• Moritz Poldrack :arch:@fosstodon.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    10 days ago

    @cfgaussian say I grant the violent incursion on tibetan land as “liberation” (which I do not), that would still leave the Sino-Indian and Sino-Vietnamese wars. Or do we redefine those away on a technicality as well? Were they maybe not long enough? I dont ask you to defend western imperialism. Its inexcusable. I do ask you to see the PRC for what it is, which includes its flaws and mistakes.

    • REEEEvolution@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      say I grant the violent incursion on tibetan land as “liberation” (which I do not)

      So you love slavery. Good start.

      that would still leave the Sino-Indian

      India dicked around, China put them to their place and the war ended in extremely amicable terms.

      Sino-Vietnamese wars

      There was one (1), so no “wars”(plural), a war(singular). It was a limited border conflict because Vietnam and the PRC ended on different sides of the the Sino-Soviet split.

      Were they maybe not long enough?

      They happened before the timframe covered by the picture. Tibet happend under Mao, as did the Sino-Indian one. The war against Vietnam happened under Deng. The timeframe covered by the pic is post-Deng. Since then the PRC did, factually, not wage any war.