South Korea will always chose whoever protects it from North Korea, and North Korea is currently propped up by China, so the South won't turn to China.

This is about South Korea and the US, not South Korea and China. South Korea relies on the US for protection, and the US created this situation.

That Trump is threatening removal of this protection for this gives them motivation to look for security elsewhere. It puts them over a gun. This is a bad move, and echoes Trumps behaviour of asking more payment for a situation the US pushed for.


Thats not the point. The US didn't go in for the benefit of the South Koreans. It wasn't altruistic. The US haven't intervened in lots of countries and wars, and have actively made worse lots of situations.



We live in democracies who vote in the people in power, so regular citizens matter.

Europe will increasingly turn on NATO + the Western alliance because Trump bashes it.

The US and the EU together dwarf the rest of the world. With India as well China will be contained by population, Nukes, and economics.

But Trumps wants to make the EU its own power centre. Why should Europe line up behind the US?

That you think China vs the US is about democracy vs totalitarianism is the mistake.

China vs the US is about who controls, runs, and benefits most from the global economy

You should stop psychoanalyzing Trump because it sounds like projection to everyone else.

You must not comprehend the threat I'm talking about. I'm talking about the survival of the west in general and the USA in particular. No other authoritarian regime currently poses the existential threat China does.

For example, if the CCP knows you have said things against the CCP anywhere, anytime in your life, you can be prosecuted if you ever step foot in China.

https://www.axios.com/china-hong-kon...5bea3f78f.html


This could be the long term state of affairs:

1. Europe continues its steep decline
2. The USA's economy collapses due to reliance on China and weakening of the dollar, in addition to way too much debt
3. China becomes financial world power and the renminbi becomes the world's reserve currency
4. Mandarin becomes the language everyone needs to know, as English loses it's influence.
5. China's AI advances further than anyone and they control the new "nukes", a super weapon that can destroy any nation.


Well you say the US currently has that position. This is true (without the super weapon, nukes notwhithstanding). But who would you prefer to be the nation in charge, the US or China?

OP, will you respond to this post?

Wars are never altruistic. Man you sound naive. I never said "intentions matter" but you seem to think that's all that matters. The road to hell is often paved with good intentions.

Trump's words are ways to test the waters. The left has never figured that out. You think the South Koreans have skin as thin as yours


I guarantee you if you were in South Korea you'd be grateful the US had come and saved your ass. Those men who died for them, while meaningless to you, matter to me and them.

They would never go for it but it's worth a try just to show the world how much they want control.

It's behind a paywall. It's also considered good form to post an excerpt from (or a summary of) an article you link to show how it supports your thesis.

So those two actions alone will prevent China from becoming the pre-eminent world superpower? If not, what are the others, and what is your evidence that Trump is the only president who would take them?

I'm not sure you know what "projection" means, but if you mean that I am secretly a fan of authoritarian regimes, I assure you that I am not.

You seem to be using authoritarianism and human rights violations to support your anti-China case. I am merely pointing out that the same arguments can (and should) be made to criticise other regimes. Your issue, by your own admission, appears to be not with authoritarianism and human rights violations, but with economic and military concerns, so I don't understand the relevance of those issues to your case.

Your contradicting yourself - if the men who died have meaning why they die matters. They died for the benefit of the US and as a by product the South was saved. They should not feel indebted to the US because of this.

If its just words, its pointless. This was never about words. Its a threat. Threats have repercussions.

This isnt left v right. This is about diplomacy. Trumps strategy sucks.

Trumps strategy is explicitly put the US first and get more from its allies, or, make new ones, abandoning old ones. This is a bad move.



Anyway, if your gunna go around insulting people im out.

I don't like insulting people but if someone keeps accusing me of not doing something when they're too lazy to click the links in my OP, I lose patience.

Occasional verbal threats are part of diplomacy. TDR said speak softly but carry a big stick. Trump doesn't speak softly, and neither did TDR, but they both like showing off their sticks. And the world is safer and more stable for it.

Diplomacy has it's time and place. Chamberlain tried diplomacy against Hitler. Churchill didn't.

Trump is putting America first, addressing the threats to its existence like China, illegal immigration, and increasing foreign dependence. But putting America first isn't a bad thing -all nations should put their nation first. That's why they're nations. America has been putting other nations first for a long time. We have done a lot to help China actually. Where did they get all their IP? From us. But they don't want to help us back and they certainly don't like our crazy ideas about freedom. Remember Asia has never had an Enlightenment. It's a vastly different civilization. Living here has taught me that. They went from Feudalism to Communism to a state controlled form of Capitalism. The idea of "rights" has never taken hold. Meditate on that for a while.

Korea does owe America for saving them from communism, as does a large part of the world. Imagine North Korea being just Korea. All gifts confer debts, that's pretty much politics 101. The US came to France's aid in WW1 because of what France did for the US in the revolutionary war.

I'm not saying we have the right to abuse Korea needlessly. I'm saying we can remind them from time to time as a way of using our authority to push what we feel is the right agenda. That's the right of the most powerful nation. If South Korea was in charge, they would do the same to us. If China is in charge... well, this is, or should be, the great fear.

I tried your link but it's behind a paywall. Your central thesis appears to be that Trump can save us from China. I am asking you to say in your own words what concrete actions he will take to do so (i.e. not vague statements like "he takes a tough stance on China"). If I were being uncharitable, I would say your continued deflection and personal attacks are because you can't actually answer the question.

It means that if China becomes the most powerful nation in the world, they will use that for evil means, like they are currently doing to their own people.

I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand. China is poised to be the sole superpower. And they harvest organs from their own people, put children in education camps after separating them from their parents, and they don't even beleive in basic freedom. The CCP is a group of thugs. A cartel. And they're racists against anyone who isn't Han Chinese. You would accept these things from China, but not America, right?

No, I am against human rights violations and authoritarianism. I'm just trying to understand why you think why Trump is going to save us all, when it's clearly quite obvious he is purely transactional and does whatever benefits him in the moment. Tough on China today, selling nukes to them tomorrow if he thinks it'll help his poll numbers, or he wants to build Trump tower in Beijing or for whatever other reason. You're acting like he's following some sort of ideology, which is laughable.

What about all those Chinese trademarks Invanka got? What was the quid pro quo there? Who knows.

My 'central thesis' is that Trump is doing things to stave off China, and maintain American independence. He can't "save" us on his own. He's not a dictator like Jinping is. We need to be educated about China, and I believe we can help Trump get reelected, and by doing so, help future generations. Trump is the only guy even thinking about this in the right way (of the few candidates).

Since you didn't even read the headline, I'll spoon feed this to you. Trump and his team are requiring the federal gov't to buy essential drugs from US manufacturerers.

Trump signs executive order requiring government to buy ‘essential’ drugs from U.S. companies.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/06/trum...companies.html

"Navarro said... it is that we are dangerously overdependent on foreign nations for our essential medicines, for medical supplies like masks, gloves, goggles and medical equipment like ventilators.”

I saw the headline, not sure why you think it answers my question. Ok, so, what are Biden's views on China? Does he not think that any of this is an issue? I'm not familiar with this topic. If you want to persuade me that Trump is better that the alternative on this issue, you need to show the alternative.

He's been talking about China in terms of trade since the 80s.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/a...-to-the-1980s/

Your personal hatred of Trump notwithstanding, Trump is a politician. Like all politicians in democracies, they work on issues that the people care about - this is why they get elected or don't get elected. If enough people become concerned about China on the left, then I wouldn't be having this conversation as Biden would have to be tough on China as well. My main intent is to help people see China not just as an authoritarian government as you say, but as an existential threat to the west. This thesis isn't just my own, it's also stated as far back as this book published in 96, well before China was what it is today.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000R1BAH4...ng=UTF8&btkr=1

Ok, maybe you don't understand the relationship of questions to answers, or the meaning of words?


Can you vote in America? Are you a citizen?

Based on the above, maybe a more productive approach would be to say "hey lefties, let's worry about China for reasons xyz" rather than "hey, we should all vote for Trump"? Which do you think would have a greater chance of success?

I am not going to debate this semantic point with you, since you seem to struggle to discern "concrete actions" from "vague aspirations". So far, you and the headline in question has listed exactly two concrete actions.

No. But if you can hone your arguments to persuade me, you might also stand a chance of persuading others who can.

You're right, I tend to misjudge the effect of Trump derangement syndrome.

An executive order is concrete in the political world. What would it take to convince you Trump is working on making the west more independent of China? And what is the democratic nominee doing better?

That's true, I keep forgetting that logic and facts don't work when someone is emotionally invested in shutting down all points as soon as the word Trump is mentioned. Silly me.

There are issues other than China why people like or dislike Trump. You are basically saying "China is more important than any of those issues combined, and if you can't vote for Trump because of that, you have TDS". That requires your interlocutor to agree with your premise that China is more important than all other issues combined, which is a stretch.

As far as I know, China is not a fundamentally divisive left/right issue in the US, and as you pointed out, if it became more of an issue for the left then the Democrats would pick up on that. So, if China is your issue, you are definitely better of making a case for that outside the context of Trump. It will certainly be more helpful to your case than "Gina bad, vote Trump, MAGA".

Is the executive order in relation to drug procurement? If so, that would appear to be one of the two things I am referring to.

Do you have any examples other than the two things already mentioned of what Trump will do in future? I don't know what the democratic nominee will do better, it's kind of on you to show that he won't do better, as you're the one asserting a claim here.

As I have pointed out, your position appears to be that China is more important than all other issues combined. I suspect not many people on either side share this view.

Is that what I said? You're reduction of all pro-trump to cartoonish descriptions is very common on the left, but it's silly and tired.

Vote for what issues you want. Just know that it's your duty as a citizen to understand world issues before voting. That's the contract we all share in a democracy. If you aren't educated on China, just don't vote. Watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmId2ZP3h0c

It is more important than all the other issues combined. If they cripple our economy what's left? Trans rights? Use your head a bit.

Biden hasn't come out tough on China. We all know his brain is gone. If he had a brain he'd be an appeaser like Obama was. His son like I already pointed out is working for the Chinese already.