• 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.