Replacing the UN with a new sans-China organization

[Nova Cosky]

Try doing that in the PRC. Try publicly saying what it did was bad and that the government should be held accountable.

Why do you care about what Chinese people can say on the Chinese internet?

Worry about what you can say on American social media without getting banned for hate speech and blocked from jobs in your industry. In Europe and the UK, they just arrest you for the wrongthink.

His problem is not your problem. Solve your own problem.

I like you already, always succinct, short and sweet.

[Nova Cosky]

this thread is what white people look like when they realise their hegemony has just about melted away

it should be preserved for future generations to read

I hope you live at a safe enough distance to laugh at this. These Americans will eat up the lowest, most banal form of hickish, jingoistic racism, just the way they did after 9/11, and support anything the government does to get itself out of the corona economic collapse, as long as it appears to be lashing out in the stupid, most destructive possible way.

This is exactly what I fear.
Just hope that another war won’t be coming.

[Nova Cosky]

Don't get it wrong. If you are against the current Chinese government, it means that the Chinese people will not like you. Only we can criticize our government.
Our history tells us how many Western troops will step into our country if our government is not strong enough.How do you explain the war west waged against us?

Tell me, if I say now I want your government to fall because I think he's terrible. What do you think?

I'm not American, but Turkish.

Iunno, if you wanted Erdoğan to fall because you think he's terrible, I'd shrug and just be fine with it, I suppose. Governments change, after all. That's how things go in proper democratic countries, at least. I reckon the same goes for Trump, Macron, Johnson, Merkel, so on and so forth; their parties may be removed from power and go into the status of opposition. How gracefully they would take such a thing is disputable, but I'm fairly certain that the Conservative Party would not try to desperately cling onto power through violence or other coercive means, were they to lose an election in the UK.

The Communist Party of China, on the other hand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tian ... e_protests

Sadly, I don’t think the Americans consider you guys a democratic country anymore?

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/29/th ... ds-turkey/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

Maybe they will come and liberate you soon, like another Vietnam?
You really should prepare bunkers, their signature all month long carpet bombing ain’t no joke.
Save some trees too, Agent Orange will kill all those poor trees, your beautiful forest will be lost forever.
Oh and after the war, there will be widespread hunger for years so you should learn farming asap.

I don’t know, I think your lovely country caught their eyes. Just hope that they won’t bad touch you so soon.

[Shanghai industrial complex]

I'm not American, but Turkish.

Iunno, if you wanted Erdoğan to fall because you think he's terrible, I'd shrug and just be fine with it, I suppose. Governments change, after all. That's how things go in proper democratic countries, at least. I reckon the same goes for Trump, Macron, Johnson, Merkel, so on and so forth; their parties may be removed from power and go into the status of opposition. How gracefully they would take such a thing is disputable, but I'm fairly certain that the Conservative Party would not try to desperately cling onto power through violence or other coercive means, were they to lose an election in the UK.

The Communist Party of China, on the other hand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tian ... e_protests

Sadly, I don’t think the Americans consider you guys a democratic country anymore?

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/29/th ... ds-turkey/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

Maybe they will come and liberate you soon, like another Vietnam?
You really should prepare bunkers, their signature all month long carpet bombing ain’t no joke.
Save some trees too, Agent Orange will kill all those poor trees, your beautiful forest will be lost forever.
Oh and after the war, there will be widespread hunger for years so you should learn farming asap.

I don’t know, I think your lovely country caught their eyes. Just hope that they won’t bad touch you so soon.

Don't you realize how evil these actions are?Just because they are not satisfied with their government, they are ready to slaughter their people and forge a noble reason.
Human rights and freedom?Are these people denied human identity by you?

[Nova Cosky]

Don't you realize how evil these actions are?Just because they are not satisfied with their government, they are ready to slaughter their people and forge a noble reason.
Human rights and freedom?Are these people denied human identity by you?

My point exactly, I was trying out satire but I'm no good at it

Well with all that said, I'm just a small individual in a big corona world, what superpowers do I will have no say in it like most people don't.

As a fellow human who still trying to be a decent man, I feel that you should take care of yourself and plan ahead for the upcoming possibility of unrest in your part of the world. My reasons being that you are probably Chinese? and you seem to love your country for all that it is, was and has been, all the good and bad. Personally I don't think China is this super evil all these people made them out to be. Yet, the world seems to hate China very much now. Especially the foremost leaders of the West. This coronavirus crisis will end sooner or later, but your country has just become the bright red target for them all to attack after this.

In one way or another China will suffer after this, how exactly I will never know, but the West will surely do something to China and as a side effect all Asians will suffer from this too.

Following this topic original ridiculous suggestion that they would remove China from the UN as retaliation, I think even ridiculous and absurd as it is if the West only stopped at that, it would still be a blessing for all the people of the world after all this suffering.

China losing their seat in that fun club might be bad but it wouldn't hurt that much because it wouldn't be the end of the world. China and Chinese people clenching their teeth again slaving out for another dozens of years would be able to get back their seat or might even get a better seat. Or they could create their own fun club and it could become a huge success since even the amazing EU and NATO seem like they are teetering on the tiny edge of their last leg.

The worst scenario would be war, when the USA and its allies happily shook hands and went bonkers bombing the hell out of China and thus Asia along with it; as retaliation and solution to China winning their game. That will be the end for us all, how can we - normal people survive this on top of all this post-coronavirus devastation?

How China handles this complex situation will determine the extent of its eventual fated suffering due to the others' greediness and selfish ambitions disguised by justice and crusade liberation.

We the people of this world will probably suffer more, much more after this corona crisis is over, I just hope that the good leaders could do everything in their powers to minimize the pain on us. Yet, Mr. Trump - The President, The most powerful man on Earth at the moment, cannot be trusted with this task; just watch how many of his people die over there after this supposedly 'common flu' is over (as he once called it during the most crucial response window in his country). If he can't even take care of his people how can he take care of strangers?

To sum up my final thoughts on this topic, if China lost his seat in the UN (this and only this), then let it be. No big deal, when need be China could endure another tens of years of working with minimal returns for the rich Westerners, Chinese people were used to hardships and could bear through hardships, no big deal. Life would go on as usual for you all after a while because you guys were always excellent at adapting, you guys don't need those pretty useless western products (toys) that they offer anyway (remember their fun opioids?).

Let them bully you for a while, please endure, persevere and save the world for us all.

See It Through
BY EDGAR ALBERT GUEST

When you’re up against a trouble,
Meet it squarely, face to face;
Lift your chin and set your shoulders,
Plant your feet and take a brace.
When it’s vain to try to dodge it,
Do the best that you can do;
You may fail, but you may conquer,
See it through!

Black may be the clouds about you
And your future may seem grim,
But don’t let your nerve desert you;
Keep yourself in fighting trim.
If the worst is bound to happen,
Spite of all that you can do,
Running from it will not save you,
See it through!

Even hope may seem but futile,
When with troubles you’re beset,
But remember you are facing
Just what other men have met.
You may fail, but fall still fighting;
Don’t give up, whate’er you do;
Eyes front, head high to the finish.
See it through!

[Shanghai industrial complex]

Don't you realize how evil these actions are?Just because they are not satisfied with their government, they are ready to slaughter their people and forge a noble reason.
Human rights and freedom?Are these people denied human identity by you?

My point exactly, I was trying out satire but I'm no good at it

Well with all that said, I'm just a small individual in a big corona world, what superpowers do I will have no say in it like most people don't.

As a fellow human who still trying to be a decent man, I feel that you should take care of yourself and plan ahead for the upcoming possibility of unrest in your part of the world. My reasons being that you are probably Chinese? and you seem to love your country for all that it is, was and has been, all the good and bad. Personally I don't think China is this super evil all these people made them out to be. Yet, the world seems to hate China very much now. Especial the foremost leaders of the West. This coronavirus crisis will end sooner or later, but your country has just become the bright red target for them all to attack after this.

In one way or another China will suffer after this, how exactly I will never know, but the West will surely do something to China and as a side effect all Asians will suffer from this too.

Following this topic original ridiculous suggestion that they would remove China from the UN as retaliation, I think even ridiculous and absurd as it is if the West only stopped at that, it would still be a blessing for all the people of the world after all this suffering.

China losing their seat in that fun club might be bad but it wouldn't hurt that much because it wouldn't be the end of the world. China and Chinese people clenching their teeth again slaving out for another dozens of years would be able to get back their seat or might even get a better seat. Or they could create their own fun club and it could become a huge success since even the amazing EU and NATO seem like they are teetering on the tiny edge of their last leg.

The worst scenario would be war, when the USA and its allies happily shook hands and went bonkers bombing the hell out of China and thus Asia along with it; as retaliation and solution to China winning their game. That will be the end for us all, how can we - normal people survive this on top of all this post-coronavirus devastation?

How China handles this complex situation will determine the extent of its eventual fated suffering due to the others' greediness and selfish ambitions disguised by justice and crusade liberation.

We the people of this world will probably suffer more, much more after this corona crisis is over, I just hope that the good leaders could do everything in their powers to minimize the pain on us. Yet, Mr. Trump - The President, The most powerful man on Earth at the moment, cannot be trusted with this task; just watch how many of his people die over there after this supposedly 'common flu' is over (as he once called it during the most crucial response window in his country). If he can't even take care of his people how can he take care of strangers?

To sum up my final thoughts on this topic, if China lost his seat in the UN (this and only this), then let it be. No big deal, when need be China could endure another tens of years of working with minimal returns for the rich Westerners, Chinese people were used to hardships and could bear through hardships, no big deal. Life would go on as usual for you all after a while because you guys were always excellent at adapting, you guys don't need those pretty useless western products (toys) that they offer anyway (remember their fun opioids).

Let them bully you for a while, please endure, persevere and save the world for us all.

See It Through
BY EDGAR ALBERT GUEST

When you’re up against a trouble,
Meet it squarely, face to face;
Lift your chin and set your shoulders,
Plant your feet and take a brace.
When it’s vain to try to dodge it,
Do the best that you can do;
You may fail, but you may conquer,
See it through!

Black may be the clouds about you
And your future may seem grim,
But don’t let your nerve desert you;
Keep yourself in fighting trim.
If the worst is bound to happen,
Spite of all that you can do,
Running from it will not save you,
See it through!

Even hope may seem but futile,
When with troubles you’re beset,
But remember you are facing
Just what other men have met.
You may fail, but fall still fighting;
Don’t give up, whate’er you do;
Eyes front, head high to the finish.
See it through!

Yes,i'm Chinese.I am always proud of my country even if patriotism is despised by some neoliberals
From the history I have learned, whenever society is in turmoil, people's ideas tend to become extreme, when they need a target to attack.You don't have to worry about China at all, sir.I know it's full of malice and complaints about China and I'm still here because I don't care.Many of them did not hate China so much three months ago, and after three months they were uncertain what to think.Times are changing. I like this forum because I want to experience the changes in the views of ordinary people.I like history and witness it every day recently.I don't hate a person who says what he thinks.I did not understand that the Soviet Union and the United States had good relations before World War II, and then launched the Cold War.But now I understand a little.
Brother, do you realize it?Soon before everything we believed was going to collapse.Lies are broken down and ideas are reconstructed.I don't want to just look at the homogenization of my fellow citizens in social media. I want to look at the ideas of some people who are interested in politics and their reactions to my ideas.But I suspect that my speech swept everyone's interest, and they haven't spoken recently.So lonely.
Thanks for your offer,And your level of satire is really not good.Sounds like a real threat and Devil.You need to make clear what you want to irony about .I read it again and thought you might want to say that his country is no longer so democratic and may suffer because the government was overthrown.But it sounds like an American who looks uncomfortable to Turks.Forgive me for not understanding for the first time

[Australian rePublic]

The Organisation who's original point is just avoiding World War Three by making people talk more, you want to remove a nuclear superpower with a massive standing army from that?

The UN is a total effing failure in every regard.

[Vistulange]

I'm not American, but Turkish.

Iunno, if you wanted Erdoğan to fall because you think he's terrible, I'd shrug and just be fine with it, I suppose. Governments change, after all. That's how things go in proper democratic countries, at least. I reckon the same goes for Trump, Macron, Johnson, Merkel, so on and so forth; their parties may be removed from power and go into the status of opposition. How gracefully they would take such a thing is disputable, but I'm fairly certain that the Conservative Party would not try to desperately cling onto power through violence or other coercive means, were they to lose an election in the UK.

The Communist Party of China, on the other hand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tian ... e_protests

Sadly, I don’t think the Americans consider you guys a democratic country anymore?

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/29/th ... ds-turkey/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

Maybe they will come and liberate you soon, like another Vietnam?
You really should prepare bunkers, their signature all month long carpet bombing ain’t no joke.
Save some trees too, Agent Orange will kill all those poor trees, your beautiful forest will be lost forever.
Oh and after the war, there will be widespread hunger for years so you should learn farming asap.

I don’t know, I think your lovely country caught their eyes. Just hope that they won’t bad touch you so soon.

What on Earth are you on about?

I think you missed the point entirely, chief. The point wasn't whether Turkey is democratic or not - it's generally referred to as a "competitive authoritarian" regime by scholars, for future reference - but rather, that the understanding of democracy generally relies upon a peaceful transfer of power.

If you want to take a jab at me because I'm Turkish, you're going to have to do better than that, I'm afraid.

[Nova Cosky]

Sadly, I don’t think the Americans consider you guys a democratic country anymore?

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/29/th ... ds-turkey/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

Maybe they will come and liberate you soon, like another Vietnam?
You really should prepare bunkers, their signature all month long carpet bombing ain’t no joke.
Save some trees too, Agent Orange will kill all those poor trees, your beautiful forest will be lost forever.
Oh and after the war, there will be widespread hunger for years so you should learn farming asap.

I don’t know, I think your lovely country caught their eyes. Just hope that they won’t bad touch you so soon.

What on Earth are you on about?

I think you missed the point entirely, chief. The point wasn't whether Turkey is democratic or not - it's generally referred to as a "competitive authoritarian" regime by scholars, for future reference - but rather, that the understanding of democracy generally relies upon a peaceful transfer of power.

If you want to take a jab at me because I'm Turkish, you're going to have to do better than that, I'm afraid.

Wah! Cool your freckles dudes!
Are you on drug or what?

Why are you accusing me of whatever jabbing jibbing about Turkey or Turkish or your personal person?
I think Turkish people are hot, coffee nice and food great among other pretty things.

You talked about “proper democratic countries” - which I assumed you included yours, I disagreed with that exact wording of yours not based on my own personal opinion but the opinions of a few of America’s most powerful news agencies. And I followed up that train of thought with a little tidbit of what could possibly happen when America liked you so much they swooped in and saved you like they already did in the past with pretty Vietnam.

Anyway, it’s hard and such a waste of time having to explain anything to people who don’t appreciate a different perspective that seems to touch just a little on a sensitive issue? Is this a sensitive issue? The legitimacy of your democracy?

Personally I don’t have no beef with your country you know? You guys are steamy hot and that’s good enough for me to look at and admire. You keep your issues to yourself it’s not my business. Dictatorship or Democracy or Authoritarian or Dystopian or whatever, you guys isn’t big enough to be a cause of concern for the world just yet.

Just raising the point that your fellow real democratic friend from America made about your country because they do concern.

Otherwise I seriously seriously don’t mind, be you Democratic Dictatorship or whatever. Don’t argue with me because I don’t care what government system you guys are. Go send letters to the editorials of those articles which said you guys aren’t democratic (you might need to write quite a lot of letters because there are a lot more where these came from, even the lovely UK also published quite a lot).

Well my only beef with you would be if and only if you were hot and miraculously single while hot. Then we have so much beef, I hate you and please talk more about your beautiful democracy or whatever. Or we could talk about how to make exceptionally good Turkish coffee in another private thread, and probably about how nice the colors of your eyes would be on a nice day after all this covid crap is over. Otherwise, ugly be you, we’re finished, I don’t give a rat bosoms about whether or not you’re true democrat bois or fake dictator gals or what. Go and Be You and Write Lots of Letters to All Those Editors! Oh My Gosh! Okay?

[Vistulange]

What on Earth are you on about?

I think you missed the point entirely, chief. The point wasn't whether Turkey is democratic or not - it's generally referred to as a "competitive authoritarian" regime by scholars, for future reference - but rather, that the understanding of democracy generally relies upon a peaceful transfer of power.

If you want to take a jab at me because I'm Turkish, you're going to have to do better than that, I'm afraid.

Wah! Cool your freckles dudes!
Are you on drug or what?

Why are you accusing me of whatever jabbing jibbing about Turkey or Turkish or your personal person?
I think Turkish people are hot, coffee nice and food great among other pretty things.

You talked about “proper democratic countries” - which I assumed you included yours, I disagreed with that exact wording of yours not based on my own personal opinion but the opinions of a few of America’s most powerful news agencies. And I followed up that train of thought with a little tidbit of what could possibly happen when America liked you so much they swooped in and saved you like they already did in the past with pretty Vietnam.

Anyway, it’s hard and such a waste of time having to explain anything to people who don’t appreciate a different perspective that seems to touch just a little on a sensitive issue? Is this a sensitive issue? The legitimacy of your democracy?

Personally I don’t have no beef with your country you know? You guys are steamy hot and that’s good enough for me to look at and admire. You keep your issues to yourself it’s not my business. Dictatorship or Democracy or Authoritarian or Dystopian or whatever, you guys isn’t big enough to be a cause of concern for the world just yet.

Just raising the point that your fellow real democratic friend from America made about your country because they do concern.

Otherwise I seriously seriously don’t mind, be you Democratic Dictatorship or whatever. Don’t argue with me because I don’t care what government system you guys are. Go send letters to the editorials of those articles which said you guys aren’t democratic (you might need to write quite a lot of letters because there are a lot more where these came from, even the lovely UK also published quite a lot).

Well my only beef with you would be if and only if you were hot and miraculously single while hot. Then we have so much beef, I hate you and please talk more about your beautiful democracy or whatever. Or we could talk about how to make exceptionally good Turkish coffee in another private thread, and probably about how nice the colors of your eyes would be on a nice day after all this covid crap is over. Otherwise, ugly be you, we’re finished, I don’t give a rat bosoms about whether or not you’re true democrat bois or fake dictator gals or what. Go and Be You and Write Lots of Letters to All Those Editors! Oh My Gosh! Okay?

Luckily, my job doesn't really involve the Washington Post, or even Foreign Policy.

I haven't seen a single article in an SSCI journal that credibly categorises Turkey as a "dictatorship", so...that's all that matters to me, from a professional viewpoint.

The rest of your gibberish, I literally can't make sense of. What exactly are you trying to say?

[Nova Cosky]

Luckily, my job doesn't really involve the Washington Post, or even Foreign Policy.

I haven't seen a single article in an SSCI journal that credibly categorises Turkey as a "dictatorship", so...that's all that matters to me, from a professional viewpoint.

The rest of your gibberish, I literally can't make sense of. What exactly are you trying to say?

Can we agree that we are not a good match and stop this all together? For the sake of other people too?
You think I’m probably deranged by your replying with insults while I think you’re cold and wooden and boring and probably selectively and purposely blind to things you don’t agree with.
It’s a game mate, so much for professionalism?
Does playing games raise your salary? How nice!

Having said that this deranged person now bid you farewell, because this deranged person think it’s not valuable to continue a shouting match with you under the guise of intellectual professionalism.
Such hubris and elitism is just too yuck for me.
I’m sorry don’t be mad.
Bye-Bye with Lots of Love

[Ankenland]

You make several mistakes in your claims. Biggest is the claim that the PRC has achieved mutually assured destruction. It has not. The PRC nuclear forces are more based on minimum credible deterrence, not MAD. With less than 1/10th our stockpile and only a handful of delivery systems that can hit the US.

And actually the US has the most extensive strategic missile defense network.

There is no real strategic difference between MAD and minimum credible deterrence. Once you nuke a city once, there are exponentially diminishing returns on nuking it again. Current US strategic thought is that it would take twelve nukes to completely wreck China, and that's also about how many successful strikes China would need to wreck the US.

Strategic missile defense is not reliable. Even if it worked at 70%, which it doesn't, China still has enough ICBMs to nuke every significant American city once. If the Americans nuked all their significant cities ten times, I guess someone inside Cheyenne mountain could say, "Hey, we won!" but to the entire civilian economy and population it would be about the same.

In the 1962 submarine example, besides the fact only one of the three individual involved claim it can close to shooting (the other two deny it)

Geeze, why would a Soviet military officer ever deny having nearly made a mistake?

You seem refreshingly pessimistic about the nature of Chinese government but unable to extrapolate that pessimism onto the system that inspired it.

But anyways what one guy suggested we do in 1950 is merely academic.

Well, it's not just academic, it's a litmus test to see if anyone discussing this understands the mainline theory of war or is just an emotional lemming.

I thought about this further, and there is actually a good humanitarian argument for just nuking Moscow, Stalingrad and Leningrad in 1947, which is that it would have prevented people from living under the Soviet system until 1991, which includes preventing the Holodomor and every other Stalinist purge and mass fatality event.

There is actually no possible humanitarian argument by which "we had to firebomb Dresden and the millions of civilians in it to stop the Nazis from oppressing Europe under Nazism" makes sense, and the similar argument for nuking the Japanese makes sense, while nuking three cities in Russia to stop 50 years of Soviet oppression across all of Eastern Europe does not also make sense.

If you want to test this theory, ask yourself if you would, right now, rather be living in Japan, Germany, or Russia.

My sincere, personal advice to you is that, if you ever want to discuss China strategy with anyone, first ask them if it would have been in the interests of the United States to nuke the Soviets as soon as possible after the surrender of the Japanese.

If they say no, then either they haven't thought about it, or they just can't comprehend how any act of violence could ever be in the interests of anyone involved. Human history will always be a mystery to these sorts of people, and you can just discard their opinions, and save your questions about China for someone who is equipped to compute them.

Right now our policies towards the PRC should be focused on containment, political and economic actions, not destroying them via nuclear weapons obviously, even though we COULD, does not mean we SHOULD.

I mean, you couldn't without most of your above-ground infrastructure getting nuked, but whatever -

Why should American policy focus on containing China? (Which, by the way, is not "the PRC" it is China, Germany was not "the Nazis" it was Germany, and every rebranding of a country into some slogan for its government, while you are still calling the American government "America" is Fox News war propaganda jargon)

What good does it do for anyone in America to get into a pissing match with the Chinese over their immediate neighbors?

[Jakker]

Maybe they will come and liberate you soon, like another Vietnam?
You really should prepare bunkers, their signature all month long carpet bombing ain’t no joke.
Save some trees too, Agent Orange will kill all those poor trees, your beautiful forest will be lost forever.
Oh and after the war, there will be widespread hunger for years so you should learn farming asap.

I don’t know, I think your lovely country caught their eyes. Just hope that they won’t bad touch you so soon.

Not sure what your goal was with these statements, but I read it as you trying to cause anger and fear. Unofficial warning for trolling. You can get your point across while still following forum rules: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=260044

[Nova Cosky]

Maybe they will come and liberate you soon, like another Vietnam?
You really should prepare bunkers, their signature all month long carpet bombing ain’t no joke.
Save some trees too, Agent Orange will kill all those poor trees, your beautiful forest will be lost forever.
Oh and after the war, there will be widespread hunger for years so you should learn farming asap.

I don’t know, I think your lovely country caught their eyes. Just hope that they won’t bad touch you so soon.

Not sure what your goal was with these statements, but I read it as you trying to cause anger and fear. Unofficial warning for trolling. You can get your point across while still following forum rules: viewtopic.php?f=16&t=260044

Got it, I’ll try to make my points clearer in later posts. I did explained to him what I meant in a later reply after but it seemed that it didn’t get through. I wasn’t trying to cause anger and fear, I guess my wording and approach was tactless when taken out of context if one didn’t read all of it. Anyway this game is quite scary, it’s so easy to forget that it’s just a game and no more. And Thanks for the light punishment.

What on Earth are you on about?

I think you missed the point entirely, chief. The point wasn't whether Turkey is democratic or not - it's generally referred to as a "competitive authoritarian" regime by scholars, for future reference - but rather, that the understanding of democracy generally relies upon a peaceful transfer of power.

If you want to take a jab at me because I'm Turkish, you're going to have to do better than that, I'm afraid.

Wah! Cool your freckles dudes!
Are you on drug or what?

Why are you accusing me of whatever jabbing jibbing about Turkey or Turkish or your personal person?
I think Turkish people are hot, coffee nice and food great among other pretty things.

You talked about “proper democratic countries” - which I assumed you included yours, I disagreed with that exact wording of yours not based on my own personal opinion but the opinions of a few of America’s most powerful news agencies. And I followed up that train of thought with a little tidbit of what could possibly happen when America liked you so much they swooped in and saved you like they already did in the past with pretty Vietnam.

[Sahraliya]

Why not just reverse the mistake of recognizing the PRC in the first place and switch recognition back to the ROC (Taiwan)?

[Novus America]

You make several mistakes in your claims. Biggest is the claim that the PRC has achieved mutually assured destruction. It has not. The PRC nuclear forces are more based on minimum credible deterrence, not MAD. With less than 1/10th our stockpile and only a handful of delivery systems that can hit the US.

And actually the US has the most extensive strategic missile defense network.

There is no real strategic difference between MAD and minimum credible deterrence. Once you nuke a city once, there are exponentially diminishing returns on nuking it again. Current US strategic thought is that it would take twelve nukes to completely wreck China, and that's also about how many successful strikes China would need to wreck the US.

Strategic missile defense is not reliable. Even if it worked at 70%, which it doesn't, China still has enough ICBMs to nuke every significant American city once. If the Americans nuked all their significant cities ten times, I guess someone inside Cheyenne mountain could say, "Hey, we won!" but to the entire civilian economy and population it would be about the same.

In the 1962 submarine example, besides the fact only one of the three individual involved claim it can close to shooting (the other two deny it)

Geeze, why would a Soviet military officer ever deny having nearly made a mistake?

You seem refreshingly pessimistic about the nature of Chinese government but unable to extrapolate that pessimism onto the system that inspired it.

But anyways what one guy suggested we do in 1950 is merely academic.

Well, it's not just academic, it's a litmus test to see if anyone discussing this understands the mainline theory of war or is just an emotional lemming.

I thought about this further, and there is actually a good humanitarian argument for just nuking Moscow, Stalingrad and Leningrad in 1947, which is that it would have prevented people from living under the Soviet system until 1991, which includes preventing the Holodomor and every other Stalinist purge and mass fatality event.

There is actually no possible humanitarian argument by which "we had to firebomb Dresden and the millions of civilians in it to stop the Nazis from oppressing Europe under Nazism" makes sense, and the similar argument for nuking the Japanese makes sense, while nuking three cities in Russia to stop 50 years of Soviet oppression across all of Eastern Europe does not also make sense.

If you want to test this theory, ask yourself if you would, right now, rather be living in Japan, Germany, or Russia.

My sincere, personal advice to you is that, if you ever want to discuss China strategy with anyone, first ask them if it would have been in the interests of the United States to nuke the Soviets as soon as possible after the surrender of the Japanese.

If they say no, then either they haven't thought about it, or they just can't comprehend how any act of violence could ever be in the interests of anyone involved. Human history will always be a mystery to these sorts of people, and you can just discard their opinions, and save your questions about China for someone who is equipped to compute them.

Right now our policies towards the PRC should be focused on containment, political and economic actions, not destroying them via nuclear weapons obviously, even though we COULD, does not mean we SHOULD.

I mean, you couldn't without most of your above-ground infrastructure getting nuked, but whatever -

Why should American policy focus on containing China? (Which, by the way, is not "the PRC" it is China, Germany was not "the Nazis" it was Germany, and every rebranding of a country into some slogan for its government, while you are still calling the American government "America" is Fox News war propaganda jargon)

What good does it do for anyone in America to get into a pissing match with the Chinese over their immediate neighbors?

There is a difference between MAD and minimum credible deterrence.
They are different concepts.
Sure minimum credible deterrence obviously also works on a cost benefit analysis, the idea being the cost inflicted on the other country of destroying a significant amount of value, even if not enough to actually destroy the country still outweighs the gain.

There are difficulties and concerns with minimum credible deterrence different than MAD, especially in the deployment and configuration of your nuclear forces.

Minimum credible deterrence still provides deterrence although less than MAD. Although MAD really on existed as a doctrine of sorts in the 70s, although it was never officially recognized.

The US government still uses a concepts of calculated ambiguity and flexible response over MAD.

Obviously we are still not likely to launch an all out BOOB nuke attack on the PRC, because yes the risk and cost still outweighs the gain, even if we would inflict far more damage than we would suffer in return.

On the 1962 incident you are relying on the testimony of a Soviet officer as well. There were three witnesses, one claimed a nuclear launch was imminent, the others deny it.
And the other two seem more credible as the Soviets were not prepared for a nuclear war and had one started in 62 they would have lost badly. It makes no sense to start a nuclear conflict if the opponent has an overwhelming quantitative and qualitative advantage in nuclear arms and delivery systems.

The rest about Operational Unthinkable is not really worth discussing as it is not really topical and it is silly to dismiss everyone who disagrees with you on it.

And there is a PRC and ROC. So I will use PRC to differentiate. The ROC still exists. And you can use US or USA if you prefer over the more ambiguous America. I will not complain.

Anyways I have explained numerous times why we should focus on containing the PRC but you ignored it. Namely that we do care about their immediate neighbors and they are not only a threat to their immediate neighbors. In a globalized world what happens outside you country still impacts it and moreover they have an adverse impact here. Yes an adverse impact we have enabled via the stupidity of our politicians, and while that demonstrates we need to remove the politicians that enabled them and end the policies they espoused, but that does not preclude us taking additional actions.

Again they are directly taking political and economic actions here, in the mainland US. They are a threat here, the only economy credibly capable of producing a peer level conventional military, have a diametrically opposed worldview on economic and geopolitical matters as well as political philosophy. The last part, political philosophy is still relevant outside the territory they control as they seek to export and expand their political philosophy globally and make it the dominant political philosophy everywhere.

On these matters although the specific PRC economic model is very different than the Soviet one (although this only makes them more dangerous) the basic concepts that they are an expansionist power with mutually exclusive goals, and they seek to undermine, weaken and replace us mean logically we should treat them as a threat.

[Novus America]

Why not just reverse the mistake of recognizing the PRC in the first place and switch recognition back to the ROC (Taiwan)?

Realistically though the PRC does exist as the number one strategic threat we face. Although ceasing to recognize the PRC just to make a point has some merit, it has problems. We recognized the Soviets Union during the Cold War despite not recognizing their right to control the Baltic States.

Accordingly dual recognition (which was Nixon’s actual long term goal, Carter was the idiot who though we should only the the PRC) is the most logical response which actually accords to the reality of the situation as it is, not as we would like it to be.

We can recognize both, as controlling the territory they respectively control and the fact that de facto both exist as functioning states.

[Novus America]

So that is why we nuked Ebola during the last outbreak?
When have nukes ever stopped disease? You clearly do not understand how nuclear deterrence works. If the enemy had nukes and you do to, neither will use them except as a desperate last resort. So as long as you can avoid pushing your opponent to such a point where they are so desperate and have no other way you can do whatever you want to harm them short of that and their nukes cannot do anything about it.

Nukes do not stop great power competitions.

You clearly didn’t understand my logic and you mistook (possibly purposely) my point for a different point just to falsely affirm your argument. This right there was Smoke and Mirrors, the tool you Americans like to use so very often (your current president is probably the most excellent practitioner at using this tool).

First, the point that I raised was about your silly comparison, not the concept of nuclear deterrence - which you might think that it is probably too difficult for anyone but you who can understand, I’m sorry but you’re so wrong about your own intellectual capacity, most people gets this concept, it ain’t hard mate, so save your mansplaining and shove it.

Secondly, if you don’t get how Nukes can eradicate Ebola then I have nothing to say because you can’t use imagination at all. Of course people don’t use Nukes to destroy Ebola in the real world, I was being silly because your comparison was silly, and I thought you would understand if I was as silly you know.

Thirdly, you misplaced and confused “threats” and “fears”. I think the truth that you and many of your camp couldn’t bear to admit is that you guys simply fear the successes and strivings of China. You can’t bear to lose your first seat. What’s more, you can’t bear to admit that you fear them. Thus, you use “threats” to justify your thinly veiled ‘hate’ and rationalize your fear. You use the word “threat” to demonize them, like you always did to wage all your countless wars against all those other countries before; countries which were laughingly pitiful against the might of America and yet were still ”threats”. Tally up all the lives that lost under all the wars of America, and see how ’threatening’ it all meant. China do not threaten you, you fear them, and so you want to destroy them if you could, all the while wearing a mask of justice. Get real! As long as your numerous nukes work, they can’t threaten your existence, they may win against you, their people may win against you (politically, economically, ideologically), but they can’t threaten your existence or your people existence. While with all that nukes, America could surely destroy this world (itself included) if it chose to. So as far as threatening goes, you guys got first place.

Nukes don’t stop competition.
Just don’t use it when you found out that you would lose the competition if you didn't.

I’m sure that you guys are sensible enough not to, right?
You guys surely won’t, right?

Only time will tell.
Only action shows, not Smoke and Mirros.

Most this is incoherent but threats and fears are not mutually exclusive.
In fact by their very nature threats are something you fear.

Obviously we do not want the PRC to become more powerful than us, or become the sole world superpower as both would obviously be against your interests.

So logically we should take steps to secure our interests and position. Obviously I expect them to also do the same. It is a competition, and one we should seek to win more than we lose in obviously.

[Gig em Aggies]

what if replacing the UN we just kick out Russia and/or China of the Security Council and replace them with India, Brazil, Germany, Australia, South Africa, Canada

[Stellar Colonies]

We shouldn't kick China out of world affairs, but they really need to get over the fact that Taiwan is an independent country.

[Novus America]

We shouldn't kick China out of world affairs, but they really need to get over the fact that Taiwan is an independent country.

I do agree with this, although we can still be selective in which organizations we support their membership in. Not all international organizations are or should include every country with no criteria, selective and regional organizations like NATO are often superior to ones like the UN.

Of course as you point out if we say the UN should be open to all, regardless of how much the governments involved have mutually exclusive outlooks and goals, then both the ROC and PRC should be in.

It is contradictory to say the PRC should be invited in because everyone should have a voice yet keep out the ROC who is the more responsible and reliable voice in this particular crisis.