I'd like for you and the other right wingers here to weigh in.

If Russia made a deal with Republicans to use tactical nukes/EMP on Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, Tampa, Richmond, Austin, Chicago, Detroit, and New York while not touching deep red urban areas or rural America and supplying arms and tactical support to conservative militias such as the Oath Keepers to end the supremacy of liberal urbanites and give the country to rural conservatives, would you be excited about it or would you be terrified that your fellow Americans, who happen to be liberals, socialists, marxists, and social leftists, were going to be killed?

As often as I see you people post and talk about how you hope Commiefornia has the big one and lots of liberals die, or that you'd rather be Russian than Democrat, or any number of similar examples, how far would you be willing to take it? If you could wipe all of the major liberal cities off the map, pick up a major socially conservative Christian trade partner which allowed you to decouple from relations with the EU and UN, and dominate China (which couldn't hope to compete with a U.S.-Russia military and economic alliance), as well as OPEC, would you take it or not?

If you answered yes to any of this, you can search yourself a little bit deeper on the China question. On the one hand, you'd be upset that China attacked the USA because their moral and economic philosophies are not yours and you don't want foreign power visibly exerted over your cultural views (with Russia this isn't an issue, as they are a Christian conservative capitalist oligarchy in the style that western conservatives want to impose in the US). On the other hand, you wouldn't really care about who died if they only targeted liberal urban centers. You'd be mad about property destruction rather than destruction of human life (which is also obvious in your support for police killing people who are suspects in property crime cases). At the end of the day, property ownership and cultural dominance are your main goals.

Which honestly leads us back to the question of Taiwan. The question isn't truly whether you are interested in a free liberal democracy in Taiwan. It's simply a matter of which imperialist power includes them in their sphere, and you want to ensure its ours. That's why the United States (which, let's be honest about it, is dominated by two imperialist political parties) will only ever officially support KMT/pan-blue goals there and never DPP/pan-green goals.

This post was edited by inkanddagger on Jul 21 2020 01:47pm

but how is China yielding a tiny bit of leverage to Vietnam (whom they already have a leverage monopoly against) help the US?

our gripes with china, economically, are their IP theft. and undercutting of american labor costs.

so if Vietnam still steals IP and Vietnam workers still take 2$/day, what has the US gained?

this is where the 4d chess shit comes in, because in order to justify this u have to add in muslim camps, organ farming, civil rights violations, Hong kong fuckery, mishandling of COVID, etc.

none of which changes if China essentially moves a small percentage of manufacturing to Vietnam.

and im not even sure with sanctions we can make we can force them to move. tariffs dont cost them, they cost the US consumer, in the hopes that US consumers stop buying that good and buy US made instead. but when china has a monopoly on many products being manufactures the US consumers have no viable domestic options and simply eat the cost. this isnt even taking into account sub assembly parts where the cost is hidden even if shipped to the US for final assembly.

what im saying is for the cost to make china move, the US tax payer would be gang raped with no lube. there are things made in china, cheap small things, that we simply cant compete with at scale, and still wont be able to even if we tariff them to double the cost.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Jul 21 2020 01:57pm

Maybe you don't know the difference between a tactical and a strategic nuclear weapon?

It is China's official nuclear policy.

You’re like a 3 estrogen treatments away from eating your own poop. Like i couldn’t even finish reading that, it was so batshit crazy. Why would I want masses to die?

Because you're a conservative, and conservatives want liberals to die.

Projecting friendo. Live long and prosper, just please stop trying to legislate away conservative freedoms!

Destroying major American cities would cause huge economic and infrastructure damage, it would hurt the bottom line of the Republican donors and it would make everyone, including the rural conservatives, a lot poorer than they were before.

Furthermore, by far not every GOP voter or Trump supporter wants archconservative, sanctimonious backwoods creatures à la Roy Moore to actually run the country.

The freedom to urinate next to a trans woman?

So you don't know the difference between a tactical and strategic nuclear weapon, do you?

Tangent time.

IP theft isn't really a thing. Trademarking a process or chemical structure is about the most insane way the wealthy oppress poor people. It is so insane to say that people over there can't do a thing a certain way because of the words on this paper. It is such a stupid game that everyone plays. Its only legitmacy it people still play it.

The chemicals in chemotherapy probably cost under 10 dollars to make a five gallon bucket of it. Probably much less. But if they charge 100000x the price of production and give their CEOs several million dollars a year then cancer gets treated better, faster? Well we've been playing this game long enough, why isn't there a better treatment than shooting poison into our bodies? Well they only make poison...if we start treating cancerous tumors with sonic vibrations for example then they can't make a pill and sell that for 100000x the actual value. They would actually have to develop a piece of trademarkable technology but that is real science which isn't profittable.

I'm not criticizing your arguments or statements.