• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -33 months ago

    A plane with no weapons circled near some islands and dipped a toe into a tiny sliver of Japanese airspace - over water - in a single pass. Check the map.

    China is full of shit about it being unintentional, they’ve been playing grey zone games for quite a few years now and the nations around them have caught on.

    Your intellectual insight is to claim that this flight path was entirely designed around that one pass entering Japanese airspace? Perhaps you can share your spy recordings where they say, “surely this is how we will advance our cause”.

    I’d argue missile deployment is exactly proportional to an unplanned breach of airspace by a military asset.

    That flight path with a toe dip into airspace over ocean vs. missiles designed to carry nukes. Do you not understand the difference between offensive nuclear weapons and maybe hearing a plane flying offshore?

    It’s historically a pretty good idea to build up your defense when a neighbor is brandishing their military on your borders

    Are you afraid of that plane and its flight path? You’re using language as if it is a weapon and threat.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -13 months ago

        Sounds like you have no counterarguments. And I did not issue any personal attacks, though clearly your comment is just a hackneyed attempt at insulting someone with a realistic political understanding. Or do you think it is a personal attack to lightly make fun of absurd claims? One can only guess.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            03 months ago

            You sound upset and are not saying particularly coherent things. It’s okay if you want to take some time to collect yourself, I don’t care about the timeline on which you respond.

            For example, you seem upset about perceived personal attacks even though I made none, but seem giddy to be insulting me. Ask yourself if this is correct and good behavior and if you believe you are following the golden rule. Presumably you were taught these things growing up.

            Re: it being a reconaissance plane, this is still not an actual offensive weapon nor is it comparable to something banned because it was meant for nukes.

            Re: DF17s, if your argument is that parity is justified then you would presumably justify Chins increasing the size of its military and weaponry about 10X and establishing several large bases circling the US, right? Or would you interpret this as a threatening escalation that must be met with even more weapons and capabilities encircling China?