• protist@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh ok, I didn’t realize we had strayed off topic. So it sounds like we’re in agreement these semiconductor sanctions against China are not “siege warfare”

    • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I say it’s an opening salvo. Do you think it’ll stop here?

      Just because the siege hasn’t fully begun doesn’t change what it is at its core.

      • protist@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not buying your slippery slope fallacy, but again, I’m glad you came around

        • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Came around to what? I’m saying this is the begining of another sanctions regime - actually it started with Trump’s tradewar bullshit. There’s a clear escalation that these wars follow.

          In every country they’re used, sanctions only ever get worse until the government collapses. Iraq, Iran, Cuba, Sudan, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, DPRK, and now Russia. It’s almost always a one way street to worse and harsher sanctions until it sparks a civil war. China is next.

          Learn some fucking history.