Not really, no. China's quite content to use soft power to simply own other people's countries, I suspect China's efforts to dominate both Japan and South Korea will be quite different to the conquest of Taiwan.
This also means that any even slightly democratic society will not have a causus bellum to use to go after China, as they're not going to be presented with a military threat.
For Taiwan, yes. For Japan and South Korea ... it's a different proposition. There's a material difference in the state of both countries with respect to China compared to Taiwan, which the PRC has always held is a part of China.
I'm struggling to see a reason for JP and SK to throw servicemen's lives away for Taiwan. It'd be a tragedy for the people of Taiwan, but those Taiwanese people are not the responsibility of Japan's PM or SK's president.
What does Taiwan have to offer that would make Japan and South Korea throwing themselves under the bus an attractive prospect for them?
If China goes all-in on Taiwan, unless the US stops them (and with Biden's handlers in charge, they won't), they're not getting stopped. About the best you can hope for is go Swiss and make conquering you expensive enough that you're not worth the bother.
The thing is, for just about any of the Romance languages, by rolling with this "-x" bollocks, you're actively ploughing your own language under for woke points from a giant, uncaring Silicon Valley corporation and their legions of supporters who have substituted debasement for decency.
It's not what you'd call a compelling trade, is it?
Dude's going all-in, isn't he?
More power to him, I guess. Be interesting to see what Macron does in response, he tends to get a bit hard-line around election time before mysteriously turning into a globalist cuck the other 99% of the time.
Even before we get to just how coercive this could be - yeah, sure "consent" from my children after you've been badgering them for a while, no thanks - what kind of person exactly do you have to be to leap straight to "I'm going to abduct these children for their own good!"
And how far a leap is it from there to the 1970s pedophilia "for their own good"?
Yes, pedophilia for the good of the child was a thing in the 1970s in Germany.
You think Imp is a Fedboy?
Do you not think he'd cop slightly fewer bans if he were?
Also, Azure, you're up to how many bans now? 8? 10?
Do you not think it's clear that whatever your opinions of the people here, this forum is not the forum for you? I'm sure there are many fora where you can spread the word of your manifesto, but every time you come here you cop a ban and, frankly, achieve very little. Perhaps it's time to move on.
Also, and this has only just occurred to me, the next time "Believe all women" comes up:
- I believe Sarah Palin;
- I believe Laura Bush;
- I believe Lauren Southern;
- I believe Lauren Chen;
- I believe Arielle Scarcella;
- I believe Blaire White!
What? They don't count? Are you a transphobe or something?
I guess it depends on what you mean by "liberal".
The US version of the word essentially means socialist, so it would not be a surprise to see US liberals doing everything they could to tear down the capitalist state of the US, would it?
No, they redefined "racist" specifically to ensure that they cannot be racist.
I don't know about you, but to my eyes, that looks like a bunch of people so racist that they have to change the rues of the game in advance because their entire life is built around racism and there's no way they can stop.