times in Europe. Taiwan island is at the epicentre of this destabilisation. The ‘rinse and repeat’ approach increases the risk that the US is seeking to lead Asia down the same Primrose Path that has seen the progressive destruction of Ukraine.

    Resolving the Chinese civil war is a necessary condition for regional stability. It’s a civil war demanding resolution from the warring parties. The question is, will it be resolved peacefully or not; and what are the conditions of such a resolution?


  • Yeah it’s fucking wild how much he puts on Trump for causing these problems, with a smaller chunk of blame on Biden. What the fuck were you in particular doing during the Obama regime years buddy? On the three issues mentioned specifically, Obama oversaw euromaidan, minsk2 and arming of ukrainian nazis. He supported the Saudi war on Yemen, which hardened ansarallah into the force it is today. He supported the Israelis during his whole span, including operation protective edge in 2014. He “pivoted to Asia” and encouraged the buildup of proxy forces in the area, tensions in the south China sea.

    Further, at best, he did nothing for rapproachment with the dprk. Not to mention the brutality of Libya, the continuation of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, maintaining Guantanamo, and lord knows what exactly his bloodless nerds were doing in Syria.

    THANKS FOR THE INPUT BEN RHODES, GO FUCK YOURSELF TO DEATH

    These fucking monsters just want to set themselves up for whatever bullshit think tank position where they scratch their chins wondering if doing the same fucking things over and over will solve the problems they spent their careers causing


  • Ben Rhodes, the Obama guy, on grappling with reality

    https://archive.is/BeVWG

    Second, the old rules-based international order doesn’t really exist anymore. As the old order unravels, these overlapping blocs (BRICS, CSTO) are competing over what will replace it.

    If Biden does win a second term, he should use it to build on those of his policies that have accounted for shifting global realities, while pivoting away from the political considerations, maximalism, and Western-centric view that have caused his administration to make some of the same mistakes as its predecessors.

    If Washington allows foreign policy to be driven by zero-sum maximalist demands, it risks a choice between open-ended conflict and embarrassment.

    On the one hand, encouraging to see an establishment liberal pumping the brakes on unipolarity, on the other hand, disappointing because both the Biden and Trump regimes have been full of maximalist neoconservatives as far as foreign policy.

    Definitely liberal brainworms on display still, like this passage:

    American rhetoric about the rules-based international order has been seen around the world on a split screen of hypocrisy, as Washington has supplied the Israeli government with weapons used to bombard Palestinian civilians with impunity. The war has created a policy challenge for an administration that criticizes Russia for the same indiscriminate tactics that Israel has used in Gaza.

    NO THEY FUCKING HAVEN’T FUCK YOU BEN

    In Ukraine, the United States and Europe should focus on protecting and investing in the territory controlled by the Ukrainian government—drawing Ukraine into European institutions, sustaining its economy, and fortifying it for lengthy negotiations with Moscow so that time works in Kyiv’s favor.

    Rofl what does this mean? How is this different from what’s happening now? Time will never work in kyiv’s favour - that’s the problem with attrition war. Every 6 months ukraine is in a worse position than it was previously.

    In the Middle East, Washington should join with Arab and European partners to work directly with Palestinians on the development of new leadership and toward the recognition of a Palestinian state, while supporting Israel’s security. Regional de-escalation with Iran should, as it did during the Obama administration, begin with negotiated restrictions on its nuclear program.

    So we’re still talking about getting rid of hamas. And it is too bad that Biden didn’t pursue restart of the jcpoa, but he chose to continue trump’s policy over Obama because he didn’t want to give the Israelis a tummy ache. He’s a staunch Zionist. Note, no prescription for relations with Hezbollah or ansarallah there, just an assumption that resolving things with Iran will improve relations elsewhere. In other words, misunderstanding of the relationships of the axis of resistance.

    In Taiwan, the United States should try to preserve the status quo by investing in Taiwanese military capabilities while avoiding saber rattling, by structuring engagement with Beijing to avoid miscalculation, and by mobilizing international support for a negotiated, peaceful resolution to Taiwan’s status.

    America’s strategy in Taiwan should be to have its cake while eating it too

    Overall, not a terrible framing of the article, but truly written by a speechwriter lapdog. It follows the familiar Obama-technocrat style of describing a problem somewhat correctly while offering no material change in approach, without recognizing the true cost of failure. Still, maybe worth a share to the libs in our lives because of Ben’s pedigree.















  • a few things on this:

    -don’t underestimate Normal Whites - they will vote for biden over trump. they are not as loud as MTG chuds but there are more of them than the most rabid chuds. Normal Whites do not really give a shit about trans bathrooms, child sacrifice and retvrning to tradition. those are things for internet people with brain poisoning.

    -the american electorate literally does not give a flying fuck about foreign policy or the rest of the world. biden’s failures in project ukraine, genocide in gaza, the humiliation of the fall of kabul in 2021 - none of that means literally anything to the electorate at large. people like to think that maybe dubya was voted out over iraq, but that absolutely is not true, his problem was the economy (stupid). do not make the mistake of thinking that american voters give even the slightest bit of a shit about foreign policy. it is a distant number 15 on priority lists compared to the economy, immigration, etc.

    -related to the above, for corporate interests, homeowners, people who own stocks the economy is doing fine. the line has gone up a lot under biden, especially recently. yes these gains are not evenly shared among the populace, but the people who gain them are far more likely to vote than poors anyway.