Comments by "Yerris" (@yerri5567) on "Biden in UN speech slams China over nuclear arsenal, Xinjiang but says US ‘not seeking conflict’" video.

  1.  @titaniumskunkogkush4365  And according to the US, Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction...
    11
  2. ​ @robertbenitez3647  "some official agreement does not mean anything" Wrong. Its the official stance/agreement that means everything. The foundation of ALL diplomatic relations are based off official agreement/stance. If official agreement/stance mean nothing then why bother making official statements/agreement? Youre not making any sense here... 'The status quo is the "existing state of affairs"' Youre right there. The existing state of affairs when US established diplomatic relations with China was as I said: "one of the core components that laid the foundations of that relation is that the US had to recognise and abide by the One China Principle, that is, there is only One China, and that Taiwan is part of that One China. That has been the status quo from the US-China perspective, and the status quo from the Taiwan-Mainland China perspective" Moreover, Taiwans government, Republic of Chinas very own constitution STILL to this day claims to be the country called China. And they must abide by it till the day it changes. Again, thats the "existing state of affairs" youre on about. Anything that changes that is changing the status quo. So like I said, it was TAIWAN that changed the status quo first, no Mainland China. Where was the US when Taiwan was changing the status quo huh? "the existing state of affairs right now is that taiwan has complete autonomy over its own affairs. that is the IMPORTANT status quo" Now? Youre talking about the status quo now after Taiwan has literally changed the status quo? What is the status quo if it can be changed on a whim and say hey thats the new status quo UNILATERALLY? Now that Russia has started a war, guess war is the new "status quo", so we must keep the "status quo". So who ever changes that is changing the new "status quo". Thats your logic right there... Also, if we want to get technical, the Chinese Civil War between PRC and ROC still to this day has not ended yet. No armistice or peace treaty was ever signed. Its technically a prolonged ceasefire. So the status quo is that - civil war-in-progress. No country on this planet can interfere in another countrys civil war unless invited by the UN and/or the countrys official government (hint: not Taiwan). "all this about the one china policy is completely irrelevant" Completely relevant. If its irrelevant then why doesnt the US recognise 2 Chinas, or recognise that Taiwan is not part of China? Instead it recognises Taiwan is part of this "One China"? You honestly dont know what youre talking about here. Youre just talking about "popular opinions" and not facts. "and even if you want to talk about the one china policy. it is an agreement/compromise between the us and china. taiwan has absolutely nothing to do with it" Wrong. Ive already stated in above. This is also the policy between ROC and PRC. But it seems like you have selecting reading...Look up "1992 consensus" and read it yourself. Moreover, the "One China" policy is for ALL countries that established diplomatic relations with China. Not just the US.
    4
  3.  @robertbenitez3647  Just because youre ignorant on that matter doesnt mean Taiwan hasnt changed the status quo. They fundamentally changed the status quo, not just a mere visit from Pelosi. Just a little context so you know whats going on. The current Taiwan government, Republic of China (ROC), once sat in the UN representing the country called China. Heck Taiwan wasnt even part of ROC till after WW2 after Japan surrendered its occupation over the island. After WW2, ROC effectively lost the Chinese civil war to the Peoples Republic of China (PRC), only having Taiwan as its remaining territory under its control. But make no mistake, they still claim to be the country called China, not "Taiwan". In 1992, ROC and PRC sat down and came to a consensus that Taiwan and Mainland China was part of the same ONE China, but disagreed on who was the legitimate ruler of this "One China". They each believed that they were the legitimate rulers of "One China". And the US also acknowledges this "One China" principle, that Taiwan is a part of China. Thats why they dont have diplomatic relations with "Taiwan". In 1995, everything changed, Taiwan started their pro-Taiwan independence movement and had them lead their government. This fundamentally changed the status quo of "We are China", to "We are Taiwan, not part of China". Tell me again how Taiwan didnt change the status quo again?
    3
  4.  @robertbenitez3647  That is NOT the status quo. The US entered into a diplomatic relationship with PRC in the 1970s. And one of the core components that laid the foundations of that relation is that the US had to recognise and abide by the One China Principle, that is, there is only One China, and that Taiwan is part of that One China. That has been the status quo from the US-China perspective, and the status quo from the Taiwan-Mainland China perspective. The status quo was never about "Taiwan gets to do whatever it wants". You literally made that up yourself. Or was brainwashed in thinking so without verifying. If you still somehow still believe that is the case, then pull out the press conference or official statement or whatever official supporting documents you have to support those claims.
    3
  5.  @captainbroady  "Defending Taiwan doesn't mean the US is going to seek a hot war - it only means the US doesn't want anything to change" Except things already changed. Taiwan changed the status quo just prior to the turn of the new century. So much for the "US doesnt want anything to change"... Where was US when Taiwan changed the status quo?
    2
  6.  @jade7631  What credible evidence do you have? Or is this another American made up number from their "think tank" that said Iraq had WMD?
    1
  7.  @titaniumskunkogkush4365  It doesnt matter to you? If China has 4000+ according to you, then the US will be building and stockpiling even more out of fear. And fear is what can start a war. Still going to say it doesnt matter to you?
    1