Let's see how Hu Xi Jin is going to whitewash this

Do u even understand the meaning of sovereignty? Or you are twisting the meaning of sovereignty to fit your narrative?

Care to elaborate to you, what do "peaceful negotiations" and"diplomacy" entail? Are u insinuating that making concessions and compromises in exchange for border security is the definition of "peaceful negotiations"? Peace through appeasement?

Does your definition of sovereignty of a country only cover its border and does not include autonomy in other matters? For instance, a sovereign country can't decide its own direction in aspects such as Economy, immigration and foreign relations?

So your "unnecessary conflict" is only at face value, meaning a weaker country gets to keep its border in name only, it also did not lose nor win in physical conflict, but in reality experience losses in other aspects, for instance, as a result of "peaceful negotiation", a weaker country relaxing immigration from a stronger country that would in turn affect the job prospect of the locals, is that your definition of victory? "No loss at paper/official capacity, but lose in reality"?

If yes, does that mean you subscribe to might makes right mentality? Weaker party has to kowtow to stronger party?

Hey, I'm asking you genuine questions to offer u a chance to uphold your reputation, and you call my questions stupid? Tells a lot about your character, that explains why many here look down on you.


U should have said this from the get go, save everyone's time, don't pretend. Previously, you talked as if you are neutral and does not have a stance.

Tq for showing ur true color.

I never said anything regarding how the world works, either might or right, I am not obligated to answer your question, do not expect any evidence. I just want to confirm if you subscribe to "might makes right mentality", that's all, you yourself chose to answer me voluntarily, I did not force you also.

See that, on one hand he supports that sovereignty also covers autonomy in other matters, not just borders, now when he comes to other matters such as during negotiating phase, he supports making concessions and compromises, having leaders of weaker countries sign lopsided deals under duress according to him, is autonomy in other matters. Yes, he means being forced to make concessions is considered autonomy and in turn sovereignty!

Or perhaps his definition of "autonomy in other matters" do not cover autonomy to not make concessions and compromises during peaceful negotiations😅

He's so naive that he thinks bending over backwards to avoid physical dispute is the only and end all be all path towards victory. He is also naive to assume that the stronger party will always prefer not to escalate tension to armed conflict provided the weaker party makes enough concessions, naive to assume stronger country can always be satisfied.

Btw, call a spade a spade la, referring to making concessions as diplomacy is just sugarcoating appeasement.

Exposed him already, he subscribe to might makes right mentality. So according to his worldview, Godfather style of geopolitics is the right way. Stronger party is free to make whatever demand ala make weaker country an offer they cannot refuse style, weaker country must capitulate.

His skewed definition of sovereignty means bully comes before autonomy😅

This post has been edited by imalmighty: Aug 15 2025, 12:19 PM

Actually no lo, that fella has no spine his "might makes right" mentality is conditional, it only matters when the might is China, if it's US or any Western allies or Israel at the might position, he would flip flop to suppork their opposition.

Look at how many times that fella whine about Gaza and Palestine instead of telling them straight up to kowtow to Israel like he did to other countries on the opposite side of China. Look at his post history.