• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Oct 26, 2017
20,440
it's a really shit thing to say, but what was the point of the question? the US has military presence throughout Japan, the US would be forced to respond.

also why the fuck would china be trying to launch an actual invasion of Japan

Bruenig set up a weirdly specific redline of not providing Taiwan with military resources against a hypothetical invasion from China unless China started doing civilian massacres on the level of the Holocaust or used nuclear weapons. This also applied to all other conflicts. This redline was questioned with the followup question of China invading Japan which was followed by this bizarre joke about Japan deserving it.

Barro, Bruenig, and Douthat are all right-wing sociopaths with limited intelligence so it was not a great discussion.
 

Mesoian

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 28, 2017
26,779
All the over reactions against the quoted statements are what's wrong with social media today. I don't and have never heard of her but if you are being grilled with hypothetical scenarios for 5 minutes, of course you would at least indulge the other idiot for a few seconds to shut them up and be polite, and of course it will risk you being taken out of context and then get reactionary responses from others who will be "outraged" by it.

The "has it coming line" is not saying its justification, but saying it in the tit for tat angle of how stupid war can be, then in their mind it's China's turn to throw some shit over. I guess it has to be seen from the ridiculous context of the hypothetical scenario.

However the op seems to have it in for her and maybe with some justification from previous articles , however it seems like you came up a little short here op. There are better things in the world to be more positive and focus on. For those with terrible world views however, the idea is to have that someone that you might despise fall on their own sword and not have to nudge them on the back on every little quip they may have as a "gotcha" moment.

As a rule of thumb, instead of trying to be like your favorite fictional TV politician from the 90's when being grilled with preposterous questioning, you should probably simply respond with, "this line of questioning is silly and you will not get to say that I support another world war".

Because the alternative is this.
 
Oct 26, 2017
20,440
As a rule of thumb, instead of trying to be like your favorite fictional TV politician from the 90's when being grilled with preposterous questioning, you should probably simply respond with, "this line of questioning is silly and you will not get to say that I support another world war".

Because the alternative is this.

Bruenig, Barro, and Douthat are not exactly serious people with dizzying intellects.

They're all hyper mediocrities who got to their positions from social connections.
 
Oct 26, 2017
20,440
It's some "well this sounded real good in my head" nonsense.

Barro is only notable for having an extremely famous and influential right-wing economist as a father. Douthat and Bruenig are notable for thinking that Satan is real and that the Catholic Church must establish a theocratic dictatorship that rules the United States to save the country from Satan.

These three were never going to have a very good foreign policy discussion.
 

Beer Monkey

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
9,308
Media 'leftists' like internet 'leftists' in general are usually pro fascism trolls, at least in my personal experience.
No, I'm not saying there is no such thing as an actual leftist.
 

JoJo'sDentCo

Unshakable Resolve
Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,544
the point is literally not "I believe that the people in japan currently have it coming" and I do not know you can read what I said and think this

the point is that it is entirely possible that warmongers in china could construct an argument that is "the people in japan have it coming as a response to what was done to us" and that they could start a war based on this, as basically even the most cursory look at the state of relations between asian nations and the continuing relevance of "remember that shit you did in ww2" there would demonstrate

this is literally a place where chinese netizens are staging boycotts unless chinese game companies remove voice actors from their anime games after those actors visit certain shrines in japan that are related to world war 2

this does not mean they are correct, it means that it is a shitty and stupid argument as the tweet says and yet people in all different types of nations go to war because of shitty and stupid arguments as the tweet says and so therefore it is very real to say that there are people in china who likely do believe this and it's not at all unreasonable to believe that, in some world, they would go to war over it
I see what you're saying.
 

Deepwater

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,349
this thread is hilarious given how pro-interventionist so many people on this site is. People wishcast for war against Russia and China any time a thread comes up about them, often using the same fascist logic of revenge and punishment Bruenig is putting on display here.
 

De Amigo

Member
Dec 19, 2017
482
Ive noticed a weird trend lately where the for lack of a better term "Chaposphere" of twitter political people feel the need to basically be white knights for all critisims directed at the CCP, not because they actually like the government, but because "the liberals" dont like them and anything they hate we suddenly have to defend.
 

sphagnum

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
16,058
Barro is only notable for having an extremely famous and influential right-wing economist as a father. Douthat and Bruenig are notable for thinking that Satan is real and that the Catholic Church must establish a theocratic dictatorship that rules the United States to save the country from Satan.

These three were never going to have a very good foreign policy discussion.

This is a weird criticism since Joe Biden also probably thinks Satan is real.

When has Liz Bruenig ever called for a Catholic dictatorship...?
 

BUNTING1243

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,712
Bruenig set up a weirdly specific redline of not providing Taiwan with military resources against a hypothetical invasion from China unless China started doing civilian massacres on the level of the Holocaust or used nuclear weapons. This also applied to all other conflicts. This redline was questioned with the followup question of China invading Japan which was followed by this bizarre joke about Japan deserving it.

Barro, Bruenig, and Douthat are all right-wing sociopaths with limited intelligence so it was not a great discussion.
do you think we should give military resources if China invades Taiwan?
 
Oct 26, 2017
20,440
do you think we should give military resources if China invades Taiwan?

The idea is that the US could provide enough military resources to Taiwan to make it so painful for China to conquer to Taiwan that they wouldn't invade Taiwan.

Remember that Taiwan has no value whatsoever to China outside of blood and soil nationalism and Xi has no political rivals or pressure and that conquering Taiwan would kill thousands to millions of people while causing severe economic harm to China.

It's already an absurd idea and the idea is to provide enough anti-air weaponry now so that China can't trick themselves into thinking an invasion would be good for them.

Obviously China would conquer Taiwan if they tried, but there is no rational reason for them to do so because of how many people would die and how much money would be lost and how there would be no benefit at all. The more military support the US could provide Taiwan means the more politically absurd the idea of invasion becomes.
 

BUNTING1243

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,712
The idea is that the US could provide enough military resources to Taiwan to make it so painful for China to conquer to Taiwan that they wouldn't invade Taiwan.

Remember that Taiwan has no value whatsoever to China outside of blood and soil nationalism and Xi has no political rivals or pressure and that conquering Taiwan would kill thousands to millions of people while causing severe economic harm to China.

It's already an absurd idea and the idea is to provide enough anti-air weaponry now so that China can't trick themselves into thinking an invasion would be good for them.

Obviously China would conquer Taiwan if they tried, but there is no rational reason for them to do so because of how many people would die and how much money would be lost.
Ahh I see, interesting thanks for the good explaination 👍
 

Zaphod

Member
Aug 21, 2019
1,131
It's like saying we shouldn't intervene if Russia invaded Germany because they deserved it. What complete empty hypothetical self righteous nonsense.
 

EMT0

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,104
Ive noticed a weird trend lately where the for lack of a better term "Chaposphere" of twitter political people feel the need to basically be white knights for all critisims directed at the CCP, not because they actually like the government, but because "the liberals" dont like them and anything they hate we suddenly have to defend.

I get what you mean, but I've got to play devil's advocate here. This is pretty removed from the CCP. If you live in the PRC and hold a quiet distaste for the CCP that you can't voice publically, you'd probably give Japan some side-eye too for being the ones that made it possible for the CCP to take over in the first place. I think this is just her being weird.
 

Deleted member 43

Account closed at user request
Banned
Oct 24, 2017
9,271
the point is literally not "I believe that the people in japan currently have it coming" and I do not know you can read what I said and think this

the point is that it is entirely possible that warmongers in china could construct an argument that is "the people in japan have it coming as a response to what was done to us" and that they could start a war based on this, as basically even the most cursory look at the state of relations between asian nations and the continuing relevance of "remember that shit you did in ww2" there would demonstrate

this is literally a place where chinese netizens are staging boycotts unless chinese game companies remove voice actors from their anime games after those actors visit certain shrines in japan that are related to world war 2

this does not mean they are correct, it means that it is a shitty and stupid argument as the tweet says and yet people in all different types of nations go to war because of shitty and stupid arguments as the tweet says and so therefore it is very real to say that there are people in china who likely do believe this and it's not at all unreasonable to believe that, in some world, they would go to war over it
Except this is all nonsense, as the act of defending an allied nation against invasion by a totalitarian aggressor is in no way the moral equivalent of invading a sovereign, democratic, and peaceful state, no matter what bullshit the aggressor uses to support their invasion.
 

medinaria

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,550
Except this is all nonsense, as the act of defending an allied nation against invasion by a totalitarian aggressor is in no way the moral equivalent of invading a sovereign, democratic, and peaceful state, no matter what bullshit the aggressor uses to support their invasion.

that would depend entirely on your own morals, which are different for everyone (or so I've heard)

it might similarly be the case that the two aren't morally equivalent, but rather than the distance between the two isn't enough to justify the loss of human life from all involved parties unless the aggressor is guilty of truly heinous crimes (to give some examples that totally have no relevance I promise, "a third-reich-esque holocaust" and "the actual use of a nuclear weapon"). it might be the case that someone's own personal morals lead them to believe that, short of that, the situation simply is not made more morally desirable by the addition of more fighters doing more fighting
 

Deleted member 43

Account closed at user request
Banned
Oct 24, 2017
9,271
that would depend entirely on your own morals, which are different for everyone (or so I've heard)

it might similarly be the case that the two aren't morally equivalent, but rather than the distance between the two isn't enough to justify the loss of human life from all involved parties unless the aggressor is guilty of truly heinous crimes (to give some examples that totally have no relevance I promise, "a third-reich-esque holocaust" and "the actual use of a nuclear weapon"). it might be the case that someone's own personal morals lead them to believe that, short of that, the situation simply is not made more morally desirable by the addition of more fighters doing more fighting
No, you are wrong, and this attempt to justify the (potential) aggression of tyrants is pathetic.
 

De Amigo

Member
Dec 19, 2017
482
I get what you mean, but I've got to play devil's advocate here. This is pretty removed from the CCP. If you live in the PRC and hold a quiet distaste for the CCP that you can't voice publically, you'd probably give Japan some side-eye too for being the ones that made it possible for the CCP to take over in the first place. I think this is just her being weird.
How did Japan cause the CCP to become the defacto party in China, im not really following.
 

Skunk

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,082
How did Japan cause the CCP to become the defacto party in China, im not really following.

Due to being on the losing side of the Second Sino-Japanese War (WW2), the government of the Republic of China (China's government at the time) had to displace their government to new capitals several times, finally evacuating to modern Taiwan to avoid capture/defeat during the war. By the surrender of the Japanese at the end of WW2, the communist revolution in mainland China had taken hold; aided by the notion that the ROC government was extremely weak in relativistic terms at this point in history even prior to the war. The wake of Japanese destruction/occupation, the concurrent spread of communism internationally in the first half of the 20th century, failing Chinese trust in their own government and it's ability to protect them, and Soviet influence and assistance in arming the communists all contributed to the successful revolution and formation of the CCP as the ruling government of mainland China. The modern government of Taiwan is essentially the remnant of the old Chinese government, hence the CCPs interest in "unifying" it (not unlike Russia's designs on past-USSR controlled territories). Like all things in history, there were a number of factors at work and Japan wasn't solely responsible for the formation of the CCP, but it's not historically inaccurate to say that the ROC was already weak and the war with Japan broke it and fuelled a lot of the native Chinese dissent with the ROC government and subsequent embracement of communism. In a nutshell the way I understand it, I'm not an expert.
 
Last edited:

Machine Law

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,119
All the over reactions against the quoted statements are what's wrong with social media today. I don't and have never heard of her but if you are being grilled with hypothetical scenarios for 5 minutes, of course you would at least indulge the other idiot for a few seconds to shut them up and be polite, and of course it will risk you being taken out of context and then get reactionary responses from others who will be "outraged" by it.

The "has it coming line" is not saying its justification, but saying it in the tit for tat angle of how stupid war can be, then in their mind it's China's turn to throw some shit over. I guess it has to be seen from the ridiculous context of the hypothetical scenario.

However the op seems to have it in for her and maybe with some justification from previous articles , however it seems like you came up a little short here op. There are better things in the world to be more positive and focus on. For those with terrible world views however, the idea is to have that someone that you might despise fall on their own sword and not have to nudge them on the back on every little quip they may have as a "gotcha" moment.

Agreed. OPs clear hate for this woman gives "bitch eating crackers" vibes.
 

De Amigo

Member
Dec 19, 2017
482
Due to being on the losing side of the Second Sino-Japanese War (WW2), the government of the Republic of China (China's government at the time) had to displace their government to new capitals several times, finally evacuating to modern Taiwan to avoid capture/defeat during the war. By the surrender of the Japanese at the end of WW2, the communist revolution in mainland China had taken hold; aided by the notion that the ROC government was extremely weak in relativistic terms at this point in history even prior to the war. The wake of Japanese destruction/occupation, the concurrent spread of communism internationally in the first half of the 20th century, failing Chinese trust in their own government and it's ability to protect them, and Soviet influence and assistance in arming the communists all contributed to the successful revolution and formation of the CCP as the ruling government of mainland China. The modern government of Taiwan is essentially the remnant of the old Chinese government, hence the CCPs interest in "unifying" it (not unlike Russia's designs on past-USSR controlled territories). Like all things in history, there were a number of factors at work and Japan wasn't solely responsible for the formation of the CCP, but it's not historically inaccurate to say that the ROC was already weak and the war with Japan broke it and fuelled a lot of the native Chinese dissent with the ROC government and subsequent embracement of communism. In a nutshell the way I understand it, I'm not an expert.
Ah I see, I mean my original point was just that Liz is needlessly contrarian which leads her to saying dumb stuff like this alot, I dont think all the stuff with Japan in WW2 applies to my original point but thanks for the history lesson anyway lol.
 
Last edited:

Skunk

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,082
Ah I see, I mean my original point was just that Liz is needlessly contrarian which leads her to saying dumb still like this alot, I dont think all the stuff with Japan in WW2 applies to my original point but thanks for the history lesson anyway lol.

I don't have a dog in this fight, just providing the requested context. Cheers.
 

microgreen

Member
Jun 24, 2020
365
She and her husband are truly some of the most insufferable people on twitter. She also has her own army of weirdo online defenders. Remember when she heavily insinuated a guy was a pedo for supporting his trans kid?
 

CrunchyFrog

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,465
I believe that is what is actually being pointed to, if we're being honest and not just like trying to piece together podcast arguments from a carefully curated set of tweets

like I think the point is that it's very possible to construct a situation where china goes to war with some allied country of the united states and we're obliged (in some sense) to go defend them and therefore enter war with china, and because of what happened in ww2, china has some legitimate grievances with japan that have never really been addressed (this is true of korea as well - there's a lot of very much still relevant tensions relating to comfort women etc.)

the point being made is that yeah, countries to go war for stupid reasons. we do it all the time. other countries might also go to war for stupid reasons, and if china wanted to construct a stupid reason, japan does kind of have it coming



Yeah I don't actually get the backlash here. It seems to me an obviously glib response to some whacked out hypothetical and not an actual endorsement of a Chinese invasion of Japan. Granted I don't know anything else about this woman though there's obviously some prior history coloring people's impression of this response.
 

KimiNewt

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,749
All the over reactions against the quoted statements are what's wrong with social media today. I don't and have never heard of her but if you are being grilled with hypothetical scenarios for 5 minutes, of course you would at least indulge the other idiot for a few seconds to shut them up and be polite, and of course it will risk you being taken out of context and then get reactionary responses from others who will be "outraged" by it.

The "has it coming line" is not saying its justification, but saying it in the tit for tat angle of how stupid war can be, then in their mind it's China's turn to throw some shit over. I guess it has to be seen from the ridiculous context of the hypothetical scenario.

However the op seems to have it in for her and maybe with some justification from previous articles , however it seems like you came up a little short here op. There are better things in the world to be more positive and focus on. For those with terrible world views however, the idea is to have that someone that you might despise fall on their own sword and not have to nudge them on the back on every little quip they may have as a "gotcha" moment.
Yeah I agree. In general I'd be wary of taking out a line or two from a whole podcast and judging the person or argument based on that.

Maybe she said the whole thing in a Goofy voice
 

nitewulf

Member
Nov 29, 2017
7,224
I don't understand her phrasing of "the way we left it"? I'm not advocating for another China/Japan war but if you were going to argue that China had a historical justification for invading Japan, wouldn't you point to, like, the Japanese invasion of China and shit like the Rape of Nanjing?
That's what I thought anyone would allude to, as justification - but she is alluding to their military weakness post WW2 due to the treaties. It's odd.
 

Bold One

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
18,911
Christian
Mother
....

Why are people who start their twitter bio with their religion are usually tools.
 

Beer Monkey

Banned
Oct 30, 2017
9,308
I'm starting to notice that the wars in the Middle East over the last 20 years have done a number on a lot of people's brains.

ERA is full of bad faith people, so don't use them as a benchmark for anything. There's a lot of folks here who would sacrifice queer rights and women's rights as long as some authoritarian tankie state gave them some shitty version of socialized medicine, who think we should have given the Nazi's Europe during WWII, and that we should give the US government over to GOP authoritarian rule with no real elections if it might 'teach establishment democrats and neoliberals a lesson' for not enacting enough progressive policy.

It's a sewer.

In other words, it's the Internet circa 2021.
 

ajoshi

Member
Sep 11, 2021
2,037
Saw the tweet a while back but someone noted she had 0, nada, nothing to say about Kyle Rittenhouse but had time for commentary on Jussie Smollett (not that he isn't clowning), kind of goes with the idea these people chase post-left/'crossover' (not using the h-shoe word) audiences.

Not as bad as Dore or Glem but still