EPTOn December 19 2024 18:20 0x64 wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
If you think Russia/North Korea deal is not approved by China, you are fooling yourself. Is this a new account or are you a new troll? Which of the older troll were you? All of them?
Russia is only standing because of a strong information that currently, all country are doing well enough to not want to start a global war. It's the dumbest of positions, but you can't compete with stupid.
Russia was behaving like a teenager, now it is behaving like a toddler.
When we see your answer, we understand how that whole shitshow ends up happening. "It is ok to kill people as long as I get paid to argue how great it is on the internet"
+ Show Spoiler +
On December 19 2024 15:13 mounteast02 wrote:
I don't know if this is a sarcastic comment or genuine believe. If you believe russia is becoming a chinese vessel state, I think you do not have much understanding to russia as a nation, or russian people.
Did russia became a vessel state of any country after the collapse of soviet union in 1991?
If the russia did not became a vessel state then, how (and why) would it become a vessel state today?
If the russia did, when and how did it break out from the control of the "master"?
Just think about it, how much economic trouble does russia need to be in in order for the chinese to be able to solely control it? How much worse it have to be when compared to the collapse of the soviet union in 1991?
The whole "russia is becoming a chinese vessel state" is a propaganda mostly for the russian (ultra) nationalist who have some english langage ability. It is aimed to put pressure to the russian government to not get too close to the chinese. I don't know if that is needed, but it is what it is. And I would caution to believe in something like that.
For what it worth, the alleged russian assistance to north korean's nuclear and or missle capability is an indication that russia is not yet a chinese vessel state.
Also, as for china "taking back" the land taken by the russian, I am going to say that can only happen when very drastic event happened such as nato troop literally marching into moscow, or the usa suddenly disappeared similar to getting snap out of existence by thanos. etc.
From strategic point of view, if china attack russia militarily (in the far east), it just create lots of trouble for china itself. Even if we assume the chinese can do what the israel did to syria in the last two weeks to the russian, china would need to face the usa which is biggest military power in the world, together with Japan and south korea, both countries are in top ten military spending the last time I checked. That is not accounting for the possible reaction of India and other countries. What had happened is that china got russia to agree to open up the development / partnership with china in the far east, then china do not need to take sovereign control of those area as a priority, which means china taking control of russia land is probably not going to happen any time soon.
I don't know if this is a sarcastic comment or genuine believe. If you believe russia is becoming a chinese vessel state, I think you do not have much understanding to russia as a nation, or russian people.
Did russia became a vessel state of any country after the collapse of soviet union in 1991?
If the russia did not became a vessel state then, how (and why) would it become a vessel state today?
If the russia did, when and how did it break out from the control of the "master"?
Just think about it, how much economic trouble does russia need to be in in order for the chinese to be able to solely control it? How much worse it have to be when compared to the collapse of the soviet union in 1991?
The whole "russia is becoming a chinese vessel state" is a propaganda mostly for the russian (ultra) nationalist who have some english langage ability. It is aimed to put pressure to the russian government to not get too close to the chinese. I don't know if that is needed, but it is what it is. And I would caution to believe in something like that.
For what it worth, the alleged russian assistance to north korean's nuclear and or missle capability is an indication that russia is not yet a chinese vessel state.
Also, as for china "taking back" the land taken by the russian, I am going to say that can only happen when very drastic event happened such as nato troop literally marching into moscow, or the usa suddenly disappeared similar to getting snap out of existence by thanos. etc.
From strategic point of view, if china attack russia militarily (in the far east), it just create lots of trouble for china itself. Even if we assume the chinese can do what the israel did to syria in the last two weeks to the russian, china would need to face the usa which is biggest military power in the world, together with Japan and south korea, both countries are in top ten military spending the last time I checked. That is not accounting for the possible reaction of India and other countries. What had happened is that china got russia to agree to open up the development / partnership with china in the far east, then china do not need to take sovereign control of those area as a priority, which means china taking control of russia land is probably not going to happen any time soon.
If you think Russia/North Korea deal is not approved by China, you are fooling yourself. Is this a new account or are you a new troll? Which of the older troll were you? All of them?
Russia is only standing because of a strong information that currently, all country are doing well enough to not want to start a global war. It's the dumbest of positions, but you can't compete with stupid.
Russia was behaving like a teenager, now it is behaving like a toddler.
When we see your answer, we understand how that whole shitshow ends up happening. "It is ok to kill people as long as I get paid to argue how great it is on the internet"
It seems that you are a bit angered by my comment, which means you actually believed in that instead of memeing.
Whether I am a troll is not of any importance, but since you asked for my identity, I will give you some information.
Firstly, I would like to thank Kwark for answering the issue regarding north korea nuclear capability. Basically, anyone who have vague understanding of east asia recent history and/or politics have to know it is a long standing chinese policy to keep korea peninsula nuclear weapon free. Whether china have imperial ambition to north korea is another topic for another day / thread. The "most" it can happen is that the russian and north korean go to the chinese and give the chinese something else in exchange for china to not objecting it. A more probable scenario is the russian and the north korean go about the nuclear deal by themselves, may be keep the chinese "in the loop", or not. If such a deal existed. Whatever the scenario is, it is contradicting the notion that russia is a chinese vessel state.
Also, I don't think I have ever saw any comment from the chinese foreign affair official supporting north korea advancement of nuclear weapon program. If you can find one, please let me know.
As for who I am, firstly, I would like to assure you that I am not any of the (recurrent) "troll" you encountered recently. I don't have the amount of time, typing speed and articulation ability to keep arguing in the internet. I am certainly not those "angry russian" you might have encountered in recent months.
This is not my first account. My first account is linked to the battlenet. However, since the battlenet blocked the API, I cannot login with that account, even though the account was not banned. In that account, I am one of the few people argued that the nord stream pipeline was not sabotaged by the russian, it is more likely to be done by the ukrainian or the american. I think I have earn the right to brag about being correct on this occasion. Two years on, more and more information come out pointing the culprit to be the ukrainian / american, and those countries investigated that had not presented any evidence that the russian did the sabotage.
I think I gave you enough clue to locate my previous account if you want to look.
I did have another account, a few weeks/ months ago. That account was made in an impulse to challenge Kwark's comment in the palestine thread that the israels is not aiming for maximum death of palestinians. And that got banned almost immediately with less than 10 posts. Even though the information I provided is corroborated by other user, and I most certainly did not use any offensive language. Then I saw videos that multiple american legislator suggesting / advocating nuking gaza, I guess that might be the basis of argument for the israelis did not kill the maximum amount of palestinian? I did not try to appeal the ban, cannot be bothered to. This account would probably be the last one, if I get banned for whatever reason, justified or not, I will try to refrain from posting. I have no interest in causing trouble to / for anyone.
This get to the next point where you accused me of being a paid troll. I think you are overthinking a bit here. I am not mean to be rude or disrespect to TL. Do you think the political section of TL have the amount of views that worth investing in trolls? Even if somehow all the TL user in the political thread agreed with me (or anyone), there is still way less power than needed to make the necessary change to the things happened in the world stage. Do you actually naive enough to believe if you write "the ukrainian is winning" enough time in the internet, the ukrainian will miraculous win because of that? Do you think the TL users can donate the millions if not billions of dollars needed for the ukrainian army? Or set up the necessary factories/ production line to produce enough 155mm artillery shells needed?
If I am a paid troll, you should be happy because whoever decided to get me as a paid troll is not very smart, the information warfare operation would not be well managed.
As for the war itself, I am not emotionally invested in either side. I consider neither side as "we" or "our side", nor I am qualified to. I don't think you could find anything from me cheering for either side. Commenting which side is winning / losing is not the same as cheering for anything. just imagine, in a football match, 80 minutes in, team a lead team b by 4-1. Would you consider comment of "team a is winning" as cheering on for that team?
