The tragedy faces New Zealand is that as soon as Australia is rendered uninhabitable by climate change, millions of Aussies who previously advocated for concentration camps for “boat people” will migrate over and set up shop like nothing ever happened.
Unfortunately 100x zero is still zero.
I think it’s a really flimsy argument tbh.
Say for example a wife of a PLA soldier has an affair with a married man and they live together, eat together, go on dates together, fuck, etc. The male adulterer would not be able to actually marry the soldier’s wife because bigamy is illegal. I don’t think it would fly for a second to argue that the male adulterer can’t be convicted because the Court would be recognizing bigamy.
I’m not a trained Chinese lawyer or anything, but if the English translation of “as if” is accurate then there’s a ton of leeway for interpretation.
In a conflict between the US and China, the strongest weapon in the PLA arsenal is Tik Toks posted by soldiers’ spouses and girlfriends at home.
Joking aside, don’t take legal analysis from a rando on the internet just as you wouldn’t take medical or financial advice from them. Most people know sweet fuck all about the law and will act as if they’re god’s gift to jurisprudence.
“A Soviet solider is not the same as a Nazi soldier” levels of hot take.
The tweet is the dumbest legal take I’ve seen since I stopped tutoring Law 101.
Both sides are so ideologically opposed to handouts that it’s possible they won’t do anything like that. If that happens, people can’t eat and when people can’t eat we enter the Cool Zone ™.
The problem is falling and being replaced with what? Seems to be few leftist alternatives and the right is all blood and soil Nazis who’ll eventually fall in line with America anyway.
Declaring America an AES because no food.
Taiwan should have used military force - or again, that might makes right.
“Should have” used military might? Are you from a parallel dimension where the First United Front didn’t end in the Shanghai Massacre? Tell me how it went down in your reality then. Chiang embraced the CPC from behind with hugs and kisses as a show of his appreciation for their alliance against the warlords?
I don’t have a morality problem because Chiang was an incompetent and corrupt jackass who started the civil war that he ended up losing on the mainland and having to flee to Taiwan Island.
It is about what you believe justifies a nation’s independence
My arguments as to international law go precisely towards your factually incorrect and repeated assertion that Taiwan Island is a “nation” or a “country”. You accuse me of “deflection” but you repeatedly asserted a factual and legal inaccuracy and refuse to address it. Your problem if you can’t engage with the argument, not mine. There is no such thing as a country or nation called “Taiwan” in the world.
The problem with the so-called “Hawaiian” Pizza is that there’s no attempt to balance flavors. It’s just sour and (sometimes) sweet pineapple tossed thoughtlessly onto a ham pizza. Pineapple goes great in a lot of things - curries, sweet and sour pork, etc., but most of those dishes are thoughtfully balanced so that there are no overwhelming flavors.
Killing Hitler is good and funny and I would do it without hesitation, but I don’t think this is dunk worthy.
The original argument is basically a condemnation of great man history - even if you killed Hitler, you would not necessarily avert the rise of German fascism. Fascism arises in response to certain material and social conditions and contradictions which were present in Weimar Germany. Perhaps German fascism without Hitler would look or behave differently to Nazism, but if we believe in materialism then we must acknowledge the strong possibility that German fascism would arise without any specific individual.
The outcomes of civil wars is widely acknowledged by both state practice and opinio juris as being a legitimate factor in the determination of sovereignty over a territory. If you don’t believe me, ask the Confederate States of America and the Republic of Vietnam about their experiences and get back to me.
There is no “morality problem” because there is no issue of morality here. Morality is not a factor in international law.
Ngl it was a difficult choice between NatSec Talking Points Journalist and School of Raytheon Rainbow Washing Bard.
International recognition in line with the principles of customary international law as codified in the Montivedeo Convention make right, but that’s not very snappy.
Skill issue. If I wanted to have a recognized independent country I would simply win the civil war instead of losing and then hiding in America’s skirt like a coward.
I took two levels of journalist before I multiclassed into rogue.
Good. Good. Let the hate pineapple juice flow through you.
There was nothing wrong with anyone biologically, it was just a hyper South Korean style population collapse would be a hilarious twist.