← Back to context

Comment by JumpCrisscross

18 hours ago

> I said "attacked/invaded", not "had some fistfights at the border"

Disputed border region. Used military force to intervene. That's an attack.

> Could we set the standard at "at least one piece of military equipment fired on people"?

Why not tens of soldiers killed? (And on what planet do "the 4th (Highland) Motorised Infantry and 6th (Highland) Mechanised Infantry Divisions" of the PLA not contain military equipment?)

> we're comparing this to the USA and Israel's military record over the last 40 years

No, you are. The list I stated was China, Russia and America. You're trying to argue that China upholds the rules-based international order around respecting sovereign borders. That would be news in Taipei.

I'm arguing that China has, generously, inflicted maybe 1k military casualties in the last 40 years if we round everything all the way up.

You're arguing that China is the real bad guy while USA/Israel are doing 10x that in the current 24 hours.

  • > I'm arguing that China has, generously, a 3-4 figure body count in the last 40 years

    If we ignore proxy wars, sure.

    And you're still arguing a straw man. Nobody in this thread ever said that China was as warlike as Russia and America (and Israel and Iran). Just that it has embraced the same geopolitical philosphy and standard.