The Green Berets are the army’s spec ops that focus on training foreign fighters, specially chosen for things like foreign language proficiency. They’re not Rangers or general light infantry. Ideally they’re not really supposed to get into direct combat, as they’re rather time consuming and difficult to replace.
I would bet a whole bunch of money that we actually do have Green Berets present in Ukraine as well, though the only people that would know that for sure would be the US govt, the Ukrainians and probably Russian intelligence.
If the 101st Airborne gets deployed to Taiwan, then I’d be worried.
Green Berets are just as worrying. It means US is training locals, preparing for yet another proxy war or brutal crackdown on any real or potential opposition against place being subjugated to US empire.
It doesn’t. The vast majority of countries recognize the PRC having sovereignty over Taiwan, as does the UN. There is no right to separatism or anything like that. Rather the PRC has the right to enforce their sovereignty. The US btw has no right to send to troops into China, that’s an act of war.
If you are talking about the President of Taiwan, are you comparing a role that’s existed since 1 January 1912 (25 October 1945 in its current form) to one that existed 18 February 1861 – 5 May 1865 and had exactly one officeholder?
The right to self-determination does not mean a right to an independent state or any right to secede.
Also I’m not a fan of creating a new national identity just so the US can claim part of China for its puppet regime. That’s using nationalism for a colonial divide-and-conquer strategy, that’s pretty much the opposite of liberation and self-determination.
The right of self-determination means that a nation may arrange its life in the way it wishes. It has the right to arrange its life on the basis of autonomy. It has the right to enter into federal relations with other nations. It has the right to complete secession. Nations are sovereign, and all nations have equal rights.
First link: Members of A Company, so you’re looking at 100 people maximum and likely less. Not exactly a large fighting force.
Second link: There’s nothing “quiet” about it. It’s been blaring on Western News non-stop for about 6 years now. The US has been completely open about weapons sales and training schedules.
Third link: We gave President Tsai Ing-Wen a medal. Okay, and?
The National Endowment for Democracy, created 15 years ago to do in the open what the Central Intelligence Agency has done surreptitiously for decades, spends $30 million a year to support things like political parties, labor unions, dissident movements and the news media in dozens of countries, including China.
Unrelated:
US Green Berets deploying to Taiwan’s front-line
The US is quietly arming Taiwan to the teeth
PRESIDENT TSAI ING-WEN RECEIVES NED DEMOCRACY SERVICE MEDAL
Taiwan has a right to defend itself if it chooses to.
With US troops?
Ukraine has a right to defend itself, but US troops are not deployed in Ukraine.
I’m talking about Taiwan, but Ukrainians are defending themselves with American weapons, intelligence and training.
I believe it was released that there are 14 special force members in Ukraine as well.
The Green Berets are the army’s spec ops that focus on training foreign fighters, specially chosen for things like foreign language proficiency. They’re not Rangers or general light infantry. Ideally they’re not really supposed to get into direct combat, as they’re rather time consuming and difficult to replace.
I would bet a whole bunch of money that we actually do have Green Berets present in Ukraine as well, though the only people that would know that for sure would be the US govt, the Ukrainians and probably Russian intelligence.
If the 101st Airborne gets deployed to Taiwan, then I’d be worried.
Green Berets are just as worrying. It means US is training locals, preparing for yet another proxy war or brutal crackdown on any real or potential opposition against place being subjugated to US empire.
Removed by mod
If they didn’t want them, they could just ask them to leave. If the leader disagreed, the people could vote for a different leader.
It doesn’t. The vast majority of countries recognize the PRC having sovereignty over Taiwan, as does the UN. There is no right to separatism or anything like that. Rather the PRC has the right to enforce their sovereignty. The US btw has no right to send to troops into China, that’s an act of war.
Is the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party the same person as the President of Taiwan, then?
deleted by creator
If you are talking about the President of Taiwan, are you comparing a role that’s existed since 1 January 1912 (25 October 1945 in its current form) to one that existed 18 February 1861 – 5 May 1865 and had exactly one officeholder?
They are. And they’re comparing glorious revolutionary China to the dastardly imperialist pig dogs in the US.
Tankies are a confused bunch.
There is no morality to statehood - just cost-benefit analysis
So you’re not a fan of national self determination then?
deleted by creator
The right to self-determination does not mean a right to an independent state or any right to secede.
Also I’m not a fan of creating a new national identity just so the US can claim part of China for its puppet regime. That’s using nationalism for a colonial divide-and-conquer strategy, that’s pretty much the opposite of liberation and self-determination.
Stalin, Marxism and the National Question
Removed by mod
You have no clue about Chinese history do you.
First link: Members of A Company, so you’re looking at 100 people maximum and likely less. Not exactly a large fighting force.
Second link: There’s nothing “quiet” about it. It’s been blaring on Western News non-stop for about 6 years now. The US has been completely open about weapons sales and training schedules.
Third link: We gave President Tsai Ing-Wen a medal. Okay, and?
The NED is notorious for basically being a CIA cut-out
It’s amazing that this gets any downvotes at all.
Washington Post 1991: Innocence Abroad: the New World of Spyless Coups
New York Times, 1997: Political Meddling by Outsiders: Not New for U.S.
they’re not there to hold down a trench
1st link: title of article
2nd link: title of article
3rd link: title of article